User reviews

I didn't really expect to like this film all that much. Sometimes in that situation you turn out to be right, sometimes you turn out to be pleasantly surprised. 'Butcher's Crossing' fell somewhere in the middle. I certainly enjoyed it more than I expected to, let's just say that.

The casting of Nicolas Cage is an interesting one. On the one hand, I didn't feel he was overly suited to the role. On the other hand, I felt his charisma brought a lot to the movie. And in a movie that is pretty desolate and grim, having a character/actor that you can enjoy and feel some familiarity with can go a long way.

I found myself a lot more interested in the story line than I expected. Generally old-time westerns do absolutely nothing for me. But the story here, simple as it was, kept me entertained and wanting to know what was around the next corner. 6.5/10.

A lot of folks are making some statements that could be misunderstood by most. Buffalo hunting in 1800s was a very lucrative occupation for someone who had nothing. So, I'm taking it out of realm of "OMG" and putting into a perspective of the hunters. They did make a lot of money in their time for these hides. And there was in our perspective a lot of waist. But it was a living. If it could have been avoided, there might have been something else that was equally as distasteful. That was the old west, and people have take that into consideration.

Find something else to beat down or complain.00.

A great Nic Cage movie.

Beautifully shot with a brooding soundtrack, Butcher's Crossing delves in to the psychology of the hunter.

At one point in the show it really does look like the film is going down the road of Apocolypse Now. The dark man becoming darker as he gets lost in his hunt, making irrational decisions as he can now only obsess about one thing. However it pulls up before fully exploring this particular heart of darkness.

Cage is fantastic. He applies rare restraint in the delivery of his character allowing the story to do most of the work.

Its a very enjoyable film exploring a regretable piece of history, not to be missed :)

This was a nice surprise of a great story with solid directing and a great cast. The dp work is amazing yet it's not a casual premise for the light hearted esp any Vegans.

It is phenomenal to see Nick Cage back in great films especially after another gem like Pig and now this western script that merits his talent as he carries the film as its star with a superb supporting cast.

The Montana landscape is epic in its splendid beauty and the true sadness and brutality of mankind's hunt for bison in 1800s is one of disgrace yet another tragic tale that has to be seen to fully comprehend the mania of some hunters.

Kudos to the director and loved the music score also.

Looking forward to more Cage films

A solid 7 stars.

I wanted to give a higher rate but it's hard because the movie has many issues. That being said, it's not a bad movie, very watchable especially if you love westerns.

The actors performances are good, the story and plot are decent. Probably lacks more action. You won't see many bullets.

My biggest issue, and maybe this is a "me problem", is their clothing. I see this problem many times in modern low budget westerns. The people in charge of the outfits, wardrobes and characters design should put a bigger effort in making the audience feel the old western days, teleporting the audience back in time. Instead, I feel they are wearing Levi's jeans and gap shirts, all clean. The horses are also way too clean.

Anyway, it's not that big of a deal, just wanted to share my point of view.

Cheers.

Especially through the credits at the end, President Grant's Policy to starve the Indian Problem by ordering the slaughter of the Buffalo was missed, not even a mention which makes the movie pointless in my opinion.

Otherwise the cinematography is wonderful and the main characters are believable.

There is no reference to why Buffalo hides are in demand though and that's because demand was a government imagined one to starve Native Americans and pay for so doing. It was a regretful policy that even before his death, Grant regretted it's success.

It's too bad that isn't explained.

Never be the same.

This movie takes place in 1883-84. The buffalo were extirpated from the rockies by this time. The United States was fairly well surveyed at this time, especially rivers and notable landmarks. How do they not know how far they are from water or the way to denver, maps and bearing compasses were in wide use at this time. I don't understand how they don't know where they are or how far they were from water. While they're skinning 100s of buffalo their clothes remain all but blood free. I'm not a horse person, but I find it difficult to believe their horses would survive the winter trapped in the mountains. The movie is slow and its hard to judge how much time has passed for them.

Seen this at the Borderlines Festival in Herefordshire. A good film, gritty, well made. Hard to watch at times due to the subject matter (if you like animals!).

Thought it showed the senseless slaughter of American Bison well, and the reasons for it. Well acted and well shot with interesting scenery, a good interplay between the lead characters. No particular twists or surprises, but all the better for it in my view.

One criticism would be it wasn't great on showing the timeline over the 6 months or so of the story. However, this is a minor point and I think overall the film is well worth a look. Hope you enjoy!

I think that this movie achieves its aim in demonstrating to the audience the tragic wastefulness of nineteenth centuries bison hunting. It doesn't really touch on the racialized element in the destruction of bison, in that it was in part based on the belief that "one less buffalo meant one less Native American." But it does aptly portray the greed. It also portrays the monotony of hunting bison, which makes for a movie that is sometimes downright boring and repetitive. There is a lot of attention paid to accurate historical details and Nicholas Cage is excellent as the brooding, disturbed, obsessive Miller. Xander Berkeley also puts in a noteworthy performance. Overall, a powerful message wrapped in a somber and kinda dull film in the "we lost ourselves in the wilderness" genre. Worth the watch.

I like a campy Nick Cage flick as much as the next uncultured American slob. But what is this movie for? It's honestly horrible. Are you into gratuitous animal skinning and forced, dumb dialog? I guess this is for you then. No character development, no rationale, no story to speak of. The old man is a bumbling religious caricature of western evangelism. The skinner hand is a skilled outback expert, yet knows so little of the business that he asks for next to nothing, and is fully naive. Cage present with his usual ticks and expressions.

It's really.just a bad movie and didn't need to be made. I wish I hadn't watched it. I forced myself to write 600 words so I could submit this, and save you a little hardship. Good luck.

Unceremoniously dropped on Amazon Prime with no real fanfare, this Western odyssey bares similarities to Joseph Conrad's 'Heart Of Darkness' (except without all the racism) and has a connection to Francis Ford Coppola's take on that material, 'Apocalypse Now (1979)', in that it also features a depiction (or several) of a bison being killed and butchered. 'Butcher's Crossing (2023)' has an additional connection with another film, that one being the Coen brothers' 'Miller's Crossing (1990)': not only goes it have the word "crossing" in the title, but its pseudo Kurtz stand-in (portrayed by Nic Cage) just so happens to be called Miller. "Alright, Mr. IMDb Trivia, get on with it," you're probably thinking. To that I say, "okay."

There's something that just feels unfinished about the film, specifically when it comes to its editing, sound mixing and colour grading. The former is mostly successful, making good use of montages and other non-linear techniques to create a purposefully elusive and unsettling atmosphere, but there's something almost intangibly off about it and it could have been tightened up with another pass to really hammer its dream-like nature home. The audio mix is notably incorrect on occasion as it straight-up clips during some of the infrequent yelling that occurs; it's a pretty major technical problem that contributes to the picture's sort of amateurish vibe. The cinematography isn't bad, but it often feels like we're looking at raw dailies. It doesn't have its own feel to it, and any semblance of naturalism is counteracted by its flat and uninspired appearance. Another problem with the feature is that its apparent conversationalist messaging is only really evident during its text ending, which uses statistics and real-life imagery to decry the extensive hunting its characters so eagerly partake in elsewhere in the piece. It feels quite random for the film to end on such a blatant anti-hunting note when its majority makes no real attempt to demonise the act, instead depicting it in quite a bit of detail (there is a lot of animal killing and butchery in this, which is something to be wary of going in) and positioning its characters' potential descent into madness not through their barbaric actions but rather through their isolation and unwillingness to cut their losses.

Where the affair mostly succeeds is in its general tone and semi-surreal atmosphere. Although it's a bit too front-loaded for its own good, the narrative is mostly compelling and the direction often takes an unexpected route to convey the feeling of a particular segment, rather than the unfiltered truth of it. There's this hard-to-pinpoint nightmarish quality to a lot of it, and a sense of dread slowly builds right from the start. You're never quite sure where it's going to go, which is yet another of its most potent strengths. The solid performances really ground the experience and lend it a sense of truth, while the sparse set design and tangible costuming make sure you don't doubt the period setting for a single second. There are some genuinely stunning vistas here, instantly iconic snapshots of the American landscape that are synonymous with the bloodstained Manifest Destiny of the era and therefore carry their own sense of ideological danger alongside their undeniable beauty (not to mention the fact that they could kill you in an instant). A couple of its environments are clearly recreated on a green-screen soundstage and they do yank you out of the otherwise solid verisimilitude, but far more are real and tactile and plain gorgeous to look at.

There is a lot to like about the piece and it draws you into its earthy narrative relatively early on. While it can't keep you glued to the edge of your seat and its technical issues do prevent it from feeling fully polished, it remains mostly engaging for its majority. It gets a bit repetitive in its midsection and the pacing is a little off in places, but it's a solid effort that's rather entertaining overall.

No pun intended - one thing we know for sure: when Nic Cage is on the box - you get Nic Cage who will do anything - but stay in the box! Well you know what I mean - dialing up the crazy to 11 and all that. Which in a story about animal hunt and whatnot is not the worst thing to have.

Cage was quite open about having done a lot of movies, because ... well he may not have been young while doing them, but he still needed the money. Something that rings true for all of us I assume, still nice to hear it from him. That said, the movie is quite decent. You have characters doing awful things mind you - but you have to suspend your disbelief and just go with the flow of it all. You can still disagree with the morality and the goals ... I've seen worse movies for sure. And while Cage may have done a lot of these, they still have a certain quality, which cannot be said about Bruce Willis output ... his medical condition aside of course.

First off, I've never made a movie so I have to give cudos to anyone who attempts any kind of artistic (albeit, a glancing blow at artistic) piece, but this filmmaker seemed to grapple with the basic precepts of any kind of cohesive vision here.

Butcher's Crossing made most Hallmark TV movies of the week look important comparatively.

The characters were about as generic as a film could make them, nothing made any sense, like buffalo would just hang out in the same area for weeks while they were picked off 30 at a time.

The editing was moronic at best.

This could be thought of as an entertaining picture if one had only been exposed to the Sharknado franchise, but then again, what the hell do I know?

It appears people are vote bombing because they don't like seeing guts, gore, and buffalo getting killed. Buffalo co-evolved with American Indians for thousands of years as a hunted animal. They were hunted sustainably and revered. Nobody is endorsing the killing of buffalo to this extent; that is the point of the movie to show the atrocities by Americans in the 1800s. If you are disgusted, the film has done its job.

I thought the supporting cast was a little weak but the writing was on point. Beautifully shot, Nicolas Cage hits a home run for his character (perfectly casted by the way), and a wonderful conclusion. This one is worth a watch.

Naive pastor's son, Will, has dropped out of Harvard and travels to Butcher's Crossing, a tiny frontier town in Kansas built on the buffalo hide trade. He wishes to see as much of the country as he can and experience the 'Wild West'. Sold on the romanticism of going on a buffalo hunt, Will seeks out McDonald, a former acquaintance of his father's, who currently runs the waning buffalo trade for the town. When McDonald refuses to oblige the young man, Will falls in with Miller, an intense and experienced buffalo hunter who spins him a tale of a remote Colorado pass where one of the few remaining massive herds can be found. Though warned about Miller and the folly of this enterprise, Will puts up all of his money to fund the expedition.

I've never read Butcher's Crossing, the novel, but I own it. So my review is solely for the film and not the adaptation. I think the cinematography and the production design were the film's highlights. The film is stunning from start to finish, a director and cinematographer which has an eye for visuals and puts the nature above everything else except for the actors of course. The West is dirty, muddy and overall an accurate depiction of the Old West.

In 1874, Will Andrews, the naive son of a pastor, has dropped out of Harvard and travels to Butcher's Crossing, a tiny frontier town in Kansas built on the buffalo hide trade. Where he joins a team of buffalo hunters on a journey that puts his life and sanity at risk.

What's so interesting about this film is the setting and how it delves into the characters psyche, it's a character study of sorts which shows the horrible nature of men and how they shot buffalo for sport. Nicholas Cage portrays the leader of the group, a terrific performance. The skinner, Fred Schneider, is portrayed by Jeremy Bobb and his character is probably the most well written one. He has this small amount of toxic masculinity and is a flawed character but when it comes to nature and animals, he's good. Xander Berkley's character serves no real purpose, making up for scenes which could easily be cut, only purpose he got is the role he got at the camp. My criticism is of the pacing, although I liked it I'm quite sure most will find it off putting. Also some of the writing, dialogue for example is often too modern but works, but also the writing of Nicolas Cage's character Miller, as the writing takes a nose dive for his character after half the film. I've read how some critics find the film's direction to be unfocused and it's noticeable in the second half. I still think the film is good, with Nicolas Cage doing a terrific job as well as the rest of the cast, along with the cinematography never disappointing. With a good message and themes, about masculinity and a warning about what happens when people fail to tread lightly in the natural world, both as a consequence of nature and themselves. Leo Birenberg composed the film and it has a great score.

Bear in mind if you watch this film, Butcher's Crossing is flawed around the edges but mostly a good if not a great film. I just wish the second half was as great as the first half, which is not, it becomes a bit strange. Scenes which go hand in hand with the story, the psyche of these men and especially that of Will Andrews. Butcher's Crossing is a hard watch and not much really happens, nor does the characters get fleshed out. Yet, with the low budget that it got and how it uses real buffaloes along with shooting on-location, this film is a great good drama.

Loved the cinematography. Love the idea of the movie. This story could've been a little bit richer. I've spent a lot of time out in the mountains overall. If I watched it again, I would do it to see the outdoors in Colorado back in the 1800s., and when you have four people together doing it for a long long time this kind of stuff happens overall if I watched it again, I would do it just to see the outdoors in Colorado back in the 1800s. In the end, the biggest thing I learned is the outdoors is a pretty deep space that needs adequate planning to make sure you come out in a good position. And a separate note Nicolas Cage casting in this might've been a little bit over the top.