Juror #2 is the kind of film you typically don’t see in theaters in 2024, yet Clint Eastwood proves they can still be solid, engaging movies.

There’s no one today who comes close to what Clint Eastwood does. Maintaining a relevant career after more than 60 years is a feat in itself, but to continue directing at 94 is just another sphere. What’s certain is that Clint was never content with what he had, and always sought to develop new material, new facets of his work. Over the course of his career, the filmmaker has explored westerns, war films, romance, musicals and sports – in short, the kind of diversity that is rare, if not unique. With Juror #2, he tackles a genre he hasn’t visited in a long time, the trial film, as he tells the story of Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult), selected as a juror in a high-profile murder case. Quickly, the events between Kendall Carter’s (Francesca Eastwood) murder case and an accident Justin had the same night set up a dilemma for the young man as to his responsibility in the case, and the conviction of James Sythe (Gabriel Basso).

Juror #2 returns to a theme that has run through Clint Eastwood’s cinema for decades, that of morality and responsibility. In both Unforgiven and Dirty Harry, Eastwood’s films questioned the morality of a man’s actions – past and present – and prompted the character to reflect inwardly. As with Richard Jewell, Eastwood’s Justin Kemp follows a man in the midst of a hurricane he can do little to control. His guilt and moral torment grow heavier as the trial unfolds.

The filmmaker doesn’t focus on an examination and investigation of the murder and Justin’s potential involvement; instead, Eastwood forces his character to deal with the facts presented to him, however blurred and differently interpretable they may be. Instead, Justin Kemp tries to redeem his guilt with the other members of the jury by pushing them towards a not guilty verdict from James Sythe, turning Juror #2 into a Twelve Angry Men style. This gives the film a dynamic edge over the typical linearity of a courtroom drama. Accusations and defenses follow on seamlessly from one another, thanks to the excellent editing that makes the whole process easy to assimilate.

In a way, Juror #2 suffers from its main subject, the manicheism of American justice. There’s little room for any other path than that between James Sythe and Justin Kemp. The noose is directly tightened and nothing can be moved. Conversely, Eastwood plays on this Manicheanism to represent Justin’s morality, with Faith Killebrew’s (Toni Collette) voice leaning towards accusing James Sythe and Justin’s denial of his own involvement, and Eric Resnick’s (Chris Messina) voice leaning towards defending James, leading Justin to sink into guilt. This turns the film into a gigantic moral dilemma for its main character.

And this sense of guilt climbs slowly to a point of moral exhaustion, well represented by Nicholas Hoult, who gives a very restrained performance, driven mainly by his looks. His stares convey his inner conflict, with a desire to escape this world, as well as his own guilt. In the same vein, Toni Colette perfectly embodies this kind of unshakeable force for justice, only to become more human as the story progresses. Nevertheless, we can regret the abandonment of several characters who were important at the start of the story, such as Lary Lasker (Kiefer Sutherland) and Harold (J.K. Simmons), both of whom you can feel are only there to support the story, move it forward or give it a purpose.

Through multiple revealing shots, Clint Eastwood doesn’t shy away from quite openly criticizing the American justice system. Through the grand speeches of the characters representing justice, there’s a clear concern about the system’s inability to properly handle its duties, due to a lack of funding, time, or simply precaution, ultimately leading a man to a fate he doesn’t deserve. And Juror #2 plays a clever game of knotting this discourse with Justin’s moral dilemma, motivating his desire to counter a system carelessly pushing towards indictment.

What is certain is that Juror #2 seems to come from another era, from a time in the history of Hollywood and its cultural landscape when a film like Sydney Pollack’s The Firm or Joel Schumacher’s A Time to Kill could bring people to theaters – And could still bring in audiences despite what Warner thinks. The film doesn’t fit into any contemporary cinematic rhythm or narrative, and that’s part of its charm. Like all Clint Eastwood films, they’re made his way according to his desires, and Juror #2 is no exception, but all the while retaining an engaging and entertaining humanity without ever seeming like an anachronistic work.