MovieChat Forums > The Hunted (2003) Discussion > Hunters or 'Sweepers'?

Hunters or 'Sweepers'?

posted 16 years ago by greenj_75
27 replies | jump to latest

One thing that has me curious, even after a few rewatches is the scene where the two hunters are killed. Are they really just a couple of city-slicking hunters?

The film itself suggests they may be hunting elk, but never confirms it. They refer to what they're tracking as 'he' and you never actually seem them take aim at an animal in their scopes.

Other than that, their equipment and demeanor when Aaron Hallam starts taunting them from the shadows suggests they may be military types.

Later in the film the FBI lady tells LT that as far as she knows they were just a couple of businessmen.

Did the film leave their true identities open to viewer interpretation? What do you guys and gals think?

[–] moth_city 16 years ago

Spoilers, sorta.

Anyway, I don't think the viewer was supposed to think they were anything other than just a couple of guys hunting. As for their equipment, there are probably hunters who've never been in the military who hunt with automatic rifles if the law permits them to. As for their demeanor, while I think realistically two average guys would have tried running rather than trying to fight, they were just protecting themselves. The movie makes it pretty clear that he's gone insane and thinks everyone is out to get him. Also, something just occurred to me, if they were hunting this trained killer they wouldn't wear bright orange hunting gear.

[–] SausagePourVous 13 years ago

Yeah,I feel as their scared response to what he says indicates that they were hunters.But just to point out how off the grid,deranged Aaron has become,I just thought of how he first seems to go after them like an extremely militant vegan and how he provokes them.."You think you could hunt ME with those rifles?",inviting them to play,wanting to be the hunted.Pointing out that"There is no honor in what you do.When you kill with your own hands...there is a reverance."

If you put that together with what Aaron says to L.T,the scopes they were using,"they weren´t hunters,they were sweepers".He seems to contradict himself a bit,since these two murders are completely set in motion and instigated by Aaron.He both mocks and think they´re cowards for killing animals with rifles,then later suggest they were professional hitmen out to get him?Include the"chicken speech" and except that it becomes pretty contradictory,I think the main point is that Aaron has completely lost it and is in survival mode.In his environment,in his world,that is.He can stil be sweet and tender to a little girl but when he feels pressured and his paranoia kicks in,then he just does his thing without hesitation.That makes him hard to dislike.¨

Those two hunters...I feel they seemed a bit too scared,clumbsy and overall unprofessional to be sweepers.This script isn´t exactly Memento,so I believe that if they WERE sweepers and Aaron wasn´t paranoid,the director would let us know.Cause it would make us sympathize with the hunted.Then All Hallams kills would´ve been...understandable,although maybe not justified(He only kills people who try to kill him).

[–] jejozi 11 years ago

I thought along that line, too. Regardless whether I ran or fought, the first thing I would have done is remove the blaze orange. Well, the first thing would have been I also had a hand gun.

My favorite part, so far, are the circles of soldiers firing their automatic weapons towards the pavement at about 45 degree angles and not hitting the guy on the other side.

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

[–] moviefan9274 15 years ago

Also, something just occurred to me, if they were hunting this trained killer they wouldn't wear bright orange hunting gear.

they would if they are trying to bleand i as hunters

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CREEPlNG_DEATH 15 years ago

In my mind its pretty clear the hunters were "sweepers". It was only when the bodies were found and identified by the local authorities, that the FBI and L.T. were called in for the hunt. If they had really been just hunters, there would be no need for all that. The FBI probably would not of got involved until the locals totally F-ed it up and the body count of innocent hunters got to high. Aaron had "gone off the farm" and they were afraid he was going to divulge top secret info about some of the missions he had been on. So they sent in the "sweepers" to find him. Once Aaron had killed 4 of them, they knew it was going to take a man with a special skill set like L.T. to find and bring him in.

Well that's my take on it anyway. All in all I thought it was a decent flick and is a little underrated due to the fact it was edited at such a fast pace.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sicness277 14 years ago

While I agree in thinking that they were sweepers, the reason the FBI was involved (at least what they claimed) was due to the multiple killings done by Aaron, not just in Washington but Oregon as well (don't quote me on the interstate part though as it's been a while since I last saw the movie). The FBI would get involved though in multiple related deaths and deaths in multiple states. So there's no clear reason to assume that they were sweepers really.

[–] blackknight273 9 years ago

The main reason the FBI was called in was because the killings took place on federal land.

[–] mrjazzy2002 15 years ago

After I thought about the hunters and what their possible intention was, they may have been agents sent out to take out Hallam. How is it that they just happened to be in the same exact location as Hallem, both men seemed to be in military, robust shape and had high end rifles and expensive glass.

The only point is the hunters or "sweepers" wearing the orange reflective vests which some hunters do wear to prevent being accidently shot in the field by other hunters in the area doesn't help them blend into the scenery for stealth.

But in Hallam's mind, he feels they just might be sweepers to hunt him down and take him out. Who knows?

[–] CygnusX21 15 years ago

I realize that the movie is deliberately ambiguous, but I feel that the hunters were most likely "sweepers". In addition to what has already been discussed, LT made an observation that the hunters had no cooler for storing meat, and had no campsite.

[–] zachanscom 15 years ago

they're hunters. businessmen who probably thought they were dealing with some psycho and were overconfident due to their expensive equipment and possible military backgrounds.

it's alluded to later on when they also report that park rangers and others were killed in the same manner by hallam, which suggests that hallam killed them out of paranoia. his focus being survival, he even attempted to kill his former mentor out of fear that he was a "sweeper".

[–] deananthony8669 14 years ago

I've watched the movie with the director's commentary, and also read a lot about the film. They are not necessarily hunters, nor sweepers. It is left ambiguous purposely. The park rangers could have been a very different situation, and he could have killed them for different reasons. I do understand that, because of him killing the park rangers, it seems like it is him simply going crazy, but one of the main points of the movie was ambiguity.

[–] samuel-84 15 years ago

Pretty vague in the movie and but that fits in with the theme of you questioning Hallam being the sane one choosing to go against the dodgy black ops he was being sent in to do. Who is morally correct, Hallam or the military. Is he simply defending himself or has he gone psycho.

They were trying to contain him as he was a major risk should he talk about the operations. They were sweepers.

Clues:
1) Over the top weaponry. Either the filmmakers are saying they are sweepers or
a counter argument is that they were merely hunters and the huge advantage they had over a defenseless deer represented the soldiers advantage of innocent people being killed.

2) The bright jackets. Either they are hunters or wearing them to blend in and not be suspicious to Hallam.

3) MAIN definitive clue. The hunters immediately try and shoot Hallam and refer to him as "him" not "it" and we see what looks more like a man than animal running away. They don't try and reason with him at all. When Hallam asks do you need all the equipment to kill a dear. The hunter replies thats how they make sure they are dead. That is enough innuendo. They immediately continue to try and hunt him not talk as any city hunter would do. Clearly the military could not admit to cops about trying to take him out.

[–] nebreen 14 years ago

The thing that indicated to me that they're more than mere hunters is their reaction upon initially being spoken to: they're startled, but they don't seem particularly surprised that there's someone talking to them, and even begin to engage in a bit of banter, none of which, as another astute poster points out, attempts to even reason with the mysterious voice, ask him who he is or what he wants, etc. Then, they actively being pursuing this disembodied voice, before they are attacked, or even threatened.

On my first viewing of the film, my initial instinct was that they knew he existed, and were hunting him in a sort of vigilante capacity. However, that doesn't seem like something some city-slicker types would undertake for a weekend vacation.

All that leads me to believe that it is more plausible than not that they were "sweepers"

[–] NoLegs 14 years ago

I think they were idiot city hunters with over the top gear in the wrong place at the wrong time. I doubt trained "sweepers" could track his location and then be so amateurish in their tactics when they actually found him.

Also, those fancy scopes appear to be either night vision or perhaps thermal and yet the view through the scope was that of a traditional scope. I believe the script was just weak during this part and their technical weapons advisor sucked.

[–] hatsAreForLosers 14 years ago

They were sweepers. Proof: When Tommy is first called in and he is talking to the woman, they explain that the "hunters" had no camp set up and other things that a hunter would bring with him but leave at the camp when hunting,

[–] tatedance 14 years ago

They were "sweepers" disguised as hunters. I thought it was made pretty clear in the film. The first thing they say is "I got him... he was down there, I saw him" while looking down his sight. They then start running after him, lol. Also you clearly see deer running away from them and neither look in that direction.

The reasons for the orange vests is obviously a bluff.

These Great Big Rats Scuttled Off The Slave Ships And Raped All The Little Tree Monkeys

[–] ApolloCreed215 13 years ago

They are definitely Sweepers disguised as hunters... No real grey area here, the clues are all there. Most of them have already been explained by others, but I notice that everyone seemed to miss a big one.

The FBI chick says that one of the "hunters" had a 9mm pistol tucked inside of his jacket. Now... I don't claim to know a whole lot about hunting, but I highly doubt that you hunt deer with a 9mm handgun.

Sweepers. Aaron had every reason to slice some bacon off their backs.

[–] BobH12370 12 years ago

They were only hunters. There is a news report in the movie that says that they were two businessmen.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]