The main buzz surrounding the new film “Juror #2” focuses on two things. The first is that, at 94, the film’s legendary director, Clint Eastwood, is still capable of making a taut, intelligent, thought-provoking movie for adult audiences with a less than two-hour run time. The second is that the film’s distributor, Warner Bros. Discovery, unceremoniously dumped it on streaming services after a very limited theatrical release.
With the film’s current 93% “fresh” rating on Rotten Tomatoes, some commentators have lamented a perceived lack of respect for Eastwood or tut-tutted about notoriously risk-averse corporate-owned studios that only seem interested in producing franchise superhero movies or remakes of remakes — anything but a mid-budget dramatic film based on an original screenplay.
Some commentators have lamented a perceived lack of respect for Eastwood.
The less satisfying and more likely explanation: Warner Bros. Discovery’s long relationship with Eastwood and his Malpaso Productions over more than 40 films, his reputation for tight, professional productions that come in on time and under budget, and the best picture statues he brought home for 1992’s “Unforgiven” and 2004’s “Million Dollar Baby” are what earned “Juror #2” a limited theatrical run in the first place.
In fact, according to Variety, “Juror #2” was “originally commissioned as an exclusive streaming release, but shifted to a theatrical run after testing highly.” (Although The Wall Street Journal noted that “when news of the Eastwood project came out in mid-2023, there was no mention of it being intended for Max.”)
Though the film only screened in fewer than 50 theaters, its per-screen box office gross was respectable, and it did even better in the few European countries where it screened.
So as much as I’d love to blame corporate greed and decry the withering stature of “the movie-movie” — which I’d define as a film that’s not explicitly engineered to compete for Oscars or is part of a multibillion-dollar cinematic universe — the reason we’re able to see “Juror #2” at all is likely the result of a Hollywood studio doing right by one of its great auteurs.
I, too, have found it baffling that while audiences will sit through a three-hour superhero movie or a two-hour-plus Judd Apatow comedy or hundreds of hours of bingeable TV and streaming shows — asking them to go to the movie theater for a less than two-hour drama seems to be a bridge too far. And yet this is another sign of the times that can’t be blamed on younger audiences or the studios.
Regarding films like “Juror #2,” “Conclave” and “Here,” Pamela McClintock recently wrote in The Hollywood Reporter, “There’s simply too much competition in terms of fall films targeting older consumers. But that demo isn’t exactly made up of frequent moviegoers. Rather, older generations have grown accustomed to watching new releases at home relatively quickly after they open in cinemas, thanks to shortened windows and the rise of streamers in the post-pandemic era.”
I wrote in 2023 about another great little movie dumped on streaming services by its studio with no fanfare — the Jon Hamm-starring comedy/mystery “Confess, Fletch” — which I half-jokingly called “the most important movie of the moment.”
“These were the kind of movies that solved arguments at the video store. The kind of movies that when they came on HBO, you’d watch until the end (no matter where in the film you started). You’d even go to these movies on date nights. People liked them! They made money! And yet, they’re all but obsolete.”
The best movies are shared experiences among audiences. They force you to take a breath after the closing credits start to roll.
Unfortunately for film lovers like myself, adult dramas like “Juror #2” and sophisticated comedies like “Confess, Fletch” are among the last of a dying breed. But we should be grateful they exist at all. And we should talk about them — “word of mouth” is still the most effective form of advertisement!
We’re going to miss filmmakers like Clint Eastwood, who despite his well-earned reputation with Westerns like “The Outlaw Josey Wales,” “Pale Rider” and “Unforgiven,” is a stunningly prolific director of films that defy genre. Films like “Mystic River,” “American Sniper” and “Bridges of Madison County” earned big at the box office and racked up Oscar nominations and awards. None of them come with the sheen of Eastwood’s grizzled Western visage.
Since it is the holiday season — when many of us lucky enough to be surrounded by family might find ourselves struggling to find something for everyone to watch together — allow me to offer up Eastwood’s 1993 film “A Perfect World.” It’s a Flannery O’Connor-inspired Southern Gothic about an escaped prisoner played by Kevin Costner who develops a father-figure relationship with the young, fatherless boy he’s kidnapped. It’s haunting, it’s morally ambiguous, and some of the film’s lighter moments are provided by Eastwood himself, in a supporting role as the hard-ass Texas Ranger in pursuit of Costner’s fugitive. It’s entertaining and emotional, heartbreaking and satisfying.
The best movies are shared experiences among audiences. They force you to take a breath after the closing credits start to roll, allowing you that briefest of moments in modern life where all you can do is reflect — then you can talk about how the film made you feel with the person next to you. Clint Eastwood made a lot of these movies, and “Juror #2” might be the last of them.
