the hunt, the ending

because he's still being hunted.

I really think everybody's missing the point in here. I think the ending has something to do with two things (I'm not very clear with this, btw):

- The deers. In the first scenes, we see Lucas killing a deer. Deers are here a representation of innocence, just like any other animal in the movie (e.g. Luca's dog, etc.). The same innocence that we see in Lucas. Lucas (society) kills the deer (Lucas).

- The son. In the end, Lucas's son becomes a hunter. That is, a real man, part of society. Society, in this case, is essentialy a group of people ready to hunt, legitimated to do it.

So, what we see in the very end is something like this (I'm pretty sure somebody can explain this better than me): Lucas is not anymore a hunter, because he became the hunted when he's accused. Instead, his son becomes the hunter, as he becomes part of society. So, the shooter is a representation of society, the one that's legitimated to hunt. But having the guns doesn't make you the right to judge anyone, but instead, it does. That's what Lucas realises when he stands up.

It wasn't hallucination because the bullet hit the tree and it was shown .
also it wasn't marcus because there is a scene right before the shooting with marcus coming down to near the lake . the shooter is on the hill.
we can settle with a random person who didn't wanna forget .

I read the screenplay which pretty clearly states that it did happen. On the other hand some changes has been made from the screenplay to the film, so it doesn't prove it. It is interesting that Vinterberg at some point did intend for it to happen.
Apart from that. When we cut from Lucas' face to his POV, the hunter has been replaced by a deer. Odd for a deer to show up in a place where there's just been fired a rifle, eh?
As the sequence is rather dream-like, it could be that long time had passed or maybe we see it from a pov of Lucas' disoriented mind.

Doesn't matter that much. The scene shows two things; Lucas is scarred. And is still scared. The hunt isn't over.
People in the village still have their doubts.
By making it seem like a dream sequence or whatever you wanna call it, Vinterberg says that both explanations are true at the same time. He goes art house on us with that one. Really well done!

Furthermore: In the screenplay it is stated at the last dinner party at the hunt ceremony that people are resigned towards Lucas. I don't think it's very clear in the film. Only with Johan, the guy that slapped Marcus around outside Theo's house.

Summarized:
Both things happened in the last sequence, because both things are equally plausible. Unfortunately Lucas will never be cleared.



I'm *beep* bitch

The same one who killed the dog and threw the rock though the window glass.

I watched the alternative ending with and without commentaries from the director. In that scene, Lucas gets shot in the heart. Their reasoning for this was that the most natural consequence of calling the movie “The Hunt” was to shoot the main character in the end. They decided against that ending because they wanted it to have a more optimistic ending. He is being shot at to show that he is still “marked” but the ending still leaves up optimistic in that he gets a chance to have a new start somewhere else.

I think this means that he either has already moved somewhere new and is only meeting his old friends at special gatherings, or that the shot makes him realize that he has to move if he wants it to be over.

As for the shooter, it looked like a gangly teenage boy so I would assume it was Klara's brother.