Clint Eastwood’s latest film takes a very interesting concept and does whatever it takes to maintain that secret throughout, even if it isn’t decisions the characters would actually make. Read our full Juror No. 2 review below.
The premise of Juror No. 2 is a fascinating one: what if one of the jurors on a murder trial was actually the person who, seemingly, actually committed the crime? In the hands of someone very capable, this could’ve been an amazing film – but the script is very one-tone and it ultimately falls flat. A lack of knowledge of courtroom decorum and law systems creates a sense of unreality that causes a disconnect between the viewer and the film – what we end up watching is some exaggerated sense of reality that could never occur in a real courtroom or situation, which is fine, but the film wants to keep the tension high and create real stakes – which is difficult to buy into when everything else in the movie is so unreal.
A lot of fun things are done with the editing here, specifically the transitioning between the past and present which sees locations switch between different time periods to showcase various events. There is clearly a lot of artistry here and whilst Eastwood’s status as an auteur is not in doubt, his additions here are pretty unremarkable. The movie is shot like a TV drama – it has full blasts of light with high-key lighting coming from every angle. There is lots of natural lighting, but it seems more as if there was no attempt to do anything creative with these technical elements. As far as the cinematography goes, it is equally uninspiring. The camera sits and observes the scenes, but there is nothing of note in the way that it is used. It is simply there and unfortunately, it thereby implied that the film would be better in someone else’s hands. The film lends itself to a much bigger scale and that is not captured here – even the intimate scenes with just the couple at their home feel bland.
It’s no surprise that Warner Bros wanted to put this straight onto Max as it comes across exactly like a streaming movie – it plays it very safe, the acting is lacklustre, it’s shot like a streaming original and the dialogue is awful. It is hard to take this movie seriously when everything the characters say is so one-note and unnatural. Even in the courtroom, where you can write good dialogue that sounds scripted, it is not fulfilled – there were not enough real court proceedings for a movie that wants to set itself almost entirely there. The actors try their best with the material they’ve got but it always feels as if they know that a camera is there, you are never truly brought into the world and are always viewing it through yourself as opposed to the characters. Some of the choices made by certain characters in the film don’t even make sense for them.
The title character, Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult), believes himself to be guilty of the murder that is the central discussion of the film and he has the chance to end the trial and send the accused away on a guilty verdict. Instead, he fights for him and encourages the other jurors to look at other suspects and possibilities. There are a few attempts in the film to create some discussion around justice, but it never leans into it enough for it to be congratulated or even for you to consider yourself as you leave the film. If he has such a moral problem with sending the wrong guy to prison, then why is he not turning himself in? And if he is so scared, which he clearly is as he gets very strongly offended any time any evidence seems to point his way, then why is he pushing the search for other options instead of ending the trial and sending the accused to prison?
It is not all doom and gloom as there is fun to be had here. It is entertaining watching the case unravel and seeing Hoult do his best job of acting unsuspecting when he believes all of the eyes are on him. It is painfully flat but if you can accept it for that, there is fun sprinkled throughout, even if that is just watching the actors play off of each other trying to do the best with the lines they have been given.
All of the building blocks are there and there is an interesting movie somewhere in here. With the half hearted ideas surrounding justice and what’s right as well as themes of morality, there is a lot to be explored but it is just not brought to life enough. The concept could’ve been realised with stronger hands all over it in every department, but for now, it is a half-baked attempt at an interesting moral dilemma set in a courthouse.
The jury is in: Juror No. 2 is an interesting concept that needed a much stronger script and stronger pairs of hands on it in every department in order to be fully supported to its true potential.
Juror No. 2 is directed by Clint Eastwood and stars Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, Zoey Deutch, Kiefer Sutherland, Chris Messina, Leslie Bibb and J.K Simmons. Clint Eastwood, Adam Goodman, Jessica Meier, Matt Skiena and Tim Moore serve as producers.
Thanks for reading this Juror No. 2 review. For articles similar to this and more movie news, make sure to check out our News section.
