Over the last 94 years, Clint Eastwood has worked closely with cinema and film, having acted in over sixty different films and directing forty. His forteith film as director released just last year and, though the movie itself had few showings throughout the country as well as a lack of promotion, Juror #2 stood out among the extensive catalog of movies in 2024.

Clint Eastwood, known for directing Unforgiven (1992) and Million Dollar Baby (2004), released Juror #2 to an incredibly small audience in late 2024. Warner Bros., the film’s distributor, released it for showing in fewer than fifty theaters throughout the United States and did not promote the movie much, leaving viewers to believe that Warner Bros. does not believe in the movie’s success. Despite the distributor’s possible views, Juror #2 was one of the best films to release last year, and one of the best criminal dramas to date.

Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult) is a journalist who was called for jury duty on a high-profile murder. The beginning of the film establishes that Kemp has his pregnant wife Allison Crewson (Zoey Deutch) at home, encouraging him to come to a verdict as soon as possible. Throughout the movie, Hoult does a fantastic job at playing his role; he beautifully portrays the inner thoughts of his character utilizing only his eyes. Hoult’s outwardly stoic demeanor in his face paired with the great emotion in his eyes makes the film far more intriguing. Deutch’s portrayal of Allison, especially during the tense and highly emotional scenes, was not only a realistic reaction, but it also made the audience feel alongside her. Faith Killebrew (Toni Collette) was the prosecutor in the murder case, and Collette’s reactions and shifting perspective over the course of the case was particularly captivating. The third person limited point of view throughout the story reinforced Collette’s wonderful portrayal of her character, creating further tension as Collette approached the truth.

The story itself was exceptionally engaging, too; ; the plot and conflict of the movie are immensely interesting concepts in themselves, and Eastwood does a fantastic job utilizing the plot to its full potential. The flashbacks throughout the first half of the movie create an interesting and dynamic atmosphere and allows viewers to join Kemp in his journey toward uncovering the murder’s truths. The script lends itself to a positive and powerful messaging, being generally realistic. For the most part—and especially during the first half of the film—the movie refuses to outright state what did or did not happen, trusting that the audience has the ability to draw their own conclusions just as the protagonist does. This is an especially effective story telling method, and it creates a more realistic setting, too.

The ethical and moral dilemmas Eastwood presents are, too, especially important. The questions the film poses—whether or not a person would take advantage of their own freedom in exchange for another’s, the negatives of the criminal justice system and what happens when a lawyer begins to believe they are on the wrong side of their case—are incredibly impactful and interesting dilemmas to work through. Much of the film delves into the downsides of the criminal justice system, showing not that it is corrupt, but rather how—even when a fair trial occurs—there is still room for wrongful convictions or trials. The film also indirectly touches on the unconscious biases within the justice system through the sole eyewitness and police investigation, a powerful yet saddening theme.

Despite its impactful messaging, the film fails to utilize the camera work as effectively as it could, and the sets themselves are nothing particularly special. Many of the camera angles are bland and uninteresting aside from a select few instances—such as a scene where it looks as though Kemp is behind bars, a physical demonstration of the consequences of his actions—and the sound design does not live up to the rest of the film’s positive components. Eastwood fails to fully and effectively use the music to enhance the movie’s messaging, and there are times where the music feels manipulative or an unhelpful addition.

Trials are a precise and detailed process, and many of the law-related elements within the film are in some cases unrealistic. For instance, the prosecution only has one eyewitness who only identifies the defendant. In real trials, lawyers ask for multiple forms of identification outside of what Eastwood portrays, and the lack of  photographs shown of the property where the defendant committed the crime is another unrealistic aspect. The prosecutor failed to demonstrate—through what the film shows, at least—the defendant’s guilt, and the movie fails to thoroughly depict the defense’s argument. In real life, the likelihood of the defense taking advantage of the weak prosecution is high, and it seemed that Juror #2 failed to acknowledge this. The lack of cross-examination was another missed opportunity from a legal perspective, too, though this—as well as the rest of the above—is arguably necessary for the plot to progress and make sense.

Juror #2 released with positive reviews on November 1, 2024. The film has a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes by critics and a 93% on Rotten Tomatoes by general audience members. The movie is available to watch on Max, Hulu, YouTube, Amazon Prime Video, and Fandago at Home.