The Telegraph: Clint Eastwood Being Ill Treated by Warner Bros Because of His Politics

The Telegraph has an article up tackling the way Clint Eastwood’s “Juror #2” has been treated by Warner Bros, but their reasoning behind it comes to us from a whole other angle.

The piece, written by Alexander Larman, has the headline, “Why Hollywood liberals are punishing Clint Eastwood for his politics.” Some of it reads like pure speculation, insinuating that Eastwood is being treated poorly by Warner Bros because of his conservative-leaning tendencies.

There are several reasons why [Eastwood’s film is getting shunned by Warners]. 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 […] Yet Eastwood’s politics and polyamory are not going to be remembered in the fullness of time. What will, deservedly, go down in history is one of the most distinguished careers in American cinema.

Honestly, I don’t buy it. If Warners wanted to “punish” Eastwood for his politics then they wouldn’t have even signed him on to direct “Juror #2.” No, I believe that the embarrassing treatment of “Juror #2” is more a sign of the incompetence of the current David Zaslav led company.

Larman goes on to mention Eastwood’s infamous anti-Obama ramble at the 2012 RNC convention where he pretended that the then President was an empty chair. Fine, that was certainly a strange moment, but it took place more than 12 years ago, and there’s absolutely no reason to believe it played any part in Warners’ shunning of ‘Juror.’

Warners boss David Zaslav couldn’t care less about Clint’s politics. He’d more into the “bottom line “and the fact remains that Clint is coming off “Cry Macho,” one of the least successful films of his career.

Back in 2021, a leaked conference call had Zaslav questioning executives who greenlit ‘Macho.’ After being told by these executives that they had doubted “Cry Macho” would turn a profit, Zaslav asked “then why did you make it if you had reservations?” When they replied that Eastwood had given the studio many hits and never delivered a movie late or over budget, he answered: “We don’t owe anyone any favors.”

A year, or so, later, I broke the news that Warners rejected Clint’s pitch for his next film, which would turn out to be “Juror #2.” Months later, they finally seemed to come to an agreement by greenlighting the film, but as a streaming exclusive on Max. It was only after the the ‘Juror’ trailer took off, met with much excitement, that the film ended up getting a tepid 35-theater rollout.

The result is that “Juror #2” is a major hit in France, coming close to selling 400,000 tickets on its first weekend. Stateside, and playing in only 35 screens, the film still managed to rake in $275K over the weekend.