‘Hunters On A White Field’ Ending Explained & Full Story: What Happens To Alex?

0 COMMENTS

Most Popular

Three men going on a hunting trip is a recipe for disaster most of the time—at least in movies. Swedish thriller Hunters On A White Field, helmed by first-time director Sarah Gyllenstierna, is no exception. Based on a novel written by author Mats Wageus, the story centers on three men who are on a hunting trip that doesn’t go quite as expected. You are obviously here seeking answers regarding the ending and the entire third act, and I am hoping to clear your doubts by the end of this article. Let us get to it then.

Spoilers Ahead


What Happens In The Movie?

Hunters On A White Field begins with an animal heartbeat—a close-up shot of the neck of what seems like a deer. The actual scene comes much later, actually; this is a common technique many thriller movies use to entice viewers. With that out of the way, we now meet our characters: Alex, a young man who’s new to hunting; his colleague and friend Greger, who’s a seasoned hunter; and Greger’s friend Henrick, who’s possibly an even better hunter than Greger. They’re on Henrick’s brother, Ivar’s land, which has always been Greger and Henrick’s hunting ground. Unfortunately, though, Ivar is selling the land, meaning the latest expedition is going to be the last time. The reason behind that is Ivar’s wife, who doesn’t like Henrick at all. Henrick is understandably not too fond of his sister-in-law, which becomes evident to Alex when he is asked by Henrick to shoot at a photo of the woman for target practice. Greger tries to lighten things by telling Alex that Henrick has a sick sense of humor. However, very often the thing men joke about is actually what they really want to do—as Alex mentions. This can also be seen as a foreshadowing of what is to come.

The hunt begins with the group shooting at clay pigeons. Henrick gets four, Greger gets two, and Alex manages to get only one—which is normal, given he is a first-timer. We also see Alex having quite the moment and feeling uneasy before shooting the birds. At this point, it might feel like the guy might not be cut out for hunting. It is one thing to be a meat eater and another thing to actually kill a bird and go through the rigorous process of making it ready for a plate. That’s why Alex having trouble seeing Henrick gutting the birds in preparation for their dinner is quite believable. But deep down, most men are animals, with giant-sized egos. At least these three are, which becomes abundantly clear with every passing minute. Greger showing off his collection of Stone Age weapons, then mock fighting with Henrick like primitive men – leading to Alex punching Henrick after getting accidentally grazed in the face (by a Stone Age arrow)—these  are all clear signs of where this story is headed


The metamorphosis of Alex 

As I have the tendency of scouring through the darkest possible corners of the internet, I once came across an Instagram reel about this high-end resort in the middle of the mountains, exclusively for men. See, male friendship is a genuinely wholesome thing, I can testify to that. But the trouble here is that the difference between wholesome and toxic is negligible. Once that invisible line is crossed, everything is doomed. What we see in Hunters On A White Field is a prime example of that. The subject of toxic masculinity being the destroyer of every good thing is a staple in modern-day movies—so much so that it has almost evolved into its own subgenre. This movie (and the book) is certainly a product of that. 

That said, Hunters On A White Field only scratches the surface, which is disappointing given the build-up over the first two acts is phenomenal. That has a lot to do with the great performances put in by the three actors and the development of Alex’s character. The story is told from Alex’s point of view only, which gives it the edge. In the beginning, he is this man from the city who has come for a taste of the wild. Like we’ve already discussed, his initial reaction to the whole thing comes from a place of morality and also following societal norms. As time progresses, the layer of civilization peels off, and we get to see Alex’s true face. It is the same for Greger and Henrick as well, but considering they are already hunting veterans, they slipped into their wild selves the moment the trip began. Alex’s transformation, on the other hand, is quite visible. Of course, it has a lot to do with the company he’s keeping. We know for a fact that Greger’s monologue about how you form a bond with the animal you’re about to kill, by looking into its eyes, has profoundly influenced Alex, as he mentions. His first kill—a black buck—serves as a catalyst in solidifying that belief inside Alex. The movie plays it pretty clever by cementing that further when Henrick takes a shot at a deer during the night and injures the animal, but when he’s unable to put it out of its misery, Alex takes on the responsibility. That bothers Greger and Henrick, as it is against the hunting rules that say one has to kill an animal after taking a shot at it, but Alex, by now, doesn’t care anymore about what the other two think. That’s why he doesn’t complain about carrying the dead deer to the cabin in the middle of the night, as it probably feels like an achievement for him. 

Coming to the thing that has probably surprised you the most in this movie now—Alex coughing up green caterpillars. This is another clear sign of the guy going through a metamorphosis. Obviously, it is unrealistic for a man to do that, unless he has actually consumed a caterpillar (which I don’t think Alex did), but here it is used as an allegory for the character. To spell it out further, a caterpillar is obviously the larval stage of a butterfly’s life cycle, and this further indicates that Alex is changing, and he’s going to go completely berserk by the end. Him agreeing to Henrick’s proposal of hunting each other implies that only. Even though Henrick floats the idea as another of his dark jokes, Alex jumps at the opportunity. Greger and Henrick, although a bit surprised, don’t stop him, as they’ve already crossed the bridge. I also believe Henrick doesn’t have much of a city life like the other two. The decision of not going into who these people are outside of hunting is a wise one, as it prevents us, the audience, from seeing them as anything else. You might complain that it also stops you from getting invested in any character and rooting for them, but not every movie has to be like that. In the case of Hunters On A White Field, it demands you to play the role of an observer and take in the social commentary.

One might wonder where all the animals of the woods go to hide, which ultimately leads the trio to do the unimaginable. I see this one as a metaphor as well—the animals getting replaced by other animals, i.e., Alex, Greger, and Henrick. It could also be that the animals purposefully go into hiding somewhere safe in order to save themselves from the predators.


What happens to Alex in the end? 

With the animals suddenly vanishing from the woods, the logical thing to do would be to put an end to the trip. From the conversation between Greger and Alex regarding some work at the office, we also realize that the time they set aside for the trip has also come to a close. But Alex wants to continue to the extent where he would not mind hunting his friends. We can’t obviously blame only him, as the other two are equally responsible for this lunacy. Not that they intend to kill each other, as they set up rules like only injuring, and once that’s done, helping the prey to heal (as it’s a human being only). But you know very well that it’s gonna end chaotically.

So they go out in the wild, with not a single living animal nearby. This is probably a reference to how humankind was all about hunting and surviving back in the days. The first proper opportunity to draw blood comes to Alex when he spots Greger and takes the shot. However, he misses Greger as he runs away. Unfortunately for him, he fails to dodge Henrick’s shot and badly hurts his shoulder. That is against the rules they’ve already set, which is protecting the upper body portion and only aiming for the lower part. Naturally, Greger gets mad at Henrick after such a thing. But that doesn’t mean the man wants to stop. In fact, during the night, while Henrick and Alex are looking after him, he requests they put his deer’s heart (the one he hunted) inside his bandage. I’m not sure about the hygiene here, but that is hardly relevant. In fact, this is a callback to the earlier scene where Greger describes that he wishes to die like an animal—with his predator locking eyes with him before putting a bullet in him. The deer’s heart is both a confirmation and foreshadowing of what awaits for Greger. 

But it is Henrick who turns out to be the first victim of this madness the next day. Ironic how Greger has a dream about Henrick killing him and then ends up reversing that into reality. He is obviously shocked after killing his dear friend, but does that mean he stops pursuing the hunt further? Absolutely not, because he is too far gone. So is Alex, who also doesn’t have any intention of backing out of this. Just like they laid down the hunted animal outside during the night, they put Henrick’s body out—now that he has become a prey. The next morning, we see Gregor trying to eat a frog outside the cabin. Henrick requested Alex to not eat the frog from earlier- which he even named ‘Arnold’ (he was only joking though). The movie deliberately makes its characters do things that prove there’s no saving these men. 

Now, between Alex and Greger, it was a given that the younger man was going to win. He is the focal point of this story, so killing the character off would have been tripping on its own feet for the movie. Greger was always supposed to be gunned down by Alex, and it goes exactly like that. The man does get to live his fantasy—of dying like an animal, with Alex looking right into his eyes. That leaves Alex, now alone in the woods, fully transformed into an animal. I bet this is going to caress the ego of so many men who would perceive this movie in a wrong way. There’s even a scene where we see Alex looking at his old self—obviously it’s playing inside his head—at the cabin. This only means he’s no longer the man who came here and squirm while Henrick was gutting the birds. All the stomach problems, puking, and retching he suffers from throughout the movie are the hints (about the transformation) that we were given by the way. 

Hunters On A White Field ends with Alex stepping into a cave, looking upwards. The movie is quite heavy on foreshadowing—this is the same cave where Alex saw a vision of a ‘caveman’ before. Hence, it is only fitting that the movie concludes in this manner. But my issue is, it still lacks a point. I mean, we do get what happened here, but by not showing Alex’s future for at least a bit, the movie remains kind of unfinished. And its lead character is still underexplored, while there were plenty of chances of doing that. I refuse to believe the runtime of it would have been a hindrance, as it is less than a hundred minutes, and twenty more wouldn’t have hurt. Still, Hunters On A White Field should be considered an exciting debut, and Sarah Gyllenstierna is definitely a director to look out for in the future.


Rohitavra Majumdar
Rohitavra Majumdar
Rohitavra likes to talk about movies, music, photography, food, and football. He has a government job to get by, but all those other things are what keep him going.


 

 

Latest articles