46/24

He’s not even really a criminal

Chronology

While serving as a juror in a high-profile murder trial, a father finds himself in a serious moral quandary, one that he could use to influence the jury’s verdict and potentially convict or free the wrong killer. Kiefer Sutherland got his share by writing to Clint Eastwood to tell him what a big fan he was and that he wanted to be in one of his movies before he retired. Kiefer’s father, Donald Sutherland, had co-starred with Clint in Kellyn Sankarit (1970) and Space Cowboys (2000). Faith Killebrew: Sometimes you try to do the right thing only to find out you’re doing it all wrong. And when you figure things out, you realize the guy you’re chasing isn’t a… psychopath.

He’s just a regular guy

Justin Kemp: What if it was an accident? Faith Killebrew: This is no accident… Referenced in Open Bar: #120 – Glicked Dominates, Snow White Panic, Captain America Disaster (2024). Hard Livin’ Written by Chris Stapleton and Kendell Marvel Performed by Chris Stapleton Courtesy of Mercury Nashville Records Licensed by Universal Music Enterprises. I always love a thriller with a good hook in theaters and Juror #2 had me intrigued from the very beginning. Clint Eastwood may be inconsistent as a director, but he’s made so many certified classics that any film he makes deserves at least some attention.

The commentary isn’t always as deep as it tries to be, with a lot of the observations ending up feeling quite shallow

Since this is supposedly his last film, I had to believe it would be something special and if that’s indeed the case for him, he definitely ended on a high note. The script does such a good job of putting you in the headspace of this main character and it left me with conflicted feelings in all the right ways. Nicholas Hoult is great in a role that would ask a lot of any actor and his few scenes with Zoe Deutch really made me love this character. I love a good legal drama and the film managed to do so well by making good use of its plot to bring out every bit of tension in these scenes. I was constantly intrigued to see where things were going to end and it left me with one of the best questions you can ask yourself after any film: what would I do in the same situation? The script has a lot to say about the justice system and its inherent flaws and I was very pleased that the film didn’t end on a stereotypical happy note but rather on a rather bittersweet one that left me as conflicted as everything else up until that point.

I also wish the overall technique was a little more solid

This is largely due to the supporting cast, particularly the other jurors, who can end up feeling one-note with very little depth. They come across as conduits for commentary rather than well-rounded characters, and their dialogue started to feel corny very quickly. Eastwood is a legend for a reason, but I just wish he’d done more interesting things behind the camera here. The way the central dilemma is revealed is quite underwhelming, and there are parts of the second act that started to drag me down due to the repetition of many of the courtroom scenes. But there’s nothing that offended me, it’s fantastically put together with some very good music but I couldn’t help but wonder what a director with a slightly more distinctive visual style could have done with this material. Juror #2 was exactly what I wanted it to be and I think it’s a tragedy that Warner Bros.

had no interest in pushing it properly

It’s consistently gripping and intriguing because it always made the most of its premise. I wish the commentary was deeper and the technique a little stronger but it’s nice to see a director of Eastwood’s caliber embark on something as quiet and meditative as this.