Analysis Of The Movie ' 12 Angry Men '

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.

In the 1957 MGM film, Twelve Angry Men, a young boy from the slum is on trial for allegedly stabbing his father to death. The jury from New York City is forced to have 12 men agree as to whether the boy is guilty or not guilty. If they decide not guilty, the boy is set free; if he is found guilty, the boy will receive the death sentence. In the beginning all but one agreed the boy was guilty; Juror 8, Mr. Davis, argues that the boy deserves some deliberation. Mr. Davis changed the other eleven jurors’ minds by using his core values such as keeping an open-mind, staying humble, and believing every life is valuable.

Daily there are thousands of people being found guilty for a crime they did not commit because of a prejudiced judge.Sidney Lumet and Reginald Rose the writers and directors of 12 Angry Men wrote and produced a play about 12 jurors that briefly discuss a trial and come to a verdict , personal issues develop which causes conflict and only makes the process more grueling. The accused boy is being found guilty for murdering his father, 12 jurors are put in a hot room in New York and spend hours briefly viewing the scenario. Although one might think that the justice system should be left in the hands of citizens ,the director and writer of 12 Angry Men , Sidney Lumet and Reginald Rose demonstrate that the United States justice system is unfair and is simply corrupt , inefficient , and injustice due to the jurors biases minds, ignorant attitude ,and the lack of time and energy put in the trial while trying to decide a verdict.

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.

Even before the deliberation talks begin it is apparent most of the men are certain the boy is guilty. However, when the initial poll is taken Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) registers a shocking “not guilty” vote; Immediately the room is in an uproar. The rest of the jury resents the inconvenience of his decision. After questioning his sanity they hastily decide to humor the juror #8 (Henry Fonda) by agreeing to discuss the trial for one hour. Eventually, as the talks proceed juror #8 slowly undermines their confidence by saying that the murder weapon is widely available to anyone, and that the testimony of the key witness is suspect. Gradually they are won over by his arguments and even the most narrow minded of his fellow jurors hesitantly agrees with him. Their verdict is now a solid not guilty.

It is apparent from the beginning of the movie that the defendant, an eighteen year old boy charged for murder, is viewed as guilty. However, there is one juror among the twelve that views this differently, Juror Eight. In fact, Juror Eight’s objection helps break the issue of groupthink, the illusion of an agreement “in order to minimize conflict, maximize cohesiveness, and reach a consensus without critically testing, analyzing, and evaluating ideas.” (Beebe and Masterson). Juror Eight plays devil’s advocate

The jurors react violently against this dissenting vote.they decide to go around the table, explaining why they believe the boy to be guilty, in hopes of convincing 8th Juror.

The movie "Twelve Angry Men" is about a young man who is accused of stabbing his father to death. The twelve jurors have to decide whether the defendant is guilty or innocent. If the young man is found guilty, there is a mandatory death sentence (the jury needs to be unanimous in their decision). At the preliminary vote, eleven of the twelve jurors vote the young man guilty. Henry Fonda is the only one who voted the accused as not guilty because he doesn't want to send the defendant to the death penalty without discussing it. Throughout the movie, Henry uses various styles of leadership in which I will discuss further in the following section.

| Factor affecting decision making process: * Attitudes * Personality and values * Emotions and moods

The only person who doesn’t vote guilty, is Juror 8, played by Henry Fonda. He says that he wants to have some form of a discussion about it, considering a life is at stake, while the others just seem to want to get it over with. This is when we really get into the plot of the movie. Juror 8 begins to talk and try and convince the rest of his fellow jurors, not of anyone’s innocence, but of the fact that there is a reasonable doubt. Without having even seen the trial, we are introduced to all of the

In this case it explains what was going on through the movie “Twelve Anger Men” and then it explains the group-thinking. The Group-thinking theory from its beginning had been the most cited endowment to the decision-making study. It focused on 7 factors given by Mitchel and Eckstein which were cohesiveness, insulation, lack of a tradition of impartial leadership, lack of norms requiring methodical procedures, homogeneity of social background and ideology, high stress from external threats and hope of a solution better than the leader’s, temporarily low self-esteem induced by situation factors symptoms of groupthink, are relevant to the juries decision-making.

During this movie, the viewers notice that as the jury spends time discussing the case, the deeper they dive into the details of the witnesses providing evidence that the 18 year old defendant may not be the killer after all. This shows how dangerous the modern day mind can be. In the beginning of this discussion period between the jurors, most of the individuals only cared about continuing their daily life regardless of what their impact would be on the boy’s life. For example, one of

Throughout the film, 12 Angry Men, the jury can be seen going through Tuckman’s five stage model of development a theoretical model that describes how groups change over time. Each stage is marked by a different processes and characteristics that can be seen throughout the duration of the film. The jury does not adhere to each stage in the strictest sense but does loosely go through each stage. Noticeable through the progression of the film, the forming stage is short and the storming stage seems to occupy most of the space of the film; followed by shorter norming, performing and finally adjourning phases.

The year is 1984 and Darryl Hunt has just is now sentenced a life in prison for the alleged rape and slaughter of Deborah Sykes. In 2004, he was exonerated after nearly 20 years behind bars because he was wrongly convicted based off false eyewitness testimonies given during the trial (Blau, 2016). There was no physical evidence that connected him to the crime, yet, but based on the eyewitness testimonies he was sentenced to a life behind bars for a crime he never committed. A somewhat similar scenario plays out in the film 12 Angry Men, when a jury must deliberate on a life or death sentence for a boy who allegedly killed his own father. While this case has the evidence stacked against the accused boy, a lone member of the jury disagrees with the consensus given and takes it upon himself to play devil’s advocate on behalf of the boy in the hopes of saving him from certain death. This becomes a high stakes battle of wits, when the juror meets opposition from the eleven other members of the jury.

The jurors in the 1957 film Twelve Angry Men, have a strong impact on the way the audience views their self-image by showing them their personality, their actions in the court room and their own personal beliefs if the boy should be charged guilty or not guilty. Each word that comes out of the juror’s mouth could either be a honest statement or a complete lie. It is the audience choice weather to believe it or to not believe it. The 1957 MGM film entitled Twelve Angry Men forces the characters and audience to evaluate their own self-image through observing the personality, actions, and beliefs of the jurors.