i really enjoyed it - was this the best courtroom drama I've ever seen? no. but the story wasn't really about that... the story was about juror #2 & the moral dilemma he was facing. i thought it was a fairly fresh take on the subject matter & really quite thought provoking. i do wish, from an entertainment standpoint, that the ending had been different (see spoiler below), but overall I thought it was well done & would absolutely recommend it. <spoiler> I wish there had been a little bit of a twist. how effective would it have been if juror #2 hears the case, questions his actions, assumes he was the killer, throws the case off by asking questions because he knows the defendant is innocent only to turn the case around & end up in jail himself - & THEN we find out he actually did only hit a deer & the defendant was in fact guilty the entire time, living a free life while juror #2 sits in his jail cell, innocent. tragedy makes people feel things & that would've been a tragic ending. instead - it just ends. exactly how they told you it would end from the very beginning.

Questo è un grande fil che come minimo avrebbe meritato la candidatura all'Oscar miglio film. È notevole come il finale non ti lasci indifferente come quello molti altri film. La regia anche quella avrebbe meritato come minimo la candidatura all'Oscar

Court room drama freak. Attention to detail is crucial and this case would never have gone to court! Detectives must have been on holiday. Poor!

Moral Dilemma!?!?! What else you need? It's really engaging bit slow, but I enjoyed.

Thoughtful writing and sometimes wrenching to the gut.

A very good movie with lots of facet of judicial system. Believable story and well acted.

Wow! Mystery and thriller at its best! Keep these coming.

Juror #2 is the epitome of a solidly made film, a film that is taut and tight and very entertaining. A throwback film perhaps, which is understandable as this is the latest film from iconic director Clint Eastwood. His newest film is a courtroom drama, that features a moral question. Justin is happily married in Savannah, Georgia, with his wife expecting a child soon. He has to attend jury duty though and he is selected, as Juror #2, for a murder trial. A man is alleged to have murdered his girlfriend 12 months ago and the jury is ready to convict him. But Justin isn't so sure. Mainly because on the night of her death he was out driving and his car hit something. He thought it was a deer, but it might have been the dead woman. So ensues a search for truth with him entangling the jury in the search. This film has no fat and makes us question our motives. The story rattles along quickly with a good cast giving their all. Nicholas Hoult is especially good as the troubled Justin. Another fine film from the great Clint Eastwood.

This movie had the potential to be a good one. It's obviously very close to 12 Angry Men and a couple other jury movies. The acting was pretty well done and the cast easily drew me in to their world. For all there is to like about the movie, there are some gaps. They spend about 90 minutes building it up, creating tension between characters, only to never resolve or even fully explore that tension. They leave the focal point of the trial as an afterthought. But my biggest pet peeve is the ending. We spend all this time in your world, your vision. Then you leave the ending up to our interpretation. Pass.

This movie had the potential to be a good one. It's obviously very close to 12 Angry Men and a couple other jury movies. The acting was pretty well done and the cast easily drew me in to their world. For all there is to like about the movie, there are some gaps. They spend about 90 minutes building it up, creating tension between characters, only to never resolve or even fully explore that tension. They leave the focal point of the trial as an afterthought. But my biggest pet peeve is the ending. We spend all this time in your world, your vision. Then you leave the ending up to our interpretation. Pass.

Were people giving this pity reviews? SO bad. Such a below mediocre script. Even some of my favorite actors couldn't pull this through. BORING. PREDICTABLE. Couldn't even watch it to the end without skimming to see if anything redeemable happened. Nope.

Took itself way too seriously. Predictable, dull, and overacted. Scenes were drawn out with very little payoff. I hoped for something thought provoking but was nothing but disappointed. Average at best, and definitely did not deserve the high praise on this site. If you don't watch movies often, I'd say skip this one and save your time for something with more depth.

Interesting premise but never really delivered any impact. The acting wasn’t good enough to draw me in so I was waiting for some kind of plot twist, which never arrived so overall found the whole thing underwhelming.

Super disappointing in light of the premise, cast, and high reviews.

Severely disappointing, perhaps the largest disparity in RT reviews I have ever encountered. Highly contrived dialogue, predictable and uncreative plot. Laughable at times. Not a realistic portrayal of a homicide trial.

i was like ...now what?

**Juror #2 – A Gripping but Predictable Courtroom Drama** Nicholas Hoult delivers in *Juror #2*, and with J.K. Simmons in the mix, you know you're in for solid performances. Clint Eastwood, the legend himself, directs with his usual steady hand, and the film is well-crafted, but it’s also… a little *too* straightforward. For a courtroom thriller, it’s surprisingly low on twists. The first act sets everything up, and then—boom—you basically know how it all plays out. No shocking revelations, no intricate mind games, just a slowburn through a moral dilemma. The stacked cast keeps it engaging, and the tension simmers, but you can’t help but wish for something sharper, more layered. Still, it’s a decent ride—elevated by its talent, even if the script plays it safe. I enjoyed it, but with this cast and premise, it *could* have been great. 3.5 stars. Solid, but not a slam dunk.

Excellent court room drama with an interesting test and goes along with Eastwoods themes of challenging moral and ethical situations which have complexities. Very strong performances all around, really enjoyed it.

73%. 3/29/25. I liked the premise but it didn't quite deliver the way I'd hoped. I had it closer to a 77% but I didn't like the ending the the prosecutor showing up at his door. It was already inferred based off their conversation after the sentencing that she knew it was him, so why even have her show back up? Some of the jury acting was painful but also makes sense with them portraying normal citizens. I liked the idea around him hearing about the case and putting it together that it might have been him. And then him weighing whether he should push back on the jury when everything thinks he did it to settle his guilt, or then eventually flip since no verdict would force them to reopen the case and reinvestigate and expose him to getting caught. It just didn't have the high-level scenes to raise the score. 3/5 rewatch.

I don't understand the high rating for this movie with a script rife with implausible conversations. I would say it was written by AI, but I'm pretty sure AI would have done a much better job. It's a shame because the premise was interesting, and the cast amazing (hence two, rather than one, ,stars), but that can't overcome stupid conversations that came out of nowhere with no explanation. Right up to the ending where we are expected to simply accept a dramatic change with no insight.