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.
Honesty is a very important trait to have. The eighth juror from 12 Angry Men believes that honesty is of great importance. Not much is known about Mr. Davis, or any of the jurors at the beginning of the movie. As the plot develops, however, the nature of each character is revealed to the audience. It is easy to see that one of Mr. Davis’ personality traits is honesty. Those who are honest are the most trustworthy, and are often the most loyal. Having complete honesty will get anyone far in life, whether it be through a job, marriage, friendship, or really anything at all, (unless they decide to become a lawyer.) After watching the film 12 Angry Men, it is easy to see that the eighth juror
Click here to unlock this and over one million essaysGet Access
Similarly ,In Twelve Angry Men Juror 8 is a smart and moral juror who is willing to stand against all the other jurors for what he thinks is right. He is the main protagonist who believes a boy accused with murdering his father deserves a discussion prior to a guilty verdict. Although all the other jurors initially voted guilty, juror 8 believed that the jurors should not “send a boy off to die without talking about it first”(Juror 8, 12). Throughout the play Juror 8 combats the pressure from the other Jurors to just vote guilty and manages to convince his fellow Jurors one by one that there in fact is “reasonable doubt”(Judge, 6) and convinces them to arrive at a “not guilty”(Juror 3, 72) verdict. Reginald Rose extols Juror 8’s pursuit of justice through his success. Not only did Juror 8 stand by his principles and have the courage to stand against all the other Jurors, he also had the wits to convince his fellow jurors to change their verdict. Through these actions Juror 8 brings justice to the courts of New York city saving the life of a young boy.
The 1957 film version of 12 Angry Men depicts the nature of a small group setting. Within this film, we can see the group as a system, the development of group climate, and the different roles portrayed in a group. Eleven out of the twelve jurors voted the boy on trial guilty when they were initially asked their vote. Later throughout the movie, the group went into detail on the trail, thanks to Juror 8, and eventually changed their vote. If it weren't for the call for communication on the topic, the boy who was being tried would have been sentenced to death.
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
Twelve Angry Men, a play by Reginald Rose, was written in 1955 at a time when America was involved in a cold war with communist countries. It shows the strength of a deliberative process that enables individuals, who have “nothing to gain or lose,” to reach a verdict. In the American jury system “everybody deserves a fair trial” and in Twelve Angry Men the defendant gets a very fair trial. All the jurors have their own opinions on the case but in the end a decision is made. The jury, and the audience, never discovers if in fact the defendant did murder his father. His guilt or innocence seems to be almost
In the film 12 Angry Men, a group of twelve jurors are deciding the fate of a young boy accused of murdering his father. Throughout the juries dilleration, one man exhibits all of the qualities of leadership. This man is juror number 8 played by Henry Fonda. Fonda not only exhibits the the 10 qualities of a leader but he uses these qualities to lead the entire jury to a vote of not guilty (Fonda & Lumet, 1957).
In the movie 12 Angry Men, the jurors are set in a hot jury room while they are trying to determine the verdict of a young man who is accused of committing a murder. The jurors all explain why they think the accused is guilty or not guilty. Throughout the movie they are debating back and forth and the reader begins to realize that even though the jurors should try to not let bias cloud their judgement, the majority of the jurors are blinded by bias. The viewer can also see that the jurors have their own distinguishable personalities. Their personalities intertwine with each other to demonstrate how the jury system is flawed, but that is what makes it work.
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
Unlike Juror 3 Juror 8 is open and even welcomes others’ opinions. He was the only one to vote not guilty at the beginning of 12 Angry Men. He was not an appointed leader and throughout the course of this film he develops into an emergent leader. Juror 8 uses democratic leadership as he focuses on serving the needs of someone else and pointing out the severity of the issue they are deciding on and that a life is at stake. A democratic leader “understand(s) that these challenges are being made to present all sides of the issue and arrive at a better answer” (Kraemer, 2011). Juror 8 wants people to talk it through and make sure they have properly evaluated every side of the reason for being guilty or innocent and a just decision is made. He used
The film “12 Angry Men” gives the audience insight as to how jury deliberations work. The film follows 12 jurors throughout the process of finding the defendant’s sentencing. The jury is overseeing a case surrounding a young boy who is charged with the murder of his father. It was interesting to see the process of this paired with the way each character’s vote had an effect on each of the other juror’s decisions. The film “12 Angry Men” portrays a realistic fluctuation of stances in a room of jurors as a whole and individually based upon the prior experiences and ethics of each juror.
Twelve Angry Men, is a play written by Reginald Rose. The play is about the process of individuals and a court case, which is determining the fate of a teenager. It presents the themes of justice, independence and ignorance. Rose emphasises these three themes through the characters and the dialogue. Justice is the principle of moral rightness or equity. This is shown through juror number eight who isn’t sure whether or not the boy is actually innocent or guilty, but he persists to ask questions and convinces the other jurors to think about the facts first. Independence is shown through both juror number three and ten. They both believe that the defendant is guilty until they both realise that they can not relate there past experiences with
When placed in a group with different personalities, you have to find a way to work and communicate effectively as a team; of course you’ll find yourself stuck at times because of certain barriers such as the lack of communication between members. However, group members have to find the ability to work together as a team. In the film “12 Angry Men,” we see a group of jurors who have to decide whether the defendant has committed the crime or is presumed innocent throughout a capital murder trial. As the audience, we witness how challenging it was for the jury to deliberate on a verdict and come to a true consensus because of the different personality role, and negotiation strategies. Specifically, I found six jurors
In the novel “twelve angry men” prejudice affects the choices of the vote and I believe that when you decide, certainty is best, so you should probably base your opinion on facts. So I stand and say that I would have voted no and that I and the rest of the jury should discuss further. In the novel, it is often described by how awful of a life this boy had and how wrongfully treated he had been. So juror number eight felt the need to give him a chance. “He had a pretty terrible sixteen years. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That's all.” Showing justice is what it's all about and that is one of the reasons I would stand by these words and that boy. The first statement holds the following, the word of justice, a word defined as being fair
Twelve Angry Men does quite a fantastic job of setting up a hypothetical situation in which the audience is exposed to quite a well developed plot that entails an interesting metamorphosis of character between the twelve jurors. At first glance, it would be easy to want to condemn most of the men as immoral, however taking into account Hursthouse's three core ideas of virtuosity many of the men exhibit these traits once critical thinking finally takes hold over their judgment. All three core ideas can be seen by a vast majority of the jurors and thus will examine how the following traits come to manifest: “the right thing to do is what a virtuous agent would do in the circumstance”, “a virtuous person is one who has and exercises the virtues”, and “a virtue is a character trait that a person needs in order to have eudaimonia” (Jacobus 402) . Conversely, one character in particular will push against these morale codes, at least until the bitter end.
The character of Davis, played by Henry Fonda, used persuasion to help convince the other jurors of why the defendant was not guilty. He was able to read the other jurors, and actively listened to what was being said. He was able to establish credibility by maintaining his composure, he gave a positive impression of himself to the others, and establish his trustworthiness. He would
The 1957 movie twelve angry men tell a complete story of what it is like to be on a jury for a murder case in which they chose whether or not a kid should live. For the start of the movie you soon realize that the twelve men all have different core values. What is noticed soon turns out to be true in the coming minutes with the group sitting down and beginning to vote. With one lone person stating not guilty. That juror was named Mr. Davis. Mr. Davis leads everyone into grunts and groans as he tries to persuade the other eleven jurors to switch the vote. The most noticeable thing that has happened through the movie analysis is how well the college, student body reflects the core values as three of the jurors. The movie shows three specific types of core values connecting to the college student logical thinking, wisdom, and lastly emotional attachment.