Watch Valley of Bones

Valley of Bones

Valley of Bones is a movie starring Autumn Reeser, Rhys Coiro, and Steven Molony. A disgraced paleontologist struggling to raise her son is tipped off to a groundbreaking dig site in the Badlands by a recovering meth addict, but his...

Running Time
1 hours 30 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
Western, Thriller, Crime
Dan Glaser
Richard M. Lewis, Steven Molony, Jon L. Wanzek, Dan Glaser
Rhys Coiro, Steven Molony, Mason Mahay, Autumn Reeser
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

"Valley of Bones" is a nail-biting adventure thriller set in the oil-rich Badlands of western North Dakota. Anna, a single mother and paleontologist, and McCoy, a meth-addicted oil worker, form an unlikely bond as they both struggle to make amends for their criminal pasts. Their hopes lay in the form of a monumental T. rex fossil, the discovery potentially worth millions. Anna needs this once-in-a-lifetime find to set both her career and her relationship with her son back on track. McCoy needs the money to pay off his debts to a local cartel boss and to save his own young daughter's life. With their motivations over the bones pulling them in opposite directions, can Anna and McCoy trust one another or will they soon turn into adversaries themselves?

Comments about western «Valley of Bones» (23)

Sandra Moore photo
Sandra Moore

The first half is good, but the second half is on par with the first half. It's a western with a haunted mansion. And it was better than "Rhinestone". If you liked "Rhinestone", you'll love this movie. If you haven't seen "Rhinestone", you may not like it.

Alexander S. photo
Alexander S.

I can see the words "snake in a woman's pants" thrown around more than once in a conversation. Well, not this time. John Avildsen's film "Dead Men Don't Wear Plaid" doesn't do that. Not even close. And not to mention that one scene in particular, where John actually gets his throat slit and cuts off his hand just like a Chinese takeout wafer. "Bones" is probably my favorite John Avildsen film. It's a fun little thriller that has a great cast, with Lee Marvin playing a "bad guy" as he is supposed to be. He's pretty good at it too. The women are pretty interesting. I enjoyed the score. I also liked the cinematography and the one shot from one of the film's many locations. The film is not a typical "mockumentary". It's a real western film, but one that was made on a low budget, so it has a real authentic feel. The film is also well written. Not your typical "tell me why this is great" Hollywood thriller. The story isn't just some cliched excuse for a western. It has depth and thought-provoking lines. John Avildsen is an interesting filmmaker. Check it out. It's not a waste of time.

Raymond D. photo
Raymond D.

This movie isn't a masterpiece, it is just one of the most watchable and entertaining westerns of the last 20 years. It has a great cast, a great plot and a lot of action. This is one of the first films where the performances are worthy of a "thumbs up". This film will have you on the edge of your seat. There are a lot of things you won't see, but I still enjoyed the movie because of the dialogue, the character development and the action. If you don't like westerns, don't go see this one. It isn't great, but it isn't bad either. It is a good movie to watch with friends and enjoy.

Keith photo

Tom Cruise has been in a number of bad movies, from the obligatory "Top Gun" to "Live and Let Die", but with "Deep Red" he's made a few decent ones. "Deep Red" is a weak example, but it still has enough of Cruise to make it interesting. It's also one of those movies that requires your full attention in order to make it worthwhile. "Deep Red" tells the story of a Native American medicine man who finds himself at the wrong place at the wrong time, and the whole movie he's fighting for his life. It's very slow and slow and slowly and slowly things get resolved, and they do. You can see the whole movie from the beginning, and you can never stop and watch the whole thing. But it's also good, because you can understand the situation the Native Americans were in, and you can see that the majority of the Native Americans in the movie are like Tom Cruise's character, completely insane, and they might kill you on the side. But, despite that, you can't really hate them. That's the best thing about this movie, because you're always rooting for Tom Cruise, even if he gets killed. The end is also good, because it's not really all about the Native Americans, but about the Native Americans and the American government, and the movie ends with the death of one of them. Well, they had to kill one of them. Still, a great movie, and not bad at all. I give it 7 out of 10.

Nathan Nichols photo
Nathan Nichols

I don't like gangster films and, while watching this one, I felt that I was part of the gang. It is extremely violent, which may be expected, but the more violent it gets, the more you feel it. Very entertaining.

Samantha photo

I really enjoyed this film and thought it was actually quite good. It was not the best acting in the world but I found the characters interesting. I think this film is quite an odd one. The characters are quite unique but there are times where it gets a bit weird. It's definitely a good film. It's quite hard to pin point which is probably what made it so good. The director is a bit weird but that works for the film. It's definitely not for everyone but I think it is good and I would recommend it to fans of westerns.

Justin photo

After a classic performance by Jodie Foster, a great performance by Tom Selleck, and an energetic and stylish performance by William Katt, I was expecting another great movie. But, instead of this great movie I got another great movie, and the last great movie of Tom Selleck's career. I found the movie very thrilling and engaging, and I found it as a good example of a "Why did you do that?" movie. The movie is a great movie, but not a great action film. The action scenes are strong, but the story, the characters, the story and the characterization are weak. The characters are supposed to be strong and charismatic. But, sadly, they were not. This is a weak movie, but it is a good movie. It has some great moments and some great moments of failure. This movie does not have a great ending, but it is not a bad ending. Overall, I do recommend this movie to anyone. It is not a great movie, but it is a good movie. I rate this movie 7 out of 10 stars.

Joseph Carlson photo
Joseph Carlson

Based on the novel by Jayne Beckinsale, Valley of Bones is a somewhat simple story. It follows an aging woman (Patricia Clarkson) who is pushed to her limit as a politician's widow and her attempts to go back to a normal life. If the plot is straightforward, the performance by Michael C. Hall is superb, as is the cinematography by Mark Andrews. And it's a lot of fun to watch. It has a quirky, goody-two-shoes protagonist, a seamy, mob-oriented low-life, and plenty of shots of the wild American west, including a really cool shot of a limo speeding by. It's even got a very nice, but often somewhat grotesque, final showdown. But there's no denying that it's a "mumblecore" movie, with an occasional goofy or clichey moment. You never get a clear sense of who's bad and who's good in this movie. The characters and the relationships are all very underdeveloped, and the film doesn't have the necessary closure that would make it worthwhile. As the film goes on, the plotting goes along at a snail's pace, and the characters are just as hard to identify with as the audience. The performances are solid, the scenery and shots are cool, and it's a worthwhile popcorn film. If you're looking for an easy movie to watch with your friends and don't mind a couple of running jokes, you might like it. I would definitely recommend Valley of Bones, but if you're expecting a deep film, you may want to look elsewhere. Grade B

Patricia photo

I am a big fan of John Grisham's books. I have the rights to the film. I want to see it, but I don't want to see it with an English accent. As a result, I was hoping that it would be one of those films that you could see with the perfect accent. If the film is good, I will watch it. I have seen the trailer, and it looked good. I was in the mood for something different. I am looking forward to seeing it.

Crystal K. photo
Crystal K.

This is a different, unusual movie that is well worth seeing if you are a fan of westerns. It is not the best western ever, but the best western. But there are a couple of problems. The first is the story. It is slow and has a lot of dialogue, but it is still an entertaining movie. The second problem is the way the characters talk. One-dimensional and artificial. It is not the western it is supposed to be. If you don't have any other choice than to see it, just go for it. It is really good. I recommend it. -PolarisDiB

Bryan H. photo
Bryan H.

No doubt I must have watched a lot of movies in my lifetime and this is certainly no exception. This is not a perfect movie. It has a very slow pace and I thought at times that I may have been watching a tape. It is a crime thriller, but with the twist and turn, it has no story and the ending is somewhat predictable. It is not an all time classic of course, but it is a well made, well written movie, which will be remembered as an experience for sure.

Terry photo

This movie has a couple of similarities to The Nail. First off, the Nail was also a western. It also had a mystery aspect. That's not necessarily a bad thing but some westerns have a more, a dramatic or psychological aspect. They have a feeling to them and you can't really watch a western without that. That's what makes this film so good. It has a lot of mystery and suspense to it. The acting is good and the story is good. The pacing is good and you don't feel like you're watching a long movie. The plot is solid and I'm glad I went to the theater to see it because I would have never watched it on cable. I'm going to go back and watch it again.

David photo

I just watched "The Valley of Bones" on TNT. It's really well done. It's nothing special but it's a lot better than your typical spy movie. I know the reviews here are a bit unfair and most of the film is getting blasted, but there are so many things I liked about it that I didn't even know about. 1. The acting was top notch. There were a few actors that had their moments, but mostly it was a cohesive whole. 2. There was enough of a plot to make it feel more like a story than a spy movie. It also did a good job of weaving the action and drama together and it didn't make the story itself drag. 3. It's well paced. This is the first movie that I've seen with a plot that makes sense, and not just a plot that's there to fill time. It's a little bit of everything, but I like that. It's like they kept the movie simple enough to not be too confusing. 4. The action scenes were well done. It was cool to see what they could do with the power that the 6 guns had. The end had some awesome battle scenes and it really worked well. 5. The romance between the two leads was great. I was surprised that it wasn't really the center of the movie. I'm not a fan of blood and guts action, but I do appreciate that the actors didn't seem too afraid of doing something different for this film. Overall, I really enjoyed it. It was nice to see different things in a spy movie, and it's great that the movie didn't rely too much on the "trailer" to give it a lot of hype. Overall, I give it a 7 out of 10. I've never seen a movie quite like this before. If you've seen it, I recommend you check it out. It's a really good spy movie.

David Sullivan photo
David Sullivan

In the 70's, there were more than 2,000 movies released every year. This was one of the best. The movie takes place in the 1870's. This is a period when the west was recovering from the Civil War. This was a good time to make movies like this because there was a good mix of genres like westerns, cowboys, and melodramas. This movie is a mix of these genres. The movie has a good cast, especially those from the western genre. There is one scene that is from the movie where a gunfight is taking place in the desert. It is a real-life gunfight where the cast was firing their guns. All the cast in this movie are actors that had to fight a lot in their later years. It is a good story and I think it will be watched by many. My rating is 7/10.

Joan photo

Some of the reviews I've read on this movie haven't been very positive. I was hesitant to watch it, but figured I'd try it out. I'm glad I did. "The Valley of Bones" is a slow moving film with no big names. It's not that it's not good, it's just that it's not memorable. There are no big actors or memorable scenes, which makes it feel like it's a standard 90's western. The characters are dull and uninteresting. If you like action movies and feel like you need a movie to sit down and watch, this is a good one to check out. It's good, but not great. If you're looking for a movie with lots of action, good acting, and a storyline that is interesting, then avoid this one. I gave it a 7/10. I recommend it for the action/western fans and fans of western films in general.

Ann D. photo
Ann D.

The only thing good about this movie is the soundtrack. I have no idea why they did it, but the music was brilliant. I think they should have just left the soundtrack out of the movie.

Jeffrey photo

I saw this movie at a screening of J.R.R. Tolkien's The Hobbit in Australia. The story has been well told but there is a flaw. In a fantasy film where the heroes are all dressed in brown cloaks and in the middle of the battle, when the villain suddenly decides to use the big sword for which they were guarding, the heroes just stand there, not knowing what to do. It was like they just had to do nothing, as there was nothing for them to do. They should have been the heroes that were there for the protection of the land, but they did nothing. In fact, I thought it was a very weak movie, I was disappointed, considering the many hours I've spent watching it. As it was a Tolkien film, I expected it to be the same way as the others, but I was very disappointed. I would recommend it for a very rare treat.

James F. photo
James F.

It was a boring movie but it was more than watchable. The performances were great and the chemistry between the actors was great. The story was good but the "typical" feel of it. It was very predictable and the movie was better if you did not know what was going to happen next. There was a lot of yelling and screaming. You will probably hate it and will be very disappointed but if you like movies that are a little different, you should check this out.

Vincent L. photo
Vincent L.

I'm writing a review for this movie for a newbie here on IMDb. The people who didn't like it are probably the same people who disliked GOLDFINGER, LADY IN THE MOON, and THE FOG. I didn't enjoy any of these movies, but I was curious about how this one would be. I think it's a good movie. It's a slow paced movie. It's like a mixture between THE CONFESSIONS, and the road movie that Paul Schrader directed in the '80s. The movie is an exploration of character development. The characters are not real people. It's a good representation of how complex human beings can be. You can see the flickers of emotion in most of the characters. Some of the characters are so likable you want to hug them and share a moment with them. This movie isn't for the kids. This movie is for adults. It's a good movie for adults, and it's a good movie for the teens who want to learn more about life. The movie has a few corny moments, but the acting and the dialogue are really good. It's very well written. I thought it was well made, but I also felt it was poorly directed. Some of the camera work was a little shaky, but not too much. The soundtrack is good, too. I recommend this movie for people who want a good movie to watch over the holidays. This movie is a good movie, and I would watch it again. I give this movie a 7/10.

Kathryn photo

If you liked 'Shane' (1999), then you'll like this one. The movie doesn't have the same action, but it is also pretty entertaining and good for those who want to laugh. And don't be afraid to watch it for those who like Hugh Grant, or if you're a fan of his. The story is not so much original, but the movie has a lot of good things, and the acting is also good. My rating: 7.8

Christine Coleman photo
Christine Coleman

It's good to be a redneck in a redneck town. Redneck movies are always fun to watch. It's a fun movie to watch if you like to see men of action and can't get enough of cowboy movies. This one is pretty fun and is better than a lot of cowboy movies. I liked it a lot better than I thought it would be. It's a lot more violent than I thought it would be. The dude from the Flintstones who plays John Coffey, is in the movie, but it's just for a few minutes and not for long. I found it enjoyable enough. I liked it, but it was not anything amazing.

John Harvey photo
John Harvey

I was taken by the reviews here and found myself curious about this movie after reading the novel, then at a friend's suggestion, watched the movie. I thought I was prepared to be disappointed, but I was surprised to be really moved by it. A combination of great directing, great cinematography and good acting makes for an above-average movie. Some critics complained that the plot was too intricate, but I thought that was a poor criticism. The plot is clear enough to follow. I don't think the movie was too long, it did what it was supposed to do well, and I can't say I would have seen it any other way. If you like action and westerns, I think you will like it. It's not going to win any Oscars, but it's certainly not a bad movie to watch. If you like a movie where you get to see a guy shoot a lot of people, that doesn't involve the violence, it's a movie for you. The movie is worth watching if you're into a movie where you don't know what is going to happen. I would say it's better than the movie "Desperado" which was recently released to the theaters.

Barbara photo

I don't know if I would classify this as a western, I could see why this movie may appeal to some people, but I personally would not recommend this movie to anyone. The premise was alright, it had a number of good things going for it. However, the plot became so formulaic and not in a good way that I had to laugh a couple times. The acting was mediocre, at best. I felt like the movie needed to go on longer so I could really understand what the characters were saying and understand why they were doing certain things. Also, there were a few parts that were just so unbelievable that I just kept wanting to turn it off. I also felt that it was really slow and dragged on and on for too long, and the ending was disappointing. However, this is a movie that I would watch and not really say much about it because it wasn't something I would call great. However, I have rated this film a 6/10 for a reason. If you want to watch a good movie with an interesting plot that has a good cast and decent acting, then this is the movie for you.