Juror #2

Clint Eastwood's potential final film is his strongest in a decade

Clint Eastwood is 94 and yet the American filmmaker has been consistently making films. In the last decade alone, he’s produced eight movies. However, age is catching up to the veteran Hollywood star and his latest is rumored to be his last before he retires.

Juror #2 is about a jury in Georgia tasked with hearing a murder case. One of the jury members, Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult), finds he has information on the case that could exonerate the accused, James Michael Sythe (Gabriel Basso). However, in revealing this information, Justin could be incriminating himself.

Juror #2 could be taken to be a re-adaptation of “12 Angry Men” with added freedoms and twists. The premise is the same, wherein only one juror sees the defendant as not-guilty while the rest do. While Juror #2 is set up to follow a similar process where Justin places the doubt in the rest of the jury’s minds, Eastwood doesn’t go down that route. Instead, Juror #2 is about the burden of guilt and the tribulations regarding what brings about justice.

The script by Jonathan A. Abrams adds layers and tangled character webs, so that an answer to its questions doesn’t come easily. Justin could come forward with his information, but he has a wife at home, Allison (Zoey Deutch), with a high-risk pregnancy. An ex-detective juror, Harold (J.K. Simmons), thinks the investigation only ever looked at one suspect, and yet it’s against the rules to do outside research, can he uphold his oat to be a police officer with that of a juror? The hard-working prosecutor, Faith (Toni Collette) is in a race for District Attorney, were she to find new evidence about the case she , should she present it and tank her reputation? The moral quandaries are delicious to see unfold, and Eastwood and Abrams script never gives us its own moral conviction until the final shot. This restraint pushes viewers into debating themselves as to what their own conscience tells them the right course of action should be.

Eastwood’s minimalism helps keep the central narrative and ethical questions clear, however, it also hamstrings deeper character moments, with key relationships like Justin’s and his wife Allison feeling shallow. The rest of the characters only tip slightly away from cliches, donning an inkling of complexities, yet never delving into them. Justin’s character is thankfully sketched more fully, giving him an unreliability trait of having been an alcoholic whose information regarding the case might or might not have come after a relapse.  

Hoult is handed a complicated and juicy role, where he must show a tormented inner debate while fitting with Eastwood’s naturalism style. Hoult struggles to give off some of these conflicted emotions in shorter scenes, appearing anxious instead. However, when Hoult is given longer moments to play the conflict inside of him, he shines, darting his blue eyes as if trying to escape the decision that lies alone with himself.

There is an obvious commentary on the justice system and its apportioning of justice, and one could even perform a reading of the fast judgement by the jury as commentary on cancel culture. However, Eastwood misses an opportunity to deliver a look at the justice system’s treatment of black men. Without changing a single word or scene in Juror #2, if James Michael Sythe’s race had been changed to black, it would have brought about a much more complex dilemma. It would have forced a reckoning of how a white man, Justin, sits in judgment of a potentially innocent black man, holding the key to his freedom, but which would mean risking himself. Juror #2’s commentary remains strong as it stands, but with such a simple tweak, the filmwould have been an enthralling look at the intersection of race and justice in America.

In the end, Juror #2 is Eastwood’s strongest film since American Sniper (2014). His succinct and efficient style fits the legal drama genre perfectly. The moral questions and dilemmas raised are riveting to grapple with. Characterization is left underdeveloped, which as a result flattens the depth of the world and story. However, Juror #2, if it is to be Eastwood’s last contribution to cinema, stands as a worthy capstone to an inimitable career.

7.9/10