Warning: This article contains spoilers for Juror #2!
While waiting for Clint Eastwood’s party Juror #2 To be released for video on demand, a classic 1957 legal drama may satisfy the appetite of people eagerly awaiting the hit film. Since the film’s 2023 announcement, Juror #2 was billed as Clint Eastwood’s last film. Although Eastwood has not confirmed this rumor, the possibility has brought more attention to the film and garnered excitement from fans. Unfortunately, Warner Bros. Pictures made the baffling decision to release Juror #2 in fewer than 50 U.S. theaters, with the situation being dubbed “The Curious Case of Clint Eastwood’s Missing Film” by The Guardian.
Unfortunately, Clint Eastwood fans will have to wait at least a few more weeks to Juror #2 to access video on demandand it could take over a month to release on Max. Anticipation will also continue to grow, as the film has been a surprise box office success and critical response has been overwhelmingly positive. Luckily, a classic 1957 legal drama with notable similarities is readily available to watch in the meantime.
12 Angry Men is considered the best legal drama of all time
12 Angry Men Is The Perfect Movie To Watch While Waiting For Juror #2
While waiting for Juror #2 to be available to wider audiences on VOD, viewers may be interested in watching other films in the same subgenre. 12 Angry Men is the perfect choice because it is widely considered the best legal drama of all time and a masterclass in American cinema. The film follows a group of 12 men who serve on a jury in a first-degree murder case against an 18-year-old who may or may not have killed his father, depending on the individual’s interpretation of the evidence.
12 Angry Men immediately establishes what is at stake in the story. If the group returns a guilty verdict, the judge states that the defendant will be sentenced to death. After a preliminary vote, the result is 11 to 1 in favor of conviction, so the group must discuss the evidence confined to a small room in the suffocating heat, an environment that increases tension. As Juror #2, 12 Angry Men is noteworthy not only for its gripping story, but also for its incredible cinematography, which makes the film as visually engaging as it is narratively powerful.
12 Angry Men and Juror #2 Confront How Biases Impact the Legal System
Every character in 12 Angry Men and Juror #2 has their own biases
Despite his age, 12 Angry Men is as important as ever, bringing to light biases that can influence outcomes in the legal system. The jurors in 12 Angry Men bring your own experiences, preconceived values, and ideas about justice to the jury room. Some biases, like Juror #3’s issues with his son and Juror #10’s racism, are easy to spot. However, Juror #8, the film’s protagonist, has values ​​about justice that impact the outcome as much as the others. The difference is that their prejudices correspond to the generally accepted ideals of the American justice system.
67 years after the classic legal drama, Juror #2 makes the same points about jury bias in a modern framework. Each juror’s backgrounds, experiences, and biases influence their deliberation. Harold’s experience as a retired veteran detective means he focuses on different details than the other jurors. Justin struggles to free Scythe because of his guilty conscience. Meanwhile, Marcus doesn’t want to acquit him because he believes the defendant is a gang member. All of these jurors’ biases enter into the jury’s deliberation process.
Ultimately, both films emphasize the fallibility of human beings involved in the legal system, even when individuals have honorable intentions.
12 Angry Men it also highlights that witnesses have underlying motives and biases that influence their testimony during the trial. The old man might want to be heard and appreciated, which would make him willing to testify. The woman across the street unintentionally deceives by taking off her glasses, influencing the veracity and credibility of her testimony. Furthermore, the defense lawyer’s workload influences the way he defends his client, further influencing everyone involved in the case.
In Juror #2this issue is also at stake. Killebrew eventually realizes that the police prepared the witness to pick Scythe out of a lineup, making the accuracy of his testimony questionable. Furthermore, as passionate as Killebrew is about the case, she tied her election campaign to it, giving her an ulterior motive to fight harder for a conviction. On the other hand, Resnick is so overwhelmed that he makes careless mistakes with significant consequences. Ultimately, both films emphasize the fallibility of human beings involved in the legal system, even when individuals have honorable intentions.
Reasonable doubt is the cornerstone of the American judicial system
In the heart of 12 Angry Men is an important question – what is reasonable doubt? Each of the jurors in the classic film has an idea about what makes them believe the defendant is guilty or innocent. However, reasonable doubt is an amorphous pattern that permeates all of history. Ultimately, by refusing to confirm whether the young man is factually guilty at the end of the 12 Angry Men, the film forces the audience to ask themselves the same questions about guilt and innocence. Clint Eastwood Juror #2 takes a similar approach to the topic of reasonable doubt.
Jurors in the Kendall Carter murder case must grapple with the evidence against James Sythe, discovering the line between guilt and innocence. The film leaves it irritatingly ambiguous to the audience as to whether Justin Kemp accidentally killed her or whether James Sythe murdered his girlfriend. The film provides a strong argument for both possibilities, ultimately leaving it up to the audience to interpret the situation and examine the scenarios for reasonable doubt. While Juror #2 will probably never be as prolific as 12 Angry Menthese narrative and thematic similarities make the films kindred spirits.