12 Angry Men : Book Review : 12 Angry Men

Twelve Angry Men, a play by Reginald Rose, follows the plot of twelve jurors in a courthouse jury room. They are attempting to decide on a verdict for a 16 year old boy on trial for the murder of his father. It is one of the hottest years on record in New York and these jurors just want the case to be over. They all decide on leaving the boy guilty except for one, juror eight. He follows through on the honesty that is supposed to be shown in the judicial system, but not like juror ten who uses prejudice to persuade the other jurors to reach the verdict of guilty.

The Constitution guarantees the right to trial by an impartial jury. Impartiality is the principle holding that all parties should be subject to equal treatment under the law. Being impartial requires jury members to reach a decision based on the evidence presented. The chosen jury must be unbiased, and capable of weighing out the evidence objectively. In order to counter bias, The Supreme Court established a rule that the selection of jurors must be from a pool representative of a cross-section of the community.

The movie 12 Angry Men directed by Sidney Lumet was released in 1957. The reenacted movie is similar, but also has additional content not found in the original play. The settings in the movie are given greater attention to in terms of specificity. In the play, the scene begins with the jurors listening to the judge's final statements about the case in the courtroom and then the jurors are dismissed and are shown walking out into the jury room. The movie however, starts with the audience being in the spot of a casual observer. The introduction could have been used to show the reality of setting through the emphasis of how the court and courtroom were set up. The settings aren't only built upon through use of scenery in the movie. The judge and more importantly the defendant are shown in the movie as opposed to the play. This change in the movie which was not in the play catches the reader’s attention because in the play, the audience has a biased view of the defendant, and the only thing known is that he is a 19 year boy who lived in the

Twelve Angry Men is a legal drama, written by Reginald Rose during the heightened period of 1950's McCarthyism. The didactic play presents a cross section, examining 1950's America during a period of immense suspicion and uncertainty. Roses' play reminds us of the importance of responsibility and integrity, emphasising qualities such as courage that aid in preserving justice. The play examines the power of the "lone voice" and places a special emphasis on the serving of justice over the quest for truth through a central plot and strategic framing. The idea of time versus

The play ‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by playwright Reginald Rose. The play conveys an optimistic view of society and the justice system. Set in New York 1957, the play delves into the journey of twelve ordinary men as they struggle to come to a unanimous decision, which in effect will determine the fate of a young boy. The play empowers diversity rather than continuity by composing a cross-section of characters that embrace their differences. The playwright exhibits the notion that prejudices and biases are factors in every dispute and can mask the truth. Additionally, Rose depicts the dangers of a jury system that relies on 12 individual men that unanimously try to reach a life or death decision.

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.

Twelve Angry Men is a courtroom drama that was brought to the big screens in 1957. The storyline follows twelve men selected for jury duty, who are trying to reach a verdict on a young man’s trial following the murder of his father. Throughout the debates and voting, the men all reveal their personalities and motives behind their opinions. Because of all the differences of the men, their communication skills lack in some ways and are excellent in others. The three small group communication variables that I found portrayed throughout the movie were prejudice, past experience and preoccupation.

The script: 12 Angry Men, written by Reginold Rose, is a play about how twelve strangers must come together and decide the future of a nineteen year old boy who was accused of murdering his father. Through their discussion of the flaws about all the presented evidence and eyewitness testimonies, the idea that although there are reasons we use stereotypes, they can ultimately be harmful,is revealed. Juror 10 and Juror 3 are the strongest examples of characters who use their prejudice about certain people to make decisions. In the end, the audience understands that our personal experiences shape the view of others because we try to decipher who the individual is. Whether it’s motivated by “fear” of the unknown, a feeling of curiosity or overwhelming

Idealized Influence – defined by the values, morals, and ethical principles of a leader and is manifest through behaviours that supress self interest and focus on the good of the collective.

Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, is a play about a jury trying to come to a verdict that will determine whether or not a teenage boy will be put on death row.

An individual's past experiences can have an incredible impact on the way they think and behave for years to come. So, the past have a significant impact on an individual. In my own life, I have had past experiences that have affected me to be the person I am today. One example is, whenever I walked through the downtown part of Edmonton and I noticed a lot of homeless people lying around on the streets. I felt so bad for those poor people that didn’t have a place to live. They appreciate anything and everything they get. This really effects me and teaches me to be more grateful in life. And appreciate everything I have. In the play the 12 Angry Men, jurors 3, 5, and 11 prove that their experiences has affected who they are. I believe that juror 3’s family issues such as his problems with his son has affected him to become an aggressive man. Additionally, juror 5 has had a background of living in a slum all his life. Therefore, he tries to prove that not all people living in slums are criminals. Lastly, juror 11 struggles with others judging him because he is a European Refugee. This affected him by making him feel unconfident about himself and feels that the others jurors don't take his opinion too seriously.

This was actually my second time watching 12 Angry Men I believe I watched either my sophomore year or junior year of high school. Normally I am not a fan of black and white films but this is one of the few I can stand to watch. Also watching it a second time I had different reactions then I did the first go round. Like how did Henry Fonda have the courage to stand alone all by himself when everyone else in the room was against him. Me personally I probably would’ve given in and just agreed. Lee Cobb was my least favorite he was just angry and upset for no reason, but I remember you saying if and actor/actress can make them not like their character because they're annoying than that means they are doing a good job. I also want to know was

12 Angry Men is a 1957 American courtroom drama film adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose. Written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet, this trial film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt, forcing the jurors to question their morals and values. In the United States, a verdict in most criminal trials by jury must be unanimous. The film is notable for its almost exclusive use of one set: out of 96 minutes of run time, only three minutes take place outside of the jury room.

Reginald Rose’s ‘Twelve Angry Men’ is a play which displays the twelve individual jurors’ characteristics through the deliberation of a first degree murder case. Out of the twelve jurors, the 8th Juror shows an outstanding heroism exists in his individual bravery and truthfulness. At the start, the 8th Juror stands alone with his opposing view of the case to the other eleven jurors. Furthermore, he is depicted as a juror who definitely understands the jury system and defends it from the jurors who do not know it fully. At the end, he eventually successes to persuade the eleven other jurors and achieves a unanimous verdict, showing his

The play and film of Twelve Angry Men show how being in a jury requires a great deal of logic, along with the ability to look over a case thoroughly. At first, the majority of the jurors think that the boy is guilty. They all believe that there is sufficient evidence to prove it. However, juror number eight points out that there are reasonable doubts, and that there is not enough hard evidence to prove the boy guilty. Some information throughout the story is more important or major than other parts, and some information and details were changed throughout the play and the film. Even though the play and the film are similar, there are major and minor details that are changed inside of both stories that make them unique.