12 Angry Men Analysis

Recently in my AP English class, we watched The film “Twelve Angry Men”. The film was unique in the fact that it only had one setting, the Jury Room. The film showed no one else but the jurors and the warden, who all remained completely nameless throughout the entire movie and we're only identified by their juror numbers. The jurors were drastically different which I believe added more diversity and made the plot more complex and intriguing to the audience. I don't believe the film had a specific intended audience, I believe that this show can be appreciated by all audiences because it shows that reasonable doubt is a much easier state of mind then certainty.

The setting of 12 Angry Men is a jury deliberation room where the jurors are and required to decide the guilt or innocence of an 18 year old that is accused of committing first-degree murder by stabbing his father with a switchblade knife. Witnesses were presented to give evidence of hearing a quarrel; hearing a threat to kill, and have seeing the boy run away. Another witness swore to having seen the boy stabbing his father from a window across from where the murder occurred. Eleven jurors were convinced the boy was guilty and deserved the death penalty. One raised questions he felt had not been asked or had not been pursued by the defense.

Over the last 60 year laws have significantly changed around the world. In 1957 New York’s penalty for 1st degree murder was the death sentence. In order for an accused to be convicted 12 jurors must come to a unanimous consensus of a guilty verdict. The film 12 Angry Men directed by Sidney Lumet and produced by Henry Fonda and Reginald Rose is about 12 jurors who are attempting to come to a unanimous decision involving an 18 year old boy who allegedly stabbed his father to death. Within the first five minutes of their deliberation 11 jurors voted for a guilty verdict; all expect jurors eight who believe that they should spend some time to discuss, before sending an 18 year old boy to die (Lumet, 1957). During the course of 80 minutes

Reginald Rose’s play Twelve Angry Men emphasises the importance of seeing things from more than one perspective. Set in a New York jury room in 1957, Rose highlights how important it is that the jury discuss all of the evidence from the case in detail and from multiple angles. Representative of this notion is the 8th Juror who is willing to acknowledge alternative views or interpretations. From the outset of the play he goes against the crowd voting “not guilty”. He then considers all of the details of the evidence including the old man’s testimony and the boy’s inability to remember the movie he saw. In contrast to this character, are

Twelve Angry Men was written over half of a century ago but still baits thought as to one’s true character. Screening the process of twelve jurors determining a young boys fate in a murder trial, the picture dissects individuals and begins to uproot prejudice and biases a few of the jurors were at first uncomfortable to admit. The 1957 MGM film Twelve Angry Men provokes thought through twelve on-screen characters by displaying their skills in empathy, personal priorities, and self-control.

When analyzing the film, 12 Angry Men, one will notice the reasoning is not consumed by the story, but by the characters and their involvement and interaction. In a brief summary of the film, it contains twelve jurors who are all participating in a trial. The trial is concerning a young adolescent who is being appointed for the death of his father. “Credit the power of this lucid study to the fact that the attributes, failings, passions and prejudices of these tales men is as striking and important as the awesome truth that they hold a boy's life in their hands” (Weiler). Through out the story, the juror’s personalities and qualities are shown, each having their own opinion of the plea bargain. Identified in detail through this analysis, one will be able to clearly depict the different characterization of the jurors. Along with their individual personas, all of the juryman fall under the category of either being Socratic or a sophist in Aristocratic terms. When looking at the arguments among the jurors one can see the different logical styles utilized, and which were effect versus the not effective approaches. Progressively through the movie, the argument grows and each juror becoming their own. When criticizing and evaluating the content of 12 Angry Men, the real meaning behind the story becomes apparent. The connotation of this film is studying the actions of the jurors and what each one brings the case in terms of rhetoric and Aristocratic style.

12 Angry Men is a wonderful film that sheds light upon both the greatness and the weakness of the Jury system. It dramatizes the flaws inherent in the Jury system with élan and at the same time, it brings out a sense of positivism about the same. It puts forth the idea that while humans do not work on pure logic and are primarily governed by emotion, justice can still prevail by a careful conglomeration of the two. The film commences with eleven out of twelve jurors convinced that the accused ought to be convicted without having discussed any of the evidence put forth in the proceedings of the case and only one juror arguing that they ought to discuss the case further to arrive at a conclusion whose consequences are of that enormity.

There was 12 juror involved in this case to decide the defendants verdict who involved in this murder case at the age of 19. The 12 angry men in this movie referring to the 12 jurors from various back ground. Juror 1 (Martin Balsam) as a chairperson and work as a football coach. Juror 2 (John Fiedler) is a shy person and work as a bank clerk.

Twelve Angry Men The film is about a young boy from slum, who experienced domestic violence by his father for a long time, is accused of being the murderer of the death of his father. Twelve jurors need to decide whether the young boy is guilty or not guilty and must be unanimous. At first, only Juror 8 votes for “not guilty”. After a drastic debate and some conflicts, all other jurors agree on the reasonable doubts and vote for “not guilty”.

Twelve Angry Men (1957) is a play set in New York, which takes place in a jury room. It follows a jury’s decision-making process in a murder trial. We are able to observe the gradual change of eleven of the twelve jurors’ minds about their verdict, illuminating the central concerns in the play. These central concerns are prejudice and justice and are shown through settings, stage directions and dialogue.

The movie, ’12 Angry Men’ showcases the trial of a young boy, who is accused of stabbing his father and causing him death. Throughout the play, the jury is able to follow through the actions of 12 men, who compose the jury. All of these men come from different backgrounds and the most astounding feature of the movie is in the manner that the experiences and personalities of these members of the jury influences their initial perception of the case. The personal bias and past experiences of the juror’s number 10, 11, and 3 are brought on focus, as they serve to inform the biased notions they have toward the accused. The film is an expose and indictment of the American jury system, which purports to uphold a strong sense of lack of bias and infallibility.

We are very fortunate to live in a country where our legal system is designed to give everyone a fair trial. One of the great advantages of our legal system is that if someone is convicted of a crime they are innocent until proven guilty. The hope and mission of our judicial system is to correctly convict the people who have actually committed the crime. To prove their guilt while also making sure we are not convicting an innocent person. However, our system is not perfect and there are some flaws. Unfortunately, since jurors are just people and not computers or machines mistakes can be made. When putting your life in another person’s hands, such as a juror, you hope for the best, but that is not always enough. Sometimes there are certain variables, which can impact decisions and alter a person’s life forever. The movie “12 Angry Men” is a great example of how these variables play a role in determining a person’s innocence. Throughout this movie there were numerous examples of psychological science. The four domains I will focus on are stereotyping, eyewitness testimony, attribution process and problem solving.

The movie Twelve Angry Men is about the twelve jurors that could adjust their influence in a decision-making process for conviction an eighteen years-old boy, whether the boy guilty or not guilty in murdering of his father. It represents a perfect example for applicable of a work group development framework. It also has examples of influence techniques among a group’s members. This paper is looking at those specific examples in the movie and focusing in analysis the reasons why Juror 8 is so much more effective than others in the meeting.

12 Angry Men, an influential and awarding winning film, is a unique movie that tells the story of twelve jurors who converse on whether the defendant is guilty or not. Despite its old age and different setting, the movie is a film worth watching as it provides real life scenarios and application of conflict management when confronted with a problem at hand and conflict from fellow members. In fact, the movie adequately portrays the occurance of groupthink, types of conflicts seen in small groups, and ways to resolve conflicts that ultimately influences how the conversation goes. 12 Angry Men does a spectacular job in enrapturing audiences with the plot at hand and showing how issues can solved in order to reach a common goal.

The 1957 move, 12 Angry Men, takes place in a jurors deliberation room in which twelve jurors must decide the fate of a young man accused of murder (Fonda, Justin, & Rose, 1957). Right away the jurors decide to take a vote in order to unanimously come to a guilty verdict so that they can go home. Davis, the juror played by Henry Fonda, throws everyone off-guard when he states his verdict of not guilty (Fonda et al., 1957). Interesting group dynamics take place as a result of Davis’s verdict, such as persuasion, conformity, and minority influence, how prejudice is displayed in the deliberation room, the evidence of cognitive heuristics, and group polarization.