At the end, whodunnit?

at the end, whodunnit?

Me, but don't tell anyone

The little girl he raped

what girl would complain if he touched her though? let's be real here.

Literally why she accused him of showing his dick. She kissed him and he told her off for it. She was btfo

my wife's son

she was a terrible human being, literally the scum of the earth

she was only a kd you idiot she doesn't know what she did

>kids can't be scum
Bet you were a shitty kid

He was being sarcastic you fucking moron. Is this your first time on here?

delet

she got confused. she's only a little girl and she didn't understand what she was doing. the real psychopath is the brother's douchebag friend who showed porn to a little girl and fucked up her head in the first place

Yeah I know, just having a joke. She was hurt by the rejection though. She really liked him but didn't know how to show it. She did nothing wrong.

>on here?
where?

Fantastic kino. It really shows how we become socialized as we grow up into society. she had no understanding of the impact of her words because she knew he did nothing. As a child, she believes that grown-ups are only punished when they've done something wrong, and she can't understand that there are rules adults follow outside of the law or right and wrong. there are social rules and the stigma of something like child molestation is so strong that just an accusation can ruin a life regardless of if there were any laws broken or any actual wrongdoings.

...

essential angrycore
when they killed the dog i fucking lost it

>he fell for the kids are innocent meme
TOP KEK

the girl tells her mom halfway through she made it all up

>the brother
the one whodunnit at the end

>He was being sarcastic you fucking moron. Is this your first time on here?

But why did he rape her? He seems like such a nice guy apart from the fact that he is a rapist. It's such a weird movie and it made me feel pretty uncomfortable. It's honestly like the director wanted you to sympathise with a child rapist and suggest that people's reactions to what he had done were somehow unjustified. Way too edgy for me.

...

I tried watching this but had to shut it off before any shit went down. I realized that I wouldn't be able to handle it.

not sure if serious

She knew what she was doing

Completely fixating on the ending proves that you completely missed the point of the entire movie. I see this happening a lot with movies like the Shining and American Psycho.

>Hey! Let's kill an innocent dog because fuck child molesters, amiright?
I like this movie for conveying the message that sometimes people do some evil shit when they think they're being morally superior.

Assuming that a question about the ending is complete fixation proves that you're autistic. I see this happening a lot with posters on Sup Forums.

It really 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.

Why didn't he just give her the D?

he did
thats the point of the whole movie

The ending literally doesn't matter.

It's purposefully ambiguous, but you can tell it's a male.

The Director has been asked many times whodunnit and he refuses to give an answer. He won't even answer other questions about the movie, ie, did he show her his dick. It's upto the audience to decide who THEY think dunnit and if he was guilty of that.. and possibly worse.

One theory is it was his own Son. There are hints in the movie that his Son is either Gay, and/or, was also sexually abused by Him during childhood; and/or knew he was guilty, so.. decided to take a shot.

At the end of the movie the group walk off and it's just him and Son on the hill. He leaves his Son on the hill and walked down into trees, a minute later the shot comes from the hill. It's a guy 100%.

It's also unclear if He actually did show the girl his dick. The Director/Writer won't answer questions on it.

I can can flip back and forward all day on whether he did it or not because it's such a well-crafted movie. Right now... I think he was guilty.

He did, the whole point of the movie is you defending someone who actually is guilty.

Yep, that's why it's in the movie right? I guess they just shot it for shits and giggles and threw it in cause why not.

see

I know half of the posts here are just baiting, but goddamn do they rustle my jimmies hard.

Children and drunks never lie. They should have put a fork up his ass.

>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.

Sounds like something that matters to me.

We have these almost daily now. It'll fade in a few months.