This very well may be the shortest review I’ve ever written. Juror #2 (2024), Clint Eastwood’s most recent directorial effort (he also co-produces), very much leans on several legal dramas and thrillers from the past, most notably the classic 12 Angry Men, to great effect. Twisting the above mentioned film in clever fashion, in some ways, recovering alcoholic Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult) is a stand-in for Henry Fonda’s Juror #8, as he too stands up for the man being charged with murder... the only difference is, he soon realizes that he knows a bit more about the case than the rest of the jurors (and even he originally thought). Though this is not a twist filled feature (à la Usual Suspects), much of its entertainment comes from watching it unfurl as it goes along – hence why very little of the plot will be disclosed here. It is also worth noting that, unlike 12 Angry Men, screenwriter Jonathan A. Abrams opens the story wide, allowing us to hear testimony, explore the crime scene, and discover actual truths we never got to see in the 1957 motion picture.
The modern-day fairy tale film seems to have become the typical Disney cookie-cutter movie. They usually follow similar formats: wicked witch captures young girl, princess needs to be rescued or male hero saves the day, yet very few pictures capture the eerie and often scary vibe of the original fairytales that these stories are based on. It is amazing how graphic and frightening the Grimm tales and other similar stories actually are.
It is unusual to find a film that is able to effectively change direction, speaking in the genre sense, without losing steam, confusing viewers, or ruining the flow of the movie. Yet, when properly done, these twists and turns can take you on a wild and entertaining ride to somewhere completely unexpected. This is what the 1986 motion picture Something Wild does effortlessly.
It is pretty rare that I do this, but I sat watching a newly released DVD called Stoker last night and decided to write a review immediately after finishing it, and for once, one of the films I have critiqued will be readily available to buy or rent.
One of my favourite film styles is the post apocalyptic genre. Depending on the time of production, these movies depict the fears of the day. For instance, in 1973 Soylent Green was made, which highlighted the possibility of overpopulation, lack of employment and most importantly, food shortages; (look for a review of this film at a later date). Quite differently, in the 2006 motion picture Children of Men, we see quite the opposite – a world that is dying as humans are no longer able to procreate.
As most of you probably already know, Roger Ebert passed away last Thursday after a bout with cancer at the age of 70. If there is such a thing as a superstar movie reviewer, Ebert would be it. Since the 1960s he reviewed films for the Chicago Sun Times and spent years bringing motion pictures to his audience through his television programs which featured his iconic two thumbs up rating system. Though I did not always agree with his opinions, he had the amazing knack of reaching both knowledgeable film experts and the ordinary moviegoer. As a tribute to this gargantuan movie expert, I will highlight three films that he loved during my next three articles.