'Hidden Themes In The Movie Twelve Angry Man'

The movie 12 Angry Men is about 12 men who are on jury duty. The case is on the murder of an old man, and the man's son is the suspect. It starts off with 11 of the men voting that the boy is guilty and 1 voting that the boy is not guilty. Throughout the movie, the men go back and forth restating evidence and information that was giving in court, bringing up several different possibilities, and changing their votes. In the end the men all agree that the boy is not guilty and then go their separate ways. However, there are so many clues and evidence that the boy was the one who killed the old man, he is guilty.

Juror 10 and Juror 3 are both connected through bias. Juror 10 is very biased towards his opinions of people of other races. Juror 3 is very biased because he went through a similar situation with his son as the accused went through with his father. This is represented by their closeness in the diagram, Juror 2 is further away because he isn’t as biased. Juror 10 and Juror 3 both think they are above everyone else, which is represented by Juror 3 and 10 being above Juror 2. Juror 2 is very humble and doesn’t seem to have much power over anyone. This also is represented on the diagram with the sizes of the shapes, Juror 10 and Juror 3’s shapes are larger, while Juror 2’s shape is smaller. As you can see, the jurors in 12 Angry Men are all very different, but their differences help challenge everyone’s thoughts in the jury

12 Angry Men is about 12 men who are the jury for an 18 year old accused of murder. The judge states in the opening scene that it is a premeditated murder in the 1st degree, if found guilty will automatically receive the death penalty. The 18 year old male is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade, in their home. The prosecutors have several eye witness testimonies, and all of the evidence that they could need to convict the 18 year old male. In the movie it takes place on the hottest day of the year in New York City. There are 12 jurors whom are to decide if the evidence is enough to convict the teen of murder in the first degree. In the first initial vote it is 11-1. The only way that the jurors could turn in

Prejudice can often be formed without one even realize they are prejudiced, many of the characters in 12 Angry Men, have done as such, allowing their prejudice to not allow them fully evaluate the case unbiasedly. Jurors three, ten and seven are swayed by their prejudiced beliefs against the accused, as the deliberate the accused fate, juror ten states “his type are no good”(12 Angry Men). This prejudice which all of them share, justifiers their neglecting to inspect the evidence and testimony given rather than simply accepting it at face value. The film 12 Angry Men conveys how difficult it can be to set aside prejudiced views through jurors three, seven, and ten. The film also enables the reader to see how prejudice such as past experiences, ingnorance or misinformation, and stereotyping can cloud ones judgement.

Only one out of the twelve jurors originally displayed empathy toward a young man whose life was at trial. That one man, who identified himself as an architect, reveals his name as “Davis”, and acts as the protagonist in Twelve Angry Men. Standing as Juror Eight, he argued on the suspect’s behalf. Although, instead of defending the boy, he admitted to being unsure of a guilty vote and thought that his speculations deserved to be heard before the boy was put to death. As Juror Eight pressed to reveal holes in the case’s evidence, other jurors began to feel empathetic toward the suspect as well. Juror Five professes that he grew up in the slums and represents how character is not determined by where one is raised. In contrast, an ill old man proves to be bitter and declares a distrust of the boy from the very beginning. Juror Ten fails to empathize with the defendant even as a person, condemning him as “one of them” as one of his original arguments. This caused viewers to realize a prejudice that was common in the jury room. The bias denounces any empathy that the few stubborn, discriminatory men may have. Another juror to argue in favor of the prosecutors was Juror Three. This individual discloses his family situation and the bad blood between he and his son. His feelings toward his son seem to be projected onto the defendant as this man argues strongest and persistently for the boy’s sentencing. Juror Nine was the first to empathize with both Juror Eight and the defendant. He aided Davis in causing speculation among the others. Failing to empathize with the boy, many jurors disagree with Davis as he introduces conjecture in the beginning of the film.

The 3rd juror from the drama “Twelve Angry Men” is another character that play an important role in the drama. Throughout the drama he argues hi point that the boy is guilty. To him it's clear that the boy is guilty because in a democracy you must decide based on the evidence given. In the drama “Twelve Angry Men” page 103 paragraph 82 - 83 it states “ I really think this is one of those open and shut things.” The 3rd juror is sharing his opinion that he thinks the boy is guilty based on the evidence he heard. The 3rd juror treats the accused a if he was a adult because of the crime he committed. He believes that the accused should be trialed as an adult and he receive the full punishment. In the drama “Twelve Angry Men” page 102 paragraph 75 - 76 it states “ I mean, lets be reasonable. You sat in court and heard the same things we did. The man’s a dangerous killer. You could see it.” The 3rd juror is stating that in

The classic 1957 movie 12 Angry Men delves in to a panel of twelve jurors who are deciding the life or death fate of an eighteen year old italian boy accused of stabbing his father to death. The twelve men selected as jurors are a diverse group, each coming to the table with their own socioeconomic backgrounds, personal experiences, prejudice’s, and all of this plays a role in the jurors attitudes and/or misconceptions of the accused young man. How each of the jurors, all but Juror Eight played by Henry Fonda, experiences and personalities impact their original vote of guilty is clear at the beginning of the movie with the first vote. However, from the start, Juror Eight displays confidence, and demonstrates leadership abilities utilizing

In ‘Twelve Angry Men’, written by Reginald Rose, juror three sees his son as the alleged and cannot wait to punish him, however, the prejudice he has against the alleged criminal urges juror three to take action as quickly as possible and votes a persistent ‘guilty’ verdict. Throughout the play, juror three is seen as an old, bitter man who makes his decisions based on his son and not his own conscience. When he is a part of the jury, he has the chance to be fair and reasonable, which he passes up the opportunity. He “[feels] that knife going in” when he talks about his son and how he finds a similarity in both the

There were many aspects of each category that foreshadows the ultimate themes of this film such as love, freedom, and crime. In the opening sequence, for example, the film starts off with a close emphasis on Bonnie’s appearance and makeup. Her red lipstick could indicate that there will be a romantic or warm, love aspect to the film. When we see red it’s usually an automatic representation of love, happiness, or even violence. Her being more cautious on her appearance indicates that she’s looking for another person to love. Caring about your appearance doesn’t always indicate that you’re trying to attract another person, but it’s one of the many options for a person to care about their appearance. The bold makeup could also represent Bonnie

The movie "12 Angry Men" focuses on a jury's decision on a capital murder case. A 12-man jury is sent to begin decisions on the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old Latino accused of stabbing his father to death, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence. The case appears to be open-and-shut: The defendant has a weak alibi; a knife he claimed to have lost is found at the murder scene; and several witnesses either heard screaming, saw the killing or the boy fleeing the scene. Eleven of the jurors immediately vote guilty; only Juror No. 8 (Mr. Davis) casts a not guilty vote. At first Mr. Davis' bases his vote more so for the sake of discussion after all, the jurors must believe beyond a

In tough times, it is easy to forget what is right and wrong. The movie Twelve Angry Men is a very clear demonstration on right and wrong. The film is about twelve jurors who are deciding the fate of a young man accused of killing his father. These twelve men all vote for guilty, except for the eighth juror, who votes innocent. It seems very clear that the suspect is guilty, and the eighth juror goes against everyone to give the young man a fair chance. Although all other jurors try to pressure him into voting guilty, he sticks to his gut and eventually proves the suspect innocent. In the 1957 film 12 Angry Men, the eighth juror, Mr. Davis, sticks to his core values of honesty, fair judgement, and hard work to prove the young man accused of killing his father to be innocent.

The play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose takes place in 1957, where a trial about a boy stabbing his father is charged with first degree charges, facing execution. 12 jurors, all with different personalities and backgrounds are settled to discuss the future of the boy; declaring not guilty will release him from his charges and vice versa. However, evidence alone wasn’t the only pieces that could convince other jurors. And though it seems mandatory that the jurors would argue and debate among each other, biases about the boy were the main attention, focusing more so on that rather than evidence. Juror 10 becomes the best example of having biases and grudges towards the boy, as he continues throughout the movie to get others to realize what he’s trying to claim, playing a vital role and although juror 10’s motives doesn’t change, he acts as a

The 1957 film 12 Angry Men, written by Reginald Rose, tells the story of a jury made up of twelve men, as they contemplate the sentencing of a young man accused of murder. As the name implies, many of the jurors become extremely emotional as the deliberation process moves on. The jurors’ emotions and unique personalities create various conflicts and show how they each have differing perspectives on the trial. Throughout the deliberation process it becomes clear that several of the jurors harbor personal prejudices which end up affecting their decisions in reaching a verdict. It is clear from the beginning that if not for one juror, known as Juror 8, the jury would have returned a unanimous guilty verdict with no deliberation.

The 1957 movie version of 12 Angry Men, brings twelve people together with different personalities and experiences to discuss the fate of a young boy that allegedly killed his father. At the very beginning, many agree that the boy is guilty except for one man. Juror #8 votes not guilty and pushes to have the evidence talked through. After reviewing all the evidence carefully, the tables turned from guilty to not guilty. Each juror brought different experiences and personalities to the jury room. The two that were forceful with their opinions and their reasonings to decide either way we're jurors #8 and #3.

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.