Something happens in the cinema, and in the world, when a Clint Eastwood film is released and people have barely heard about it. It is not normal that a legend of cinema, who has delivered films fundamental to his recent history such as No forgiveness, Mystic River either Million Dollar Babysuffer ostracism from an industry more concerned with its franchises, the next IP to exploit or algorithms. Eastwood, furthermore, is not an author who does not connect with the public. His adult films, which treat the viewer with intelligence, have been hits that have given the theaters, and his production company, Warner Bros., resounding box office successes.
Not only the most obvious ones, such as The sniper either Gran Torino. Minor and more recent titles such as The mule (2018) or Sully (2016), made more than 100 million at the US box office alone. That is why it was surprising that Warner, which owes it several successes, has decided to release it there in only 50 copies and with the growing rumor that, from the company, they will not report their box office data. The US media suggests that the new head of the studio, David Zaslav, has been responsible for this decision after the failure of his previous film, Cry Male.
For whatever reason, it is painful to see that a Clint Eastwood film does not have the space it deserves. Even if that space is only to make mistakes. It is not the first time that Warner betrays one of its directors in its portfolio. The company’s refusal to release in theaters after the pandemicTenet, Christopher Nolan’s film, caused the director to change them to Universal in Oppenheimer, which culminated in seven Oscars and a box office of almost a billion dollars. Warner would have, according to Variety, tried to get him back for their new film with a succulent offer that Nolan has rejected, staying at Universal.
Beyond the attack on Clint Eastwood for his merits, it is surprising because his new film Jury No. 2 –which is also released in Spain – is a great film. An intelligent thriller that focuses on adult cinema for adults, something that is increasingly difficult to find, but which is where a niche audience is opening up that is returning to theaters. Last week a film with a similar cut as Conclave It exceeded expectations and achieved a premiere of almost 7 million in the US.
It is true that Conclave It has a supposed Oscar race ahead of it that Eastwood’s film is not going to have, but this one could provoke word of mouth among a transversal audience so that it would work in a more than decent way. The release in 50 theaters blocks that possibility completely.
Jury No. 2 It has in its favor an original and surprising premise. An ideal man, future father of a family, and perfect husband is chosen as a popular jury. When he gets to the case he will realize that he was the culprit of the victim’s death, so the person accused of murder is innocent. The question is whether to turn himself in or not, but Jonathan A. Abrams’ script gives it a twist so that the viewer can witness how the protagonist tries to convince the rest of the popular jury not to convict him without having to turn himself in. All while maintaining the suspense about what the verdict will be and the doubt about whether they will discover their lie.
Eastwood does not waste such a powerful idea, and despite Nicholas Hoult’s limited dramatic talent, he manages to keep the viewer in the seat without really knowing where he is going to move forward. A film that draws on classics like 12 men without mercy, but that achieves its own autonomy. Eastwood also takes it into his own territory to address several of his favorite topics, such as morality, guilt or a failed judicial system. Themes found in several of his most popular films such as Mystic River.
The veteran director, who is now 94 years old and assures that he still has the strength to direct at least one other film, takes advantage of the thriller to raise interesting questions about a society without values, one where a rich man has a better chance of saving himself than a poor one; where justice is based on prejudices and first impressions and where there is no reliable system. A pessimistic vision that it makes sure to maintain in its ambiguous final shot, which does not give answers and which leaves the viewer to complete as they wish.
Eastwood’s classic style remains. Without fanfare, reliable and to the point, although there may be certain visual truisms – focusing on a statue of blind justice every time there is a moral doubt is something that should be overcome. The moral ambiguity of his characters is also transferred to the film, and that is where everything becomes somewhat more uncomfortable, since Eastwood’s conservative seams are visible. While he succeeds in destroying this perfect man (and believer), who puts his personal interest before the collective, Eastwood resorts to reactionary clichés to describe the rest of the characters.
For the director, black people are always angry and want to get home because life passes them by; and there is little emphasis on whether the accused, guilty or not, is a woman abuser. Details that do not completely cloud this enjoyable thriller, which recovers the aroma of a classic from the 90s, and that one can even understand as trademarks of a conservative director who at this point and at 94 years old is not going to change either.
#Clint #Eastwood #reflects #justice #morality #guilt #Jury #intelligent #ambiguous #thriller
