Juror #2

2smiggy

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt27403986/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_0_tt_8_nm_0_in_0_q_juror

Clint Eastwood's latest film he has directed. Don't think it's getting a wide cinema release. Pity, it's a fairly decent film, a lot better than some of the other tat being released. Some glaring plot holes, and the ending seemed a bit rushed for me, but very enjoyable. It's on prime to rent.

flasher0030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058383126/juror-2

I watched this last night. Very enjoyable. John Grisham esq. Very intriguing plot - i.e. what would you do if you were in that position. One of the better movies I have seen in the past while anyway. Nicholous Hoult does a great job in the lead role.

I didn't notice anything too bad in terms of plotholes. Some of the court thing was a bit lax - there was no proper evidence that the suspect actually did anything wrong. All circumstantial. And the jurors were spouting rubbish that they were saying he was guilty because they didn't like the look of him.

I don't think those points are a spoiler on the plot.

Seathrun66

Watched it last night and liked it a lot. Kept you guessing til the very end as it could have gone many different ways. A couple of jurors were not credible, particularly the angry guy.

It had a wide cinema release here and in the UK (over 300 cinemas there) but only lasted circa two weeks in most places as there wasn’t much hype behind it. The problem was in the US where it was released in less than 50 screens, not publicised and then put on a streaming service after six weeks. Very disrespectful to Eastwood, particularly as it’s far from a dud.

spiritcrusher

Went to watch this after keeping an eye on it for a while, thought it sounded very much like the dialogue driven courtroom thrillers I often enjoy. Then seeing all those positive reviews emerge, really was looking forward to it.

Sadly though I thought it was nonsense. A nice curveball to the plot very early on seemed to set it up quite interestingly but unfortunately the whole thing became predictable to the point of being intolerable. I assume the direct lifting of almost everthing that happens in the jury room from 12 Angry Men and Runaway Jury were supposed to be knowing winks and homages but they were so egregious that it felt like straight up plagiarism. The script was so barebones it was essentially just the characters being reduced to tools that ensure we get to where the plot wanted to go as quickly as possible. Hard not to compare it something like Conclave, which is similarly dialogue heavy, but generally manages to conceal it's tricks quite well (although it does have some issues with believability also at times).

Sorry Clint. I like a lot of his stuff but this did not land for me at all.

steve_r

I think this is really a mixed bag - it feels like a cross between a John Grisham courtroom drama and 12 Angry Men, for better and for worse.

The film puts a lot of pressure on Nicholas Hoult to carry it all, and I'm not so sure he does - Henry Fonda he ain't. I think putting a stronger actor in the role would have served the film a lot better.

The plot itself was fine - it could have used some fine tuning around the case itself but I guess they had to make the alternate scenario plausible so that's how it ended up like that. Like the poster above, I thought the jury immediately jumping to a verdict based on that evidence was a little implausible.

All in, it's not a terrible film and it probably suffers from being out of step with modern trends.

JP Liz V1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122969537#Comment_122969537

I agree on Hoult who I like, not pulling me in as the lead, I like courtroom dramas and this was pretty good, watchable but as a Clint film I expected better, maybe 6.5 out of 10

Homelander

Really enjoyed this but there are definitely a lot of plot absurdities and conveniences you have to overlook.

If you're looking for convincing courtroom drama, this isn't that, but it's well crafted simplistic entertainment wrapped around an interesting premise.

Worth a watch anyway.

eightieschewbaccy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122969537#Comment_122969537

I really feel like JK Simmons has a plot in it that got removed at some point during the production.

2smiggy

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123010983#Comment_123010983

Spoiler Warning

him sort of disappearing from the story seemed like a rushed afterthought to be honest

flasher0030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123030233#Comment_123030233

Spoiler Warning

Ya. I presumed he was going to be completing his investigation behind the scenes, and there would be some revelation then. But nothing happened. It was a very strange plotline to include and then have it lead to nothing.

expectationlost

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123010983#Comment_123010983

or he was happy to do a small role in Clint Eastwood movie.

~Rebel~

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123030339#Comment_123030339

Spoiler Warning

JK's plotline itself (looking into cars that had damage repaired in the aftermath) was continued by the prosecutor, which led to her realising it was Hoult.

Baseball72

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123031734#Comment_123031734

I brought a good friend of mine, who is visually impaired, along with the guide dog(!) to see the film in the cinema- it was good for the dialogue and my friend could follow it quite well with the odd clarification from me.

flasher0030

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/123031734#Comment_123031734

That's true. I've forgotten the plot already.

Brief_Lives

I watched this over the weekend. Very good stuff. killer ending.

Thought Leslie Bibb and JK Simmons were underused a bit, but maybe happy to be in a Eastwood movie.

Highly recommend it though.

FortuneChip

Really disappointing.

Central premise is obviously interesting and actually felt Nicholas Hoult was good at bearing the initial weight but...

How did the case ever get this far?

How was the trial allowed to continue with such serious issues? How did a florist/detective not realise that wouldn't fly?

Fully clichéd jury as a check box, but none of them really brought too much to the decision making. Even with the long monologues about med school.

The field trip was painful too