Who was it?

who was it?

Attached: jagtne.jpg (1280x720, 41K)

It doesn’t matter who was the shooter.
The director didn’t choose to make the shooter look ambiguous so the viewer has to "figure it out", he made him look ambiguous because the shooter could've been anybody.
What matters is that no matter how much evidence he has and what the trial outcome is, there will be always someone who believes that he actually did it.

The movie shows how the "innocent until proven guilty" system sadly works only in court, not in the society itself.
Today a simple "user on trial for sexual assault" newspaper headline is enough for literally everyone to be convinced that you actually did it and that you need to be hanged in public, the evidence or the outcome of the trial doesn't matter at all at that point, your whole social and work life is fucked for good no matter what you do anymore.
False allegations are a scary thing.

It's not important who it was that shot at him. That's not the point of the scene. The point is simply that he's been branded and that he'll never be trusted by anyone again.

God.

probably the brother of the raped girl

his son

you

somebody who was raped too a.k.a. you

The dc sniper

His jackass is the most likely. Which made me want to strangle him to death even more by that point. All the colorful language and imagery Klara could possibly provide as evidence was thanks to his own friend. Was he not right the fuck there while that went down?

it was "someone"
its supposed to tell you that nobody will ever truly trust him anymore in this village

I liked when his son spit in the little girl's face. It was pretty stupid of them to assume that they could all be BFFs again.

Attached: NearMiss.webm (720x304, 421K)

he's such a fucking good actor

Attached: ItsNotFair.webm (720x304, 269K)

yeah, you almost believe that he's actually innocent

He did it.

You guys know Mads wasn't innocent right?

This is currently happening right now with the whole Leaving Neverland allegations, to which there has been some speculation over the legitimacy of the claims against MJ but that’s ultimately irrelevant as the social opinion of MJ has already irreversibly changed.

jesus christ give it a rest you fucking loonie

Did he miss on purpose?

Rust

well it could be either way, it's up to the individual to decide

What makes you think that.

You can leave now.

Attached: NoApologies.webm (720x304, 727K)

roasties that didn't understand the movie

one of my favourite actors
too bad he's mostly in shit

Attached: file.png (800x450, 330K)

Genuinely the movie that has most impacted me emotionally to this day/

No it's not, he is unambiguously innocent.

What's the name?

The Hunt. Or 'Jagten', in Danish. Easily Mads best performance.

this.

I saw Arctic recently, he does a good job in that

The deer did it.
It actually had nothing to do with the rest of the film.
They were having their revenge from being shot at all the time.

in your opinion maybe

If his innocence was meant to be ambiguous, that means that the film should have given some credence to both sides, right? However, there is not a single shred of evidence in the film that suggests that Mads ever diddled children. The film always made Mads the victim, simply because he WAS the victim.

don't worry the eventual Hollywood remake will introduce the "did he or didn't he? you decide!" angle

maybe he was, maybe he wasn't, there's no real way we can ever tell for sure