अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंWhile serving as a juror in a high-profile murder trial, a family man finds himself struggling with a serious moral dilemma, one he could use to sway the jury verdict and potentially convict... सभी पढ़ेंWhile serving as a juror in a high-profile murder trial, a family man finds himself struggling with a serious moral dilemma, one he could use to sway the jury verdict and potentially convict or free the wrong killer.While serving as a juror in a high-profile murder trial, a family man finds himself struggling with a serious moral dilemma, one he could use to sway the jury verdict and potentially convict or free the wrong killer.
- पुरस्कार
- 4 जीत और कुल 14 नामांकन
सारांश
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.
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
To be short, it's not a masterpiece, but finally, they shoot a normal movie, where people behave like normal logical human beings, not like crazy people, illogical, or in an absolutely unreal situation that you will never imagine. Here you will see just people who behave most likely how the majority of us do. I would most likely do the same as the main character, which I definitely ain't going to say about 99% of other movies nowadays. It's probably a bit old-fashioned movie by the latest standards, but it's still how normal life is going on. I was pleased to see that movie and would recommend watching it if you like a good plot story. The actors' play is also quite solid as well, and there's not any bad personage even though it's a court-criminal story. Besides, what I also like about this movie, is it's not just the black and white story. It's a bit more complicated, but somehow everything is positive and nice in the movie.
"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.
I doubt that this case would ever have gone to trial. The only "witness" supposedly saw the suspect during a dark night, through heavy rain, from a couple of hundred feet away, right? If this case did make it to the courtroom, any halfway decent defense attorney would've knocked down the supposed validity of that witness without much trouble. There's nothing else to go on. The suspect followed her? How far? No one knows, which means that's of no value at all. If she was hit by a car, any autopsy would have shown this to have been the case, i.e. She was hit hard by a very large object... in other words, a vehicle, rather than a hand-held object. In summary, the direction, the actors and the production are all fine, but the whole film is a house built on a foundation that has no strength.
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.
This could have been so much more.
Reels you in, twists and turns of justice, morality and keeps you guessing, unfortunately it ends, without the ending expected.
I was very disappointed with the ending as it appeared to be taking another twist but just ends.
Hollywood and premature ending movies have to be the worst , however, it was enjoyable up to that. Bit of a slap in the face for such a lazy ending. This could have been so much more. It's a shame really.
The movie does have many qualities though and is worth a watch, it was fairly enjoyable, even intense at times and reels you in.
Give it a watch , enjoy.
Unfortunately could have been so much more.
Reels you in, twists and turns of justice, morality and keeps you guessing, unfortunately it ends, without the ending expected.
I was very disappointed with the ending as it appeared to be taking another twist but just ends.
Hollywood and premature ending movies have to be the worst , however, it was enjoyable up to that. Bit of a slap in the face for such a lazy ending. This could have been so much more. It's a shame really.
The movie does have many qualities though and is worth a watch, it was fairly enjoyable, even intense at times and reels you in.
Give it a watch , enjoy.
Unfortunately could have been so much more.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाKiefer 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 Kelly's Heroes (1970) and Space Cowboys (2000).
- गूफ़Faith 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.
- भाव
Larry Lasker: We're only as sick as our secrets.
- कनेक्शनFeatured in WatchMojo: Top 10 Best Movies of 2024 (2024)
- साउंडट्रैकHard Livin'
Written by Chris Stapleton and Kendell Marvel
Performed by Chris Stapleton
Courtesy of Mercury Nashville Records
Under license from Universal Music Enterprises
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइटें
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- Присяжний #2
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- बजट
- $3,00,00,000(अनुमानित)
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $2,70,00,000
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 54 मि(114 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 2.39 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें