Talk:Bone Tomahawk

Genre
Per WP:STICKTOSOURCE which states ". Source material should be carefully summarized or rephrased without changing its meaning or implication. Take care not to go beyond what the sources express or to use them in ways inconsistent with the intention of the source, such as using material out of context. In short, stick to the sources.". The Guardian article does say "horror western" in it's title, but the actual authors prose calls it "A Western, with horror trimmings" downplaying the horror aspect. It would be wrong to use it as a source to call it a hybrid per the above rule. Andrzejbanas (talk) 23:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking at other reviews, it seems that the film is a blend of several genres. It has Western and horror genres with some trappings of comedy as well.


 * https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/23/movies/review-bone-tomahawk-is-western-horror-and-comedy.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
 * https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/la-et-mn-bone-tomahawk-review-20151023-story.html--Paleface Jack (talk) 00:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Let's look into major sources and see what they say, probably paying attention to more specific detail if they go into genre rather than just listing genres willy-nilly.
 * * RogerEbert.com: "a surprisingly sturdy Western [...] until it takes a sharp left turn and becomes something closer to horror. These kind of genre mash-ups rarely work, which makes the impact of “Bone Tomahawk” that much more impressive." here
 * * The Guardian: "well-made, macabre and violent western-horror" here
 * * New York Times: "a witty fusion of western, horror and comedy...[Zahler] has given us a horror movie whose monsters are withheld until the tail end of its 132 minutes, and an action movie whose longest section involves mostly walking and talking." here
 * * Irish Times: "there's plenty to admire about this innovative genre-bender...thrilling horror-western" here
 * * Variety: "a gleefully grisly genre gazpacho ...pic’s gut-twisting left turn into hard horror territory"
 * * IGN: "A violent horror-western...A genre mash-up. Initially the film is a western" here
 * * Paste Magazine " If Bone Tomahawk is a neo-cannibal-western-thriller-romance, in thrall to a whole host of traditions, genres, and micro-niches" Paste Magazine
 * * Starburst Magazine: "effectively injecting the Western with a shot of horror...Whilst the Western and horror genres might seem an unusual mismatch [...] provides one of the best examples of either genre that we’ve seen in recent years." here
 * * Empire: " exceptionally gruesome Western" "the Grand Guignol last act plays out – including one spectacularly appalling cannibal dismemberment – with effects far more convincing than in the ‘80s chop-em-up-and-eat-'em video nasties. Despite that, this is as much a comedy as a cowboy horror film." here


 * So there are certainly discussions of it being a hybrid of predominantly horror and western, but a large chunk of reviewers also note it just basically becomes a horror film towards the final act. I think if we could add something reflecting this it will clear the air with any viewer confused about what kind of film they are getting into. Andrzejbanas (talk) 11:12, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

I agree with you, I am always a stickler for details. Its interesting how each review and outlet imputs it as either horror western or western with horror trappings and some major outlets. I would love to see if an interview with the writer/director would put a rest to its classifacation.--Paleface Jack (talk) 22:49, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I don't actually like using the creators interpretation on a genre as the "go to", because I feel like that's more just how they want their film to be marketed. It think that information should be included in an article, but as genre is subjective, we can only go with third party sources, not the director or studio themselves. Andrzejbanas (talk) 06:13, 19 September 2022 (UTC)