12 Angry Men Movie Analysis

782 WordsNov 29, 20154 Pages
Twelve Angry Men Analysis BA 321 Reaching a unanimous vote, beyond a reasonable doubt, was a difficult task for the jurors represented in the film, 12 Angry Men. All but one were convinced the boy on trial was guilty of first degree murder based on eye witness testimony and circumstantial evidence. Uncomfortably hot and sweaty, one intent on getting to a ball game, eleven of the twelve jurors had no intention to stop and think about the life contingent on their verdict. The entire story was motivated by the reasonable doubt, communication competence, and persuasion of one man. Had they not discussed the evidence in further detail and investigated potential explanations, the boy would have been executed. The purpose of…show more content…
The diversity issues explored in the film are most discernable in Jurors #3, #5, and #10. Juror #3 constantly explodes with bottled-up anger, blinding him to the facts. Juror #5 shares his upbringing in a slum, identifying with the boy’s struggle growing up in an underprivileged area in an abusive family. Juror # 10 is an unreasonable bigot whose prejudice ultimately demonstrates his lack of credibility. Even Juror #4, who was one of the last to concede, told Juror #10, “now sit down and don’t open your mouth again” (Lumet, 1975). Eventually the biases among the group were overcome, as they made no contribution to determining innocence or guilt. The jury did achieve their goal to reach a unanimous decision, but it was not the original goal of each juror. There were clearly mixed feelings regarding the conclusion of their deliberation, including self-awareness, reflection, and relief. A swift and undiscussed decision concerning the fate of the boy’s life was an inappropriate approach for the jury. In the end, all of the jurors were satisfied with the verdict of not guilty, but for very different reasons. Reference: Lumet, S. (Director). (1957). 12 Angry Men [Motion

More about 12 Angry Men Movie Analysis

Open Document