Jury Duty (1995) User Reviews

A Mistrial

[bkoganbing · 4/10 · 1 February 2010]

I'm not a hater of Pauly Shore by any means, he can be a very funny guy and I rather liked Biodome which came after this film. But this one really stretched Shore's smart aleck personality way too far.

Jury Duty is now something I try to avoid figuring that back in the day I served on three of them at one time or another. And the next time I'm eligible I would be over 70 years old and would get an automatic exemption should I choose. But if you have nothing else to do, your life isn't going anywhere, why not take that magnificent sum of $5.00 a day for service.

That's what Shore figures when his mother Shelley Winters and her long time boyfriend Charles Napier get married and he's at loose ends. And wouldn't you know it, he gets on the jury of an accused serial killer, Sean Whalen. Shore however finds a way to make Jury Duty not only profitable, but quite comfortable.

Whalen is accused of butchering and dismembering several fast food managers when he's found sleeping at the place their bodies were stashed. If he didn't do it his hopes for justice rest on the shoulders of Pauly Shore a fate I'd not wish on anyone.

Pauly gets way too over the top in Jury Duty and you'd better like him if you have any hopes of liking this film. Also I just can't believe that fellow juror Tia Carrere would ever fall for someone like Shore. But that's movie magic for you.

Among other places Pauly takes his cues from is that flawed classic 12 Angry Men. When I reviewed that I said that Henry Fonda's actions, one in particular would have been grounds for a mistrial. Ironically because of what Shore does, Judge Abe Vigoda does declare a mistrial.

Justice does get served in a highly unusual manner. If that pleases you by all means see Jury Duty. Otherwise people who are not Pauly Shore's fans will have a hard time with this film.

Pauly Shore is the Antichrist!!!!!

[mattymatt4ever · 3/10 · 3 October 2002]

I first saw this movie when I was in grade school, so naturally I wasn't too critical. It's a silly comedy and I got a few laughs at the time. I also didn't see what people hated about Pauly Shore. When you're 11 years old, you don't find a dude like that obnoxious. Now...he pretty much annoys the crap out of me.

I'm not jumping onto the bandwagon of Pauly Shore-haters. As a matter of fact, I recall very few comic actors who hardly retain an ounce of merit. The thing that's jarring about Shore is he tries hard to hammer a laugh out of his audience, but he does it in such a dull, low-key manner. If you're gonna be obnoxious, flaunt your obnoxiousness. Obnoxious can be funny. Just look at Vince Vaughn's portrayal of Trent in "Swingers." Shore is like that class clown who tries hard to annoy everyone in sight, yet at the same time tries hard to be liked. If Shore had charm, that might be possible. A guard dog has more charm than him.

The cast is pretty much second-rate. Tia Carrerre would grab any script that's hurled in her direction, and so would Abe Vigoda. Sure, Vigoda was popular in his hayday, but that's the whole point. He was popular IN HIS HAYDAY. Andrew Dice Clay has an amusing cameo, though. And what in the world was Stanley Tucci doing in this film??!!! Yes, THE Stanley Tucci. The Stanley Tucci from "Sidewalks of New York" and "Big Night." And here he is, playing a fanatical environmentalist. I can betcha 100 bucks this film is now crossed off his resume.

Unless you're a die-hard Pauly Shore fan, this film is as boring as sitting in a jury for 4 straight hours--and the movie's only 90 minutes long! The only hints of wit are occasional references to "12 Angry Men."

My score: 3 (out of 10)

Stupid not in a funny way

[SnoopyStyle · 3/10 · 12 January 2015]

Tommy Collins (Pauly Shore) drives off all the ladies and loses the stripper job at his uncle Sal's. He is hopelessly unemployed and living with his mom (Shelley Winters). The police captures the Drive-Thru Killer and Tommy gets jury duty. His mom takes off for Vegas and he's aiming to get sequestered for a long free hotel stay. And it pays $5 a day. Monica (Tia Carrere), Frank (Stanley Tucci) and Tommy's old Principal Beasely (Richard Riehle) are some of the jurors.

Pauly Shore is playing the moron and a slacker jerk. He's doing it solo. It's boring and unfunny. The script is stupid and not in a funny way. It's like a really weak '12 Angry Men'. The best I could say about this movie is that Pauly Shore could have been more annoying. That's little comfort.

Awful So-Called Comedy

[Michael_Elliott · 26 January 2018]

Jury Duty (1995)

BOMB (out of 4)

Pauly Shore plays Tommy Collins, a spoiled brat of a human who can't keep a job down. He lives with his mom (Shelley Winters) and thinks he's gotten the "job" of a lifetime when he's offered jury duty, which will provide him free room and bored as well as some fun.

When you look back at the 1990's it seems that there were several comedies making some really awful movies. To most people Shore was the most boring and obnoxious of the group of comedies but I honestly enjoyed his act. I loved him in ENCINO MAN as well as SON IN LAW, which allowed him to have the lead spot but after that things started to go rather bad and JURY DUTY is the prime example.

I don't know the production history of this movie but at the time the O.J. Simpson case was in the headlines and there's even a joke about it in the film. I'm going to guess that this movie was put into production to try and cash-in on that craze but this is without question one of the worst comedies of the decade.

It honestly seems like the screenplay was never finished and they just let Shore loose in a courtroom to be his obnoxious self. Again, I think Shore is funny but it's clear that he has nothing to work with here and you get non-stop annoying jokes that make you want to turn the movie off. It's just not funny and the film just grows more and more aggrevating as it moves along. It's really too bad that more wasn't done with it and especially since there is a nice supporting cast.

Bad movie

[buttons-3 · 2/10 · 18 October 1998]

This is one of the worst movies I think I've ever seen in my life. Who on earth spent money on this piece of junk. Whoever they are I am sure they are regretting it. I am not a Pauly Shore basher, I really liked Son In Law, but this movie is worthless. Do not see it, I'd say burn it and put it out of its misery.

Pauly Being Pauly.

[phillafella · 2/10 · 17 October 2003]

JURY DUTY is exactly what you would expect from Pauly Shore: obnoxious, silly and ridiculous. Here, Shore plays a jobless boy who decides he can get himself a free hotel room by posing as a juror for a murder trial. Usually, I give movies what they deserve, but since Shore never made a good movie, I have to give him credit. I mean, here is another guy whose movies were successful at the box office, but had little or nothing to show for it. If you are a fan of Pauly, I doubt you will be disappointed. Others beware, for JURY DUTY will be a real trial to sit through.

1 out of 5

Ain't nothing' sweeter than a catfish doing a backstroke at the shallow end of the kiddie pool.

[MarkAdler · 3/10 · 7 October 2006]

There is a scene early on in "Jury Duty" when Pauly Shore stands on a bus and imitates a town tour guide. It is obvious that this scene was written to showcase Pauly Shore's comedic talents, however, he makes noises and is loud and generally obnoxious and unfunny.

"Jury Duty" is the point where Pauly Shore officially abused his stay in movies. After this movie, he would forever be sanctioned to the lunch table in the corner with the smelly kid, Carrot Top and the Noid from the Dominoes commercials. But not until he showed the world his versatility in Bio-Dome.

Jury Duty is bad. Not bad like "In the Army Now," but close. There is little originality to the script, no amusing characters and about four funny lines. I did enjoy the scene where the witnesses from restaurants give testimonies in their respective fast food uniforms. There isn't much else here. It just isn't funny.

Shore also lacks the wit his idiotic leading men contemporaries like Adam Sandler and Chris Farley showed in the 90s. These were all, more or less, bad versions of Steve Martin's wonderful "Jerk" character. All Shore shows in this movie is that he has the talent to bug you.

Of course, not all the blame can be put on his shoulders. He has no script to work with. Nothing. I don't know why Stanley Tucci thought this movie would be good for him and or how the studio blackmailed him into being in it.

I remembered both "Encino Man" and "Son in Law" were kind of funny in a stupid way. "Jury Duty " on the other hand is stupid in a very unfunny way.

And Now The Verdict...

[aesgaard41 · 3/10 · 13 July 2001]

Pauly Shore is just not funny. How can one man continually create such irritatingly grating roles one after another and still be allowed to make more movies ? Answer: if Adam Sandler, Jim Carrey, Chris Elliott, and Tom Green can do it, why not ? The one thing that does carry this film is by filling it with actors who do know what they are doing so that he can ride on their coat tails and stay in the minds of a tiny legion of fans blind to the truth. Tia Carrera shines in this movie as she struggles to remain aloft, but Shore just drags her down to his level at the end. Richard Riehle starts out like everyone else wondering how he got into this mess and how to get out, but then gets brainwashed to down to Shore's level. Some of the film is funny, much of it is not. Shore's dog, a long-haired chihuahua, does a better job at being funny as well as carrying the movie. Another thing which makes the movie is spotting the celebrity cameos through out the plot. If only they got rid of Shore, maybe it would have worked!

Pauly Shore tries to master Fonda

[Cez_Aslak · 2/10 · 6 September 2015]

OK, starting off we all knew that this wasn't going to be a masterpiece. In general I do "sympathise" / laugh with Pauley Shore, however this " try-to -be-funny-remake-of-12-angry-men" just left me disturbed.

Not only do they totally disregard the entire judicial system on how they choose jury, as if Pauley can choose the trial he wishes to be on... yeah whatever... but during the process we are to believe that the entire governmental state is deceived by a guy bribing a hotel to get a better room. In any case, it's possible I took this more to heart due to the fact that my Dad was a lawyer.... but I added an extra star due to the dog.

This whole courtroom's out of order.

[vertigo_14 · 7/10 · 4 April 2004]

I can't understand why there are so many poor reviews of this movie. And some to say that this is the worst movie Pauley Shore has ever done. I've seen it about a million times, and I think it is just as hilariois nearly every time I see it. And, sure Pauley Shore's most classic movie may forever be Son in Law, but com'mon, I do not think this is the worse thing he's ever done.

Jury Duty is largely a parody of Twelve Angry Men, and ...And Justice for All. Tommy Collin's (Shore) mom and her soon-to-be husband take their trailor and head off to Vegas for a quickie marriage. So, unemployed Tommy, in need of a place to stay, finds an opportunity for an extended stay at a luxury suite while serving jury duty on a high profile murder trial. The suspect is "Drive Thru Killer," Carl Wayne Bishop (Whalen), and now his fate is to be determined by eleven jurors who just want to vote him guilty and go home, and one juror (Tommy) who wants to prolong the jury sequestering as long as he can. Eventually, it turns into a parody of Twelve Angry Men when Tommy, trying to prove Carl Wayne Bishop's innocence, must find a way to prove to the other jurors that reasonable doubt exists.

If you know Pauley Shore, you know that going to be no easy task, but it is also going to be a hilarious endeavor. And the supporting cast of jurors are just as funny as they become ever more irritable as it seems like a verdict is never going to be reached, especially Richard Edson and Sean Whalen.

So why all the negative reviews? It is such a stupid story, so stupid that it is funny. And it is Pauley Shore, doing what Pauley Shore does best, acting like a total nut and having a blast doing it. For a load of laughs and a waste of some time, Jury Duty is not a bad choice.

Pauly Shore's last stand

[Agent10 · 5/10 · 9 July 2002]

Pauly Shore entertains us in the follies of being sequestered, and for some strange reason, I loved almost every moment of it. Sure, the concept was stupid and the eventual resolution was ridiculous, but who cares. Shore was on his last legs in this film, but they still had some good laughs. I won't call this film his best, its not even close, but it still has a little entertainment value left. 5/10

This movie is a good laugh for some...

[havana-2 · 10/10 · 29 October 1999]

In the future people will not be able to understand the OJ Simpson references that are made in this movie. It is a timely comedy, set to a backdrop of a gruesome killing. The hero, a stupid man named Tommy Collins (Pauly Shore) exposes the jury system for what it is. Instead of making us laugh, it made me think, that courts actually decide the fates of men's lives by using juries. Who is to say who would make a good juror. Anyhow, if your in the mood for something light, pick this film up at your local video/DVD store and give it a chance. It's not too bad, and watching Pauly Shore in a g-string and a bottle of milk poured on him is likely to get even the most Anti-Shore laughing.

Also look for guest appearance by Andrew Dice Clay as Pauly's uncle.

Hey, Bu-uddy! Why is everyone so down on Pauly Shore?

[Mike_LaTorres · 6/10 · 7 August 2003]

I think this was possibly Pauly Shore's best performance (to date)! I have never understood why people don't like him. My theory has always been him humor is over a lot of people's heads. To the casual observer his humor may appear very low brow, but if you pay any real attention and are smart enough to understand where the Weasel's coming from then you'll find a lot of enjoyment in his work! I solidly recommend "Jury Duty" to anyone bright enough to be looking for a wild subversive romp through America's legal system with a true comedy genius! I am anxiously awaiting Pauly's next movie!

Jury duty

[kogansasha-69394 · 5/10 · 28 February 2023]

Jury Duty, a 1995 comedy film starring Pauly Shore, is a mixed bag. On one hand, it offers plenty of laughs and humorous moments, but on the other hand, it falls short of being a great film.

Pauly Shore's character, Tommy Collins, is a slacker who is called for jury duty and sees it as an opportunity to avoid work and party with his fellow jurors. The film is filled with wacky antics and absurd scenarios, such as when Tommy decides to dress up as a woman to gain the sympathy of the other jurors. The supporting cast also delivers some great comedic performances, including Tia Carrere as a fellow juror who catches Tommy's eye and Abe Vigoda as a grumpy old man who always seems to be napping.

However, despite its comedic strengths, Jury Duty falls short in other areas. The plot feels disjointed at times, and the pacing is uneven. Additionally, some of the jokes feel forced and fall flat, which can be disappointing for a comedy film.

In the end, Jury Duty is a fun and entertaining film that offers plenty of laughs, but it's not a masterpiece. Fans of Pauly Shore and absurd comedies will likely enjoy it, but others may find it lacking in substance.

Guilty As Charged.

[tfrizzell · 30 October 2002]

Typical Pauly Shore fare that has him stalling the verdict on a murder trial so he can stay in a plush hotel longer. Naturally he has cut a deal to be in the President's suite of a different inn than the other jurors. Anyway as time progresses, it appears that Shore might be on to something when he tries to convince the others that the case is not as cut-and-dried as it appears. Some outstanding performers (most notably Shelley Winters, Charles Napier, Tia Carrere and Stanley Tucci) somehow found their way on this downer. 2 stars out of 5.

Terrible

[Meredith-7 · 1/10 · 17 May 2004]

In my opinion, a film starring Pauly Shore is going to be bad, however, while some of his films are good/bad (Encino Man), this is not one of them. This is Shore at his most gratingly annoying, throw in a tired storyline & terrible jokes & you have jury duty. Nothing can save this film, it's bad from start to finish. I expected better from some of the cast - they must have really needed the money. The strange thing is the premise of the story could really work - if it had different actors, an appealing lead & a much better script. Unless you are a die hard Pauly Shore fan I suggest you stay away from this one. There are thousands of better films to watch.

Hey Pauly Shore! You owe me $7.00!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Jetset971 · 1/10 · 4 December 2010]

UGH! What a waste of time this was. Pauly Shore hit a professional low with this regurgitated from hells cinema's anus stink bomb. I could belabor you with all of what is wrong with this film but I decided that maybe I could focus on the few good aspects of "Jury Duty". Yeah, thats the way to go. So, without further ado, um....I....um....Na, sorry I tried but even manure with sprinkles is still manure.

Pauly Shore movies were always exercises in irritation. You sit their asking yourself from the first reel, "Why am I watching this?" "Why did I waste my money on this?" Personally, I think its like a train wreck. You know its gonna be ugly and hard to look at but you just have to see how bad it can possibly be. Jury Duty has Shore as a loser-bum that refuses to get a real job and wants to get on a jury for as long as possible so he can have free room and board for as long as a trial can last. So of course he does anything to drag the case out. Wacky premise, huh, I was so disgusted at this movies lame attempts at humor that I bailed out 30 minutes in. From what I heard it didn't get any better as the movie progressed.

In conclusion: Avoid like the freaking plague.

Truly awful - a disgusting parody of "12 Angry Men"

[elwyn5150 · 1/10 · 3 March 2000]

I've heard about how awful Pauly Shore's humour is. This film easily and quickly confirmed that.

This film is a horrible parody of a great film, "12 Angry Men". It disgusted me to see such a great film treated so.

You are better off steering clear of this film. If you are interested in a quality drama, just watch "12 Angry Men"; if you want a good laugh, make sure Pauly Shore is not in it.

Disappointing!

[BuffSpike · 1/10 · 15 November 2005]

First of I want to point out that I like Pauley Shore and have enjoyed watching other comedy movies that he starred in and but I just didn't like Jury Duty and didn't find the humor to be that funny and it was kind of boring and a let down compared to Bio-Dome and other Pauley Shore movies! I had bought this movie on video before I watched it because since I had liked his other movies I assumed I would also like this but I didn't like it and I learned a lesson that I should watch a movie first before I buy it! This movie just didn't appeal to me at all! I would recommend people rent this before buying or try to watch it on TV first!

Tiresome! Painful! Avoid!

[MovieAlien · 1/10 · 12 January 2002]

When this was released for video (the same year it was released in theaters, a shockingly low 3 month gap in between) I was expecting it to be just a silly, lightweight farce involving no imagination. Nothing much can really be expected from Shore's movies but despite his whiny personas, they can be fun on a mindless, youthful level.

Since everyone else in this movie is a caricature, all it has going for it is Pauly Shore's whiny personas and nothing but. At first it's harmless but as soon as Shore's character cheats the judicial system it becomes both excruciatingly brainless and dull. The film's main point was to spoof the almost coinciding Simpson case, but all the "humor" in that (and Shore's "attempt" at "humor") was completely idiotic.

If it weren't for the scene with the dog on the game show, I'd have to honestly say that this is *THE* worst movie ever.

A 'Guilty' pleasure.....

[FlashCallahan · 6/10 · 22 March 2015]

When jobless Tommy Collins discovers that sequestered jurors earn free room and board as well as $5-a-day, he gets himself assigned to a jury in a murder trial.

Once there, he does everything he can to prolong the trial and deliberations and make the sequestration more comfortable for himself......

Depending on how you feel about Shore will make or break this film for you. As the box office shows, his popularity and schtick was wearing thin after the likes of Son-In-Law, and In The Army Now, but here, he appears to be that little bit more humble, and thanks to a wealth of support, it doesn't outstay its welcome.

It starts off with a random joke about Tuna Salad, and its so leftfield that it is laugh out loud funny, and that's the last time I laughed throughout the film.

Don't get me wrong, I smiled during the film, and appreciated a few of the jokes, but I watched this for one reason, I'm so curious about Shores career, he made a massive impact with Encino Man, and the studio gave a rare picture deal, its a kind of sadistic thing to do, but I want to see if the movies were really that bad, because they crashed and burned, but they are nothing out of the ordinary.

The film starts like any other of his, a brief introduction, the realisation that he's a little eccentric, the concept, the love interest, he wins over who he wants to, they find out that he's done something selfish, he wins them over again.....end of.

It's hardly a spoiler, this tropes happen in the majority of comedies released in the nineties, and they are all harmless enough, much like this.

Send this forgettable movie to the scrapheap.

[Cinemaniac1984 · 1/10 · 23 May 2016]

I highly dislike Pauly Shore as an actor because he is very untalented and highly unfunny. Some people seem to adore his stand up work and think he was groomed to be one of the biggest stars in comedy. Wrong. A majority of his movies are unlikable thanks to his lack of star appeal. Jury Duty is another one of those duds that is easily one to forget.

The plot comes across as moronic and the laughs fall flat. What more can I say? Oh and Pauly Shore helps drive the movie into the ground. Not even Stanley Tucci, Tia Carrere, Brian Doyle-Murray, Shelley Winters and Charles Napier can even redeem this rubbish.

Easily one of the most forgettable movies out there, and it looks like this is one of many movies out there that has thankfully not surfaced on DVD or Blu-Ray but instead found itself somewhere on the scrapheap.

Don't bother.

1/10.

Pretty good comedy

[frenzalrhomb_255 · 8/10 · 7 September 2004]

Well if you're not a Pauly Shore fan, skip this one, but if in facts, you appear to like him, this one might please you. I'm not very picky when it comes to movies, but I'd say this one was not bad at all. Lots funny parts and stuff, maybe you would like to rent it first though, but well worth the money!.

Pauly Shore is of course a like it or not, the way he tries to sound annoying might offend you, but like I said earlier, I don't really care about it, as long as its funny!

Too bad he stopped making movies!

I give it an 8!

Light comedy with its moments

[BlueSkies765 · 7/10 · 31 March 2019]

A case study of a troll before trolling was invented. Pauly Shore plays a slacker who has the responsibility of jury duty. Hilarity ensues.

The best part for me is that there's a parallel with what is called "fake news" today. What you see nowadays is conspiracy theorists skepticism of a governments official narrative. When this skepticism is repeated with conviction eventually other people will start becoming skeptics too. This movie has some moments that will make you think about this topic.

It's hits and misses. Some parts were just too silly (especially towards the end) but it also had memorable moments with Tommy weaseling his way in and out of situations. Trying to bend social norms with implicit social commentary. It's a light comedy with its moments.

Waste of time

[hipriti · 2/10 · 12 December 2004]

It is a bad movie that gives wrong idea out to the public. There is no way that wasting taxpayer's money can be made to look funny. The guy is healthy educated guy and living on his parents money. And then he decides to live off tax payers' money like a parasite. That certainly does not count as funny.

Being a jury is a serious business. Making a comedy is a serious business. Unfortunately, the movie maker seems to care for neither. I would not recommend this movie to anyone. It is a waste of time.

The actors did a fairly fine job in the given scope. Story and direction failed the movie.