elshikh4 This is a movie starring Pauly Shore while his finest hour (or accurately his 15 min of fame!). And it's not complicated to review.Good things : 1_Pauly Shore, doing his thing. And it wasn't a bad thing at all. 2_The script. It's kind of brilliant, being a nice far spoof of 12 Angry Men, giving us small world, nice plot, and hot climax. 3_Tia Carrere; back when she was smoking HOT. Despite how they didn't go and show well all of her capacities (Shore's fantasies are so lame !). 4_The last 10 minutes. They were close to perfect. 5_The innocent feel of it. I mean look at the gags, there is No bad tasting, toilet humor,..etc. It's all plain fun. 6_Moments like messing with the accused in the court, the way how the lead approved his point about guiltlessness, playing the original "S.W.A.T" music while running to Carrere, or Shore's Chihuahua watching TV. 7_The minor parts were played by lovely actors. 8_The song by the end of the movie. 9_I was about putting this in the "bad things" section : Portraying the ones who love and care about environment as lunatic serial killers. The reason I didn't is that I'm one of these people, though I laughed my heart out with Stanley Tucci going bananas over Asbestos! 10_The fact that TV is airing it a lot. I watched 3 times till now.Bad things : 1_Pauly Shore dressed as a whore. Just Yuck !! 2_ Shore's striptease. Just NOOOO! 3_Shore spoofing coldly Al Pacino in (And Justice for All). Wasn't a good move-ito pal-ito. 4_The weakness of the lead's main goal. I couldn't wholly buy how all what he wanted was the petty paycheck and living in a good room ! 5_I don't think that the hotel we watched needed desperately this publicity from the lead. There must have been more powerful reason for giving this deluxe room for him.So 5 bad vs. 10 good. Namely for every bad thing there are 2 good things to keep the sweetness up. Accordingly this is a good movie. Rather an average low budget comedy (to be sadistically objective !). Nothing wrong with light time, and this one provides that for harmless 88 minutes. Though the thing that I hated, wanting to put it in the "very bad things" section, is the way Pauly Shore and his movies were BANNED! I do not know at all how he wasn't forgiven for being himself in 5 movies he made, that's his all cinematic career to date by the way, while for instance Jim Carrey was for horrible disgusting trash he did one after another at his start, at the mid-90s too, such as (Dumb & Dumber), (Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls), (The Cable Guy) and (How the Grinch Stole Christmas) ??? Simply the major studios gave (Carrey) millions, while not giving Shore even a second chance.In the same time Adam Sandler acted as nothing but the same idiot fool for his first 10 movies and he got a career out of it. While Chris Tucker is known as unbearable, he had the opportunity to make Rush Hour 1,2, and 3 ?!! Steve Martin became not funny anymore, nevertheless they made him the new Pink Panther in not one but 2 movies ?!! In fact the list is long, yet with no (Shore) in it ?! If you think "unfair" already then you haven't heard Gene Siskel saying, in 1995, that (Shore) is annoying but not strategically annoying like Jim Carrey (HUH ??!!), or Roger Ebert saying that watching Jury Duty is like hearing long fingernails scratching a piece of glass for long time. Well, Roger, that's exactly what I feel while watching 2001 Space Odyssey, not Jury Duty !The deduction : Not everyone loves Pauly Shore. However, he didn't have much time to develop, be different, or assure that he has good things, as the time some other actors apparently had to do the same. In any case still (Jury Duty) is : A Pauly Shore Classic. Cute unpretentious fun. "Bad" or "so Bad" are only what I call many of its reviews. Plus it's somehow a rare chance to watch a work of a comedian who his career by now has gone with the wind, and what a strange wind that was! Finally, don't feel guilty if you found yourself singing : "Judge-ito have a bite of my burrito, Ato have some of my tomato".

lastliberal I am sure that there is someone out there in movie audiences that like Pauly Shore. I mean, he has to have made something worth watching, right? Well, it certainly wasn't this movie. Except for Tia Carrere, there really isn't anything to see here.The concept is innovative, I have to admit. Made homeless, he gets on jury duty in a murder case to get sequestered, and he keeps the jury going (Spoof of 12 Angry Men?)to keep a roof over his head. But even the murderer (Sean Whalen) gets irritated. I got irritated long before that.Well, let's just wait for the next Pauly Shore venture with American Idol, Ruben Studdard. I am sure it will be as good as this one.

For the Love of Good Cinema 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.

andoniadistim I think that Jury Duty was stupid but very funny. Pauly Shore is funny because he exists. There's room for anyone in comedy and he proves this point. I'm not sure if this movie damages brain cells, but I watched this movie alone and laughed my ass off. A little tasteless at times. I wonder if Pauly Shore wrote any of it. Andrew Dice Clay made an appearence, I think he's a good actor, very funny. Tia Carrere is a good actress also. It's a true comedy if you think about it, stupid, funny, there's only one part of the film that I didn't find funny. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Pauly Shore's mother runs the comedy circuit, so that's pretty funny in itself. Did he get on the big screen just by talent. You be the judge:)