The courtroom drama is slated for a November 1 limited theatrical release.
If, as has been widely reported, or at least rumored, Juror #2 really is Clint Eastwood’s final film as director, he appears to be bowing out while at the top of his game.
The drama, which opens Friday, Nov. 1, in limited theatrical release, had its world premiere Sunday at the AFI Fest in Hollywood. And the first reviews suggest that the two-time Oscar winner as Best Director is leaving us with one of his finest movies.
The official plot synopsis from Warner Bros.: “Juror #2 follows family man Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult) who, while serving as a juror in a high profile murder trial, finds himself struggling with a serious moral dilemma… one he could use to sway the jury verdict and potentially convict — or free — the accused killer.”
Among the first reviews:
Peter Hammond, Deadline: “Clint Eastwood’s 42nd and possibly last film as director (hope not), Juror #2, also happens to be his best since American Sniper. At 94, this remarkable filmmaker not only still has it, he actually has it in spades over some half his age.
“Delivering a classic courtroom drama — not a genre he has worked in much — Eastwood has made not just a riveting suspenseful thriller and family drama but also one with penetrating themes such as moral complexity and dealing with a crisis of conscience. It asks the question: What would you do in a similar circumstance but doesn’t answer that with easy solutions. It’s complicated, to say the least.
“Eastwood, working with a fine original screenplay by Jonathan Abrams, has made one of the most compelling human dramas of his career, one that inevitably will resonate with smart adult audiences. You could hear a pin drop at Sunday’s world premiere as the closing-night gala of AFI Fest at the Chinese Theatre in Hollywood.”
Christian Zilko, IndieWire: “A throwback character study that invokes the kind of mid-budget hits that kept the lights on at Warner Bros. for 50 years, Juror #2 both enriches our understanding of the Hollywood icon who made it and stands on its own as one of the best studio films released in 2024.
“If Eastwood’s acting career is defined by his rugged charm, his directorial output is most notable for its empathy. Many of his masterpieces exist within the tension between his crusty old man persona and his undeniable ability to put himself in the shoes of the people his characters claim to hate. His most simplistic films are criticized for giving heroes too much credit for reaching bare minimum levels of empathy far too late in life, while his best works showcase our capacity for prejudice so fully that its limitations and shortcomings are placed on full display.
“Count Juror #2 among the latter group. Opening with broad strokes of patriotism that paint the American legal system in a euphoric light, it descends into a study of the ways that an imperfect system can be made even less perfect by the mortals tasked with running it. Yet it’s more interested in giving everyone the benefit of the doubt than casting blame on any individual person or group. Even in the film’s darkest moments, Eastwood and screenwriter Jonathan Abrams beg us to consider the possibility that our enemies are doing their best to get through the day without veering too far from their own definition of a good person, only to remind us how short of those ideals we’re each capable of falling. Juror #2 argues that nobody should be defined by their mistakes, but we can’t move on from them without admitting to ourselves that we’ll never be fully liberated from our pasts.”
Peter Debruge, Variety: “Once the trial wraps and deliberations begin, Eastwood seems to be counting on our having seen 12 Angry Men, dangling the possibility that Justin could sway the rest of the jury to acquit — or else nudge them toward a guilty verdict, letting [the accused killer], James Sythe (Gabriel Basso), take the fall. But Jonathan Abrams’ script has a few twists up its sleeve, which seem to fit Eastwood’s more skeptical view of the legal process…
“While there’s much to chew on throughout, the film’s ambiguous last few scenes trust us to be the judge. As always, Eastwood respects our intelligence. And yet, Juror No. 2 registers as something of an anomaly in his oeuvre: It ranks among his quietest films, forgoing spectacle in favor of self-reflection. One could argue the whole system is on trial, and yet, the only angry man here is Eastwood, not the jurors, as Dirty Harry goes out not with a bang, but an ambivalent whisper.”
Tim Grierson, Screen Daily: “In recent years, Clint Eastwood’s films have often paid tribute to ordinary men who stand up and do what is right. With Juror #2, he tweaks that tendency in a fascinating fashion, telling the story of a troubled writer who discovers that he may be intimately connected to the murder trial in which he is sitting as an impartial juror. Nicholas Hoult gives a nicely modulated performance, conveying the character’s conflicting feelings of guilt, fear and moral conscience as he begins to realize that he, in fact, may be responsible for the accidental killing. This sturdy courtroom drama moves along briskly, asking questions about personal ethics while supplying the genre’s comfy pleasures…
“Juror #2 features the typical lack of flash from Eastwood, who turned 94 this summer. The director allows Justin’s moral dilemma to add sufficient suspense to what is otherwise a compelling but fairly straightforward procedural. And Hoult brings complexity to his silently anguished character, a recovering alcoholic grateful for the second chances he has been afforded. The actor conveys both Justin’s desire to save James and his hesitation to come clean about what actually took place. Eastwood’s heroes are frequently meant to be inspirational, but Justin is a far more nuanced protagonist — one who recognizes that ensuring justice for James may mean destroying the life he has meticulously rebuilt after a string of DUIs. (Crucially, Justin had not been drinking that fateful night when he drove off.) To give the defendant, an equally flawed man, redemption, Justin might have to jeopardize his own.”