Weekend Read: Juror #2's (Lack of) Day in Court

Why was 94-year-old Clint Eastwood's new legal drama disbarred, and is it any good?

Thanks for reading The Schmear Hunter! If you like this newsletter, consider supporting it with a paid subscription: $5/month or $50 a year 🥯🎞️

Nicholas Hoult in Juror #2

No spoilers

---

When audiences bemoan what they’re missing in theaters today, they’re often lamenting the lack of mid-budget, adult-focused fare that has formed the backbone of cinema for most of its existence as an art form. This kind of storytelling has largely migrated to TV (though the rise of IP on the small screen is even negating that).

The exact kind of film being mourned was mysteriously and unceremoniously dumped into around 50 U.S. theaters on Friday, despite its legendary director, talented cast, reliable genre, and compelling hook: potentially 94-year-old Clint Eastwood’s last film, Juror #2.

I was in one of those 50 theaters, and for those affected by Warner Bros.’ burying of the film, I’m here to share how it actually was and explore the reasons for its ignoble release.

The film is a classic legal drama starring Nicholas Hoult as a juror on a murder trial in Savannah, Georgia, who may have a troubling connection to the case. As the trial progresses, he (and we) discover the extent of his involvement and watch as he navigates this thorny moral dilemma.

Nicholas Hoult and Clint Eastwood

To read on, consider upgrading your Schmear Hunter subscription…