Juror #2 (2024)

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Utnayan

Utnayan

F16 patrolling Rajaah until he plays DS3
<Gold Donor>
16,583
12,697
Animosity said:
I just watched it and was thoroughly invested in it. Great movie IMO. And no the open ended ending isnt obnoxious or anything. The whole premise of the movie is based on the "did he or did he not do it" scenario where the main character doesnt even know.
Click to expand...

I do not want to ruin it for the Doc so I will spoiler this.

I get the fact that no one knows if he hit a deer or the actual person. One could also easily clip a deer and the deer will run off and die or may have survived. Drug dealer guy saying he changed his life and all that, two versions of events shown at the bar, the whole smash. But to me, a better ending would have been this: The lawyer shows up at the house of Juror #2 and says, "We have some new information" - (Juror #2 is shown shaking a bit nervously) Meanwhile, they pivot to show a conversation with the drug dealer dude boyfriend and an inmate with the boyfriend saying, "I thought I almost had them. They deliberated forever and my lawyer said that was good." And then go back to where the body was, keep panning along the wilderness a bit and see a dead deer laying in the brush. That would have pointed to a solid ending in my mind given everyone's tale of events.
 
  • 1Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users
E

elidib

Vyemm Raider
2,360
4,363
Utnayan said:
I do not want to ruin it for the Doc so I will spoiler this.

I get the fact that no one knows if he hit a deer or the actual person. One could also easily clip a deer and the deer will run off and die or may have survived. Drug dealer guy saying he changed his life and all that, two versions of events shown at the bar, the whole smash. But to me, a better ending would have been this: The lawyer shows up at the house of Juror #2 and says, "We have some new information" - (Juror #2 is shown shaking a bit nervously) Meanwhile, they pivot to show a conversation with the drug dealer dude boyfriend and an inmate with the boyfriend saying, "I thought I almost had them. They deliberated forever and my lawyer said that was good." And then go back to where the body was, keep panning along the wilderness a bit and see a dead deer laying in the brush. That would have pointed to a solid ending in my mind given everyone's tale of events.
Click to expand...

I mean, if you just show the deer, that's enough. You don't need the boyfriend copping to it also, that would just be redundant and overexplaining it. As I said previously, the better ending would have been the DA confronting him with both that cell phone video zoomed in on his "for sale" sign proving he was there, and a positive DNA test she somehow finessed to get while he was parked at the courthouse or something.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users
U

ubiquitrips

Golden Knight of the Realm
633
96
I may not be watching the right movies, but I actually appreciated the ambiguous ending in this one. This movie passed all my watch tests. I didn't look at my phone, paused to use the restroom, and the characters were better than I thought. I definitely thought the foreman was going to be...typical white lady(?) but she was fine.

My only problem was how quick they jumped to guilty. This was all sorts of My Cousin Vinny 'How many fingers am I holding up?'. Yeah? Your star witness is some old codger with a dirty window identifying the specific person 100ft.+ away and no one takes issue with this?

The movie took on too much of a happy ending towards the end without the open ending. Conflicted good guy confesses in the third person and goes on to live his new reformed life with beautiful wife and baby.

I get the 'bad person go jail' vibe combined with wanting to go home. Though the preoccupation by most of the jury with not wanting to be there seemed a bit much. I haven't had the pleasure yet in my life, so what do I know. I want to believe I am a purist in the sense of not convicting a bad (or formerly bad) person just because they are bad for a crime they did not commit.

I didn't want the boyfriend to go to prison that was not rewarding. I wanted him to get let off based on Justin working his magic or the DA changing her heart and upholding truth over a career. I probably would have made the same choice in his position if it came down to 'it's him or my family'.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: 2 users
Dr.Retarded

Dr.Retarded

<Silver Donator>
12,910
28,936
This just seem to be a modern day version of 12 angry Men, but had a bunch of extraneous stuff happening that didn't have everything getting relegated to that in very simple environment with 12 characters.

I don't know it was okay, and my feeling is he ran her over, and the up-and-coming DA knows it but she's a politician, and she's going to do everything she can to make certain she gets into office.

I think everybody was bad, I'm probably the least bad person was to do the who was on trial even though he may have been a piece of shit, but he wasn't a murderer.

Also, the only other decent person was the defendants attorney. Heelys knew or believed his client was innocent, and was willing to slug It out.

Like I said it was entertaining but wasn't the greatest courtroom drama I've ever seen.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.