17/16
2 interested me just from the basic premise
Chronology
As a juror on a high-profile murder trial, family man Justin Kemp struggles with a serious moral dilemma…one he could use to influence the jury’s verdict and potentially convict or acquit the wrong killer. Kiefer Sutherland got his part by writing to Clint Eastwood telling him how much of a fan he was and that he wanted to be in one of his movies before he retired. I always enjoy watching thrillers with a good hook in theaters and Juror No. Clint Eastwood may be inconsistent as a director, but he’s made so many certified classics that any film he directs deserves at least a modicum of attention.
The script does such a good job of putting you in this movie
Since this was supposed to be his last film, I had to believe it was going to be something special, and if it really is for him, he definitely ended on a high note. main character and it gave me mixed feelings in all the right ways. Nicholas Hoult is brilliant in a role that would demand a lot from any actor, and his few scenes with Zoe Deitch really endeared me to the character. I love a good courtroom drama, and the film was very successful in using its hook to take all the tension out of these scenes.
I also wish the overall technical work was a bit stronger
I was constantly wondering where it was going to end, which gave me one of the best questions to ask after any movie, and what I would do in the same situation, and I was so glad that the movie didn’t end on a stereotypically happy note, but on a rather sweet note that remained as controversial as everything else before it. The commentary isn’t always as deep as it tries to be, but there are a lot of observations that ended up being pretty superficial. A lot of this has to do with the supporting cast, especially the other members of the jury, who ended up feeling very uniform with very little depth. They felt like conduits for commentary rather than well-rounded characters, and their dialogue began to feel inconsequential to me very quickly.
I have done with this material
Eastwood is a legend for a reason, but I just wish he would do more interesting things behind the camera here. The manner in which the main dilemma is revealed is quite disappointing and some parts of the second act began to drag for me as many of the courtroom scenes could have been repeated. But there’s nothing about it that offends me, it’s fantastically edited with a really good score, but I just couldn’t help but wonder what the director could do with a little more distinct visual style. 39.
It is constantly exciting and intriguing because it has always made the most of its spaces
Juror no. 2 was exactly what I wanted and I don’t think Warner Bros is interested in pushing it right. I wish the commentary was deeper and the technical work a little stronger, but it’s nice to see an Eastwood director go for something as quiet and meditative as this. We don’t have enough movies like this these days and it deserves much better than Warner Bros.
Leave a Reply