Tribeca Festival 2024 Review: “Hunters on a White Field” – A Familiar Look at Toxic Masculinity!

A psychological thriller following three men, Gregor, Henrik, and Alex, hunting in a remote area of Sweden where their own competitiveness and thrill to kill gets the better of them sounds like a familiar idea that never ceases to spark interest among viewers. There are so many styles, tones, and avenues to take with an idea such as this that has the potential to stick the landing.

Sarah Gyllenstierna’s first feature Hunters on a White Field is a tale of three men whose motivations and primitive instinct take over their morality, exhibiting their masculinity in a dominant and violent way. Although the film is crafted with a slow burn that takes its time, it struggles to do so in a way that captures the audience enough to withstand its pace.

Related – Tribeca Festival 2024 Review: “An Update on Our Family”

Hunters on a White Field themes of primitive violence and competitiveness among men felt like it was affirming what other films have already displayed without setting itself apart. From the beginning Gregor (Magnus Krepper), Henrik (Jens Hultén), and Alex (Ardalan Esmaili), have this need to prove their power over the animals they hunt as well as their dominant nature among each other.

Scenes of them engaging in “playful” combat and their view on hunting as it relates to something pleasurable like s*x, foreshadow the eventual “the most dangerous game” path they will be led down. Knowing the goal in mind doesn’t necessarily hinder a film but Sarah Gyllenstierna’s handle on the material feels all too familiar and tame.

There are instances in the film where the script plants seeds that ask to be tied together thematically. It seems like a majority of these seeds planted did not come to fruition by the end, making the film feel incomplete in its execution. It felt like a lot of dialogue was being thrown out to the audience with the impression it would be important later, only to fall through the cracks. Alex seems to be a go-getter in theory, as he converses with Gregor about various business practices, urging them to take action.

However, in practice Alex is portrayed as the “weakest link,” for example becoming sick at the sight of their killed prey. The script felt like it had more material to explore only to feel cut by the end. Hunters on a White Field’s structure was able to pose an intriguing idea on men’s motivations to display their masculinity as it relates to ethics. Hunting has been a pastime since the beginning of time, evolving into a sport for modern society, now that we no longer need to hunt and gather to live.

Killing animals like ducks and bucks is considered ethical to humans and may make its audience question whether carrying out “smaller” forms of violence against animals is a preventative measure from engaging in our primitive but unethical nature towards other human beings. Once the animals in the forest seem to disappear, the three men decide to level up the game to involve each other.

Related – “The Watchers” Review: A Folk Horror Misfire!

The film poses the question as to whether rules are what prevents us from engaging in chaos and if chaos is actually in our true nature. It is a fascinating idea that unfortunately was not captured fully by Gyllenstierna’s script. Hunters on a White Field’s downfall is not necessarily in Gyllenstierna’s filmmaking but more in the familiarity of its execution.

‘Hunters on a White Field’ Rating – 2.5/5

Follow Steph (the Author) on IG – @cinemasteph_7