Directed By Clint Eastwood

Starring – Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, J.K Simmons

The Plot – While serving as a juror in a high-profile murder trial, family man Justin Kemp (Hoult) finds himself struggling with a serious moral dilemma, and one he could use to sway the jury verdict and potentially convict or free the wrong killer.

Rated PG-13 for some violent images and strong adult language.

Juror #2 | Official Trailer (youtube.com)

POSITIVES

For one reason or another, Eastwood has rarely impressed me as a director, but ‘Juror #2’ feels like his most realized film since Oscar-Winner ‘Million Dollar Baby’, which could ultimately serve as a culminating goodbye for one of Hollywood’s most commanding icons. In being a courtroom drama, Eastwood not only elevates the stakes with a fascinating exploration of this complexly riveting case, involving some creative measures towards storytelling and conveying vital exposition to the audience, but also trivializes the imperfect science of the American judicial system, which make it difficult to even attain an unbiased and interested jury towards relieving an innocent man of a lifetime of prison. In terms of the events in question to the case, Clint offers a stirring balance of show and tell perspective to the reveals that allow audiences the kind of advantageous accessibility of watching the night in question play out before us, throughout overhead narration of the legal teams interacting with various witnesses, inscribing an immersive appeal to the already thorough definition given to the responsibility and thankless appeal of being a juror that feels anything but glorious. Responsibly, Eastwood stays away from the heavy handed commentary that insincerely underscored films like ‘Richard Jewell’ or ‘The 15:17 to Paris’ with his own brand of crotchety preaching, and because he feels determined to take audiences on a ride of unforeseen twists and unresolved demons with the characters, it never loses sight of everybody’s role in the system, where the events playing out in real time have just as much, if not more, relevance than those frozen in the backstory of that one fateful night. The sequencing never repeats itself without applying something new and shifting to the dynamic of information that wasn’t initially presented, and while the case itself is far more about the jury’s deliberations than it is the questioning of the various legal teams, Eastwood values everything about some of the best courtroom dramas of all time that make this such a compelling watch, this time with style refusing to rob him of the unflinching focus that this story deserves in a media sensationalized nation that prematurely paints narratives unnecessarily. That’s not to say that ‘Juror #2’ doesn’t brandish a distinct personality in consistent editing and impeccable framing that elicit so much deeper meaning to the imagery’s correspondence with the unraveling events in real time, it’s just that they work to service and enhance the contextual divide between now and then, without coming across as distractingly imposing like some of his most recent offerings. In terms of storytelling, this was a mostly rewarding watch that impressed me with the questions about morality and societal prejudices that inevitably come into play with heavily profiled cases, without falling for the same kind of tropes that tie so many of these movies together, despite early act set-ups that looked like they were headed that way. As expected, the script does take time fleshing out these various jurors as much as it can with a 108-minute run time, but instead of constricting themselves to playing types for the sake of ratcheting the intensity inside of its claustrophobic confines, it instead pursues each of them in ways that appraises the humanity and conscience with upending a man’s life, primarily with some unique choices paid to the backstory of Simmons character, who deserves ambiguity as much as my review can capably maintain. Because it values the many angles of roles within a court case, with a far greater expansion of exploration to everyone from the jurors, to the legal teams, to even the family of our conflicted protagonist, we receive consciousness where few courtroom dramas consistently pursue, allowing us fruitful dynamics and a platitude of opinions that can at least test audience perception from where it began, to where it ultimately ended up. But all of this pales in comparison to the meaningful work in performances that drive the movie’s appeal, with Eastwood and the production assembling a who’s who of dramatic heavyweights, with each of them receiving ample time to make their presence felt. The deepest is obviously in Hoult or Collette, with the former carrying a tremendous burden that weighs heavily on his distracted demeanor, and the latter enacting a powerful stoicism whose greatest downfall is her character’s lack of vulnerability that comes to humble her. Each of them are great enough to lead their own movies, so I’m glad that Eastwood makes them dual protagonists of sorts, allowing each of their arcs to maintain a fresh appeal that doesn’t overstay its welcome or become tedious. In addition to this powerful duo, there are memorable turns from Chris Messina, Zoey Deutsch, Keifer Sutherland, Amy Aquino, and of course J.K Simmons, whose cunning intellect added a refreshing clarity to this group of jurors that always remained one step ahead of Hoult’s Justin, in this battle for power that didn’t need confrontation to feel compelling. As for the ending, I predict that it will come with some division among its audience, but it landed on the right side of effectiveness for me, with a last second blow to my complacency for expectations that feels more optimistic than I was expecting from a story like this.

NEGATIVES

Earnestly, ‘Juror #2’ is probably my second favorite Eastwood-directed effort, but even within the prestige of the certification comes some issues with the execution that nearly had this treading the sacrificial waters of his last seven years of filmmaking, primarily in its abundance of conveniences that were a bit difficult to coherently interpret alongside the characters. Without revealing too much, characters catch on to someone in the ways that person acts and behaves in correspondence to certain developments, and while the script requires some give and take to drive this conflict towards feeling edge-of-the-seat urgency, it reaches a bit further in trying to obscure disbelief than feels possible, especially considering this character never really does anything that feels too transparent to what they’re concealing. The worst of these undoubtedly pertains to a character looking someone up on Google, during a big reveal, and their face pops up in the first five pictures. This wouldn’t be a problem if say the character was famous in the context of this established world, but they’re an everyday nobody, so the fact that the world’s greatest search engine would only show one person, who essentially has a very common name, is downright silly, forcing more than an ironic laugh to anyone who understands how basic searches work. In addition to convenience, my only other issue with the movie came with the dissipation of Simmons character, midway through the movie, which rids the movie of its most compelling dynamic. Despite the aforementioned praise for one of the year’s best and deepest ensembles, Simmons imbeds the kind of irreplaceable presence in which the movie’s momentum takes a bit of a hit during the inferior second half, and I wish the film kept him around throughout its entirety, as he’s almost single-handedly responsible for driving much of its urgency factor, leaving a noticeable void that nobody, regardless of their talents and appeal, can capably fill.

OVERALL
‘Juror #2’ serves no shortage of morality debates or entertainment value to an everyday court case made complicated by one earth-shattering revelation that fuels the fires of justice in Eastwood’s latest and most impressive offering in decades. Despite momentary conveniences needed to push the story forward, the prosecution, involving radiant performances aplenty, and one exclamation point of an ending, offers an airtight case for audience enlightenment, with stomach-turning justice that definitely isn’t blind.

My Grade: 8/10 or B+