There’s a new Clint Eastwood movie opening this weekend. That might be the last time we can stay that.
The 94-year-old hasn’t shared any retirement plans, but given his age every new movie can, potentially, be his last.
It’s sad but true.
Equally sad? Most Eastwood fans won’t be able to see “Juror #2.”
The drama debuts Nov. 1 in select theaters. Very select, to be more accurate. The film opens in less than 50 screens nationwide with no existing plans for an expansion. Even indie films will start out modestly with the hopes of adding theaters if the box office results demand it.
Warner Bros. Discovery isn’t thinking that far ahead, and the film’s north of the border release slate is only marginally better.
The film’s official website only promotes showtimes in 18 markets. Cineplex, Canada’s leading exhibitor chain, is opening the film in just one theater in Toronto and 160 nationwide venues.
Why release a Clint Eastwood film in that fashion?
It’s gets even more confusing. Did we mention it’s a star-studded affair with Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, Kiefer Sutherland and Oscar-winner J.K. Simmons?
All of the above appears lost on his longtime studio. The company has treated “Juror #2” as shabbily as its “Salem’s Lot” remake. That film sat on the shelf before being dumped onto Max earlier this month.
“Juror #2” may have modest box office appeal, but it’s still an Eastwood film with a twisty premise. A conflicted juror (Hoult) realizes he has a deeply personal stake in the case he’s asked to judge.
The curious rollout hasn’t gone unnoticed.
The Telegraph, hardly a conservative outlet, blamed the insulting release plan on Eastwood’s politics. He leans to the Right, something that caught plenty of attention during the 2012 election cycle. Eastwood famously mocked President Barack Obama as an “empty chair” at the RNC, drawing scolding reviews from the biased press.
His political views are no secret, but he’s been mostly quiet on that front in the Trump years. He has yet to weigh in on the Trump/Kamala Harris matchup.
The Telegraph still smells a rat.
“Why Hollywood liberals are punishing Clint Eastwood for his politics,” reads the headline.
In a town where to be a Democrat is practically de rigueur, Eastwood’s liberal Republicanism – he has described himself as a social liberal and a fiscal conservative – has marked him out as somehow problematic…
The studio’s one potential excuse crumbled over the weekend.
The film debuted at the AFI Film Festival to very positive reviews. Critics didn’t label it an Oscar favorite, nor did they deem it so disappointing that it merited that shabby release.
Could this be a personal matter?
Warner Bros. Discovery CEO David Zaslav infamously raged against Eastwood’s last film, 2021’s “Cry Macho.” The oater, a disappointment on several levels, didn’t ring those studio cash registers as hoped. It didn’t help that it came out during the pandemic.
“It’s not show friends, it’s show business,” Zaslav reportedly said about the actor’s 50-plus year relationship with Warner Bros.
Yet “Cry Macho” hardly broke the studio’s back. The suits would take several “Cry Macho” duds over “Joker: Folie a Deux,” expected to cost the studio up to $200 million.
Eastwood’s Hollywood reputation remains impeccable. He gets the job done on time every time, never going over budget. “Juror #2” boasts a budget in the mid-$30 million range, according to Variety.
That has to count for something. Right?
Apparently not. Nor does his legacy as one of Hollywood’s most beloved and talented artists.
Clint Eastwood’s final film ‘JUROR #2’ will only be released in less than 50 theaters for its entire run with no wider release planned.
Warner Bros will also not reveal any box office numbers for the film.
(Source: https://t.co/Hwe0Wp5Az6) pic.twitter.com/kzOasT34xQ
— DiscussingFilm (@DiscussingFilm) October 24, 2024
Did The Telegraph get the story right? Hollywood routinely blacklists conservatives, no doubt. Yet the older guard are often given a pass of sorts. Jon Voight is far more outspoken than Eastwood on political matters, but he’s worked consistently in recent years in both indie fare and mainstream productions like “Ray Donovan.”
Tim Allen and Kelsey Grammer have also avoided overt punishment, for the most part.
Eastwood’s Hollywood legacy has earned him a better release schedule than “Juror #2” has received. The industry routinely rolls out dreck into thousands of theaters. Think “Madame Web,” “Borderlands” and “The Crow” in this year alone.
By all accounts “Juror #2” is a superior product. That isn’t the bottom line here, though.
Legends deserve better.
The post Is This Any Way to Treat a Legend? appeared first on Hollywood in Toto.
