Justin Kemp es un padre de familia que, mientras ejerce de jurado en un juicio por asesinato, se enfrenta a un grave dilema moral que podría utilizar para influir en el veredicto del jurado ... Leer todoJustin Kemp es un padre de familia que, mientras ejerce de jurado en un juicio por asesinato, se enfrenta a un grave dilema moral que podría utilizar para influir en el veredicto del jurado y condenar -o liberar - al asesino equivocado.Justin Kemp es un padre de familia que, mientras ejerce de jurado en un juicio por asesinato, se enfrenta a un grave dilema moral que podría utilizar para influir en el veredicto del jurado y condenar -o liberar - al asesino equivocado.
- Premios
- 4 premios ganados y 14 nominaciones en total
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Resumen
Reviewers say 'Juror #2' is a compelling courtroom drama exploring justice and morality, directed by Clint Eastwood. Nicholas Hoult's performance is lauded, though some find the plot predictable. The film, featuring Toni Collette and J. K. Simmons, is a solid addition to Eastwood's work, though not his best. The direction and pacing are effective, yet some critics wish for deeper thematic exploration.
Opiniones destacadas
I saw this film at the premier in the TCL Chinese theater as the closing film of the AFI Film Festival of 2024. Nicholas Hoult stars as the titular character who is forced into a moral dilemma when he is chosen to be on a jury for a murder. The story is kind of a twist on the old Henry Fonda role in "12 Angry Men" of which I can't say more without creating a spoiler. Hoult's performance is more than adequate along with the rest of the stellar cast including Toni Collete as the prosecutor who is running for District Attorney, JK Simmons as Hoult's ally on the jury, Gabriel Basso as the defendant, and many others. The story and screenplay are involving with a few surprises although the inevitable conclusion is not. Eastwood's direction is solid as usual but not exceptional; however, given the constraints of the story I would say that it is more than fine. So, in summary this film is a 7/10, certainly not a 10/10 but not a 4/10 either (I reserve 4 and below ratings for films that are technically incompetent). Recommended if you can find it given Warner's lack of support for the film!
Juror #2 , which may well be Clint Eastwood's last film as a director, is very good. We're not talking Unforgiven, Bronco Billy, Million Dollar Baby good, but it is properly good. Hard to tell you anything without spoiling it, but it's a great courtroom drama with a twist early on that takes it to a whole new place. You can relate to all the major characters, and even when they're doing not great things you can put yourself in your shoes and go I'd really struggle not to do that. Well worth a watch.
We don't have enough one and done dramas in the cinemas nowadays. This is exactly the kind of film we need more of. Very glad I saw it in the cinema.
We don't have enough one and done dramas in the cinemas nowadays. This is exactly the kind of film we need more of. Very glad I saw it in the cinema.
"Juror #2" is a movie that teases greatness but ultimately falls short due to its flawed execution. The premise is undeniably strong, offering a fresh take on the courtroom drama genre that immediately grabs attention. The story revolves around a juror torn between his duty to deliver justice and the burden of a personal secret that could change the case's outcome. It's the kind of setup that promises tension, moral dilemmas, and edge-of-your-seat storytelling. However, the film struggles to make the most of this potential.
Despite a talented cast delivering commendable performances, the script fails to provide the depth and nuance necessary to elevate the story. The characters, while well-acted, often come across as trapped in a plot that feels more concerned with sensational twists than meaningful development. The narrative choices veer into contrived territory, undermining the gravity of the film's premise. Instead of a thought-provoking exploration of justice and morality, we are given a story that leans too heavily on clichés and illogical decisions.
What's most disappointing is how close "Juror #2" comes to being great. With a sharper focus on its central themes and more thoughtful storytelling, it could have been a standout in its genre. Instead, it feels like a missed opportunity, one that leaves you wondering what could have been. The strong performances and intriguing premise deserve acknowledgment, but they aren't enough to save the movie from its poor execution. In the end, it's a serviceable but forgettable watch-a film that could have soared but instead settles for mediocrity.
Despite a talented cast delivering commendable performances, the script fails to provide the depth and nuance necessary to elevate the story. The characters, while well-acted, often come across as trapped in a plot that feels more concerned with sensational twists than meaningful development. The narrative choices veer into contrived territory, undermining the gravity of the film's premise. Instead of a thought-provoking exploration of justice and morality, we are given a story that leans too heavily on clichés and illogical decisions.
What's most disappointing is how close "Juror #2" comes to being great. With a sharper focus on its central themes and more thoughtful storytelling, it could have been a standout in its genre. Instead, it feels like a missed opportunity, one that leaves you wondering what could have been. The strong performances and intriguing premise deserve acknowledgment, but they aren't enough to save the movie from its poor execution. In the end, it's a serviceable but forgettable watch-a film that could have soared but instead settles for mediocrity.
By the end of the film, you can tell they really thought they did something. Credit to the stacked cast with great acting skills, but wow - what year was this written? It felt like an early 2000s episode of CSI, except with awful pacing making you constantly question the script. Pacing and depth aside, references to gangs and crews was almost laughably cringe with statements like "... when he got inked." The 2000s called and they want better pacing for a movie with this much potential. If the cast wasn't what it is, this film would easily be a 4/10, but they saved it. I wouldn't recommend it, but I wouldn't exactly stay fans of the genre away from it .. just don't expect much.
Juror #2 directed by the iconic Clint Eastwood, Juror #2 brings together an incredible cast led by Kiefer Sutherland, Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, and J. K. Simmons. This courtroom drama explores the complexities of jury deliberation in a murder trial that involves themes of domestic abuse. The story is immediately engaging, setting up a clear-cut case, but it soon dives deep into moral territory, where the right verdict is anything but straightforward.
As a non-U. S. viewer, I found the trial process and jury dynamics especially fascinating. Eastwood cleverly exposes the issues of biased jurors and the impact of personal agendas. The film makes you question how often jurors-pressed by personal motivations outside the courtroom-lose sight of the real deliberation required to reach a just decision. This theme feels disturbingly relevant and is well-executed here.
Though this is Eastwood's 45th directorial work, I'd say Juror #2 isn't his best. At times, it struggles with pacing, which occasionally dampens the tension that should be building. Still, the stellar performances from the cast and the moral questions it raises make it a thought-provoking watch, and it's a worthwhile addition to Eastwood's body of work.
As a non-U. S. viewer, I found the trial process and jury dynamics especially fascinating. Eastwood cleverly exposes the issues of biased jurors and the impact of personal agendas. The film makes you question how often jurors-pressed by personal motivations outside the courtroom-lose sight of the real deliberation required to reach a just decision. This theme feels disturbingly relevant and is well-executed here.
Though this is Eastwood's 45th directorial work, I'd say Juror #2 isn't his best. At times, it struggles with pacing, which occasionally dampens the tension that should be building. Still, the stellar performances from the cast and the moral questions it raises make it a thought-provoking watch, and it's a worthwhile addition to Eastwood's body of work.
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaKiefer Sutherland got his part by writing to Clint Eastwood telling him how big a fan of his he was, and that he wanted to star in one of his movies before he retired. Kiefer's dad, Donald Sutherland, had co-starred with Clint in El botín de los valientes (1970) and Jinetes del espacio (2000).
- ErroresFaith cites her office's limited resources when arguing against a mistrial. This should have drawn a swift rebuke from the judge, who may only consider the motion on its merits.
- Citas
Larry Lasker: We're only as sick as our secrets.
- ConexionesFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Best Movies of 2024 (2024)
- Bandas sonorasHard Livin'
Written by Chris Stapleton and Kendell Marvel
Performed by Chris Stapleton
Courtesy of Mercury Nashville Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
Taquilla
- Presupuesto
- USD 30,000,000 (estimado)
- Total a nivel mundial
- USD 24,800,000
- Tiempo de ejecución1 hora 54 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 2.39 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta
Principales brechas de datos
What is the Canadian French language plot outline for Juror #2 (2024)?
Responda