12 Angry Men is a magnificent display of the contemporary approach to the long-lasting human questions. It’s use of tools of the movie artform earns its author the place in the fine line of the classical movies. The feature questions the historical human prejudices by dissecting the unpaved road of the interpersonal relations. By breaking the conventions of industry, the film succeeds in questioning the human psyche beyond the settled norm and beliefs.
Closed environment of the Jury Room puts to a test the individual ethics by confining its members and delegating them with the responsibility of consensual decision of the life of another human being. This rather unusual and stressful situation swiftly exposes the individual approach towards
…show more content…
It touches to the deeper philosophical questions of the human justice system theory and philosophy of the world. The initial tally of 11:1 for a Guilty verdict exposes the dangers of the human prejudice. In those initial minutes of the feature, the majority of the jurors allowed themselves to trust the formal truth, rather than questioning it by the reason. Only by abandoning the self-interest and rising to the responsibility delegated, allows the Juror #8 to give a chance to the plaintiff, whose faith looked decided from the rest of the jury. Taking another human life seemed like a boring duty to the rest.
The communication professionals will find broad range of topics that the movie reveals for its audience. Besides being a clever dissection of the American society, the movie demonstrates the dangers of the collective decision making. System built on the concept of the “Reasonable doubt” could easy become pray of the personal indifferences. Analyzing historically it is hard to argue that there is a better approach or more fair system of justice. Even up to today the debate about the death penalty is up for a discussion, due to the accepted imperfections of the humanly designed
…show more content…
In the initiating stage of the deliberation, Juror #1 was quietly attempting to exercise the maintenance role. In the very beginning, when just Juror #8 was focused on the task role, the rest of the juror expressed openly just a self-serving role by rushing the conclusion of the deliberation and announcing a verdict without any attempt for discussion. Immediately after the Juror #9 joined the camp of the Doubters, the members of the camp took increasingly the task role in the group. The very latest to desert falling camp were Juror #4 and Juror #3. While Juror #4 strictly adhered to the task role by reinstating the argument of the prosecution, Juror #3 seized the opportunity for a personal retaliation and aligned to the very end of the deliberation to the self-serving
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
The jurors are transformed by the process of deliberating. Eleven men voted guilty because of their prejudices, fears, laziness and insecurities, but they are eventually persuaded by reason to give up these limiting beliefs, to see the potential in the facts, and to find justice. The critical turning points in the jury votes occur, not when there is passion and anger, but when there is reasoned discussion, as the rational Juror 8 triumphs over the prejudices of his fellow jurors. The facts of the case do not change, but the jurors come to see the facts differently, and change by the process they go through. Despite the hostility and tension created in this process, the twelve men end up reconciled, and justice is done.
People's bias and predispositions can affect their opinion of different circumstances and different people. This is very evident throughout the play. After the first group vote and juror 8 votes not guilty, a discussion ensues. It is there that
Through history people have tended to judge the lives of other by what they see on the outside, and completely disregard their actually character. “Stereotyping in the World” today has become a greater and greater problem has history moves on. Some have been known to look past these cases such as Reginald Rose’s book Twelve Angry Men. The play has been shown that one voice can change the thoughts of many by getting past the first layer and breaking it down to their inner person. Twelve Angry Men has showed the theme of “Stereotyping in the World” through the characters’ proper reasoning, communicating, and believing in good faith.
Bigotry is an unacceptable trait of a person's personality that not only causes that person to be intolerant, but it also causes problems for those around the person. When a person is not only judgemental, but intolerant to other people based on their beliefs, status or features, he becomes problematic and his ability to make a fair and honest decision is compromised. Bigotry is a problem frequently emphasized in Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose. This story takes us through the process of twelve men making a unanimous decision to determine if the defendant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Making such an important and impactful decision calls for a person to be uninfluenced, but while clouded with bigotry a fair verdict will be hard to obtain. Ten constantly has issues with giving the defendant a fair chance. He has very strong opinions against people of lower class and those opinions impact the group tremendously.Tens bigotry and bias against people of lower class causes setbacks and conflict between the other jurors and hinders their ability to see the defendant as anything but a troubled delinquent. This teaches readers the dangers of bigotry and intolerance. Being a bigot, bias, or even intolerance of any aspect of a person or their life clouds a person's ability to pass a fair and reasonable judgement.
Juror one, the foreman helped to keep the group orderly and the arguments from escalating further. The tenth juror was an obnoxious man with and prejudice towards people from the slums.
Juror 11 is a refugee from Europe. He is a watchmaker who speaks politely and deeply appreciates his democratic rights and freedoms and has no tolerance for those that don’t. He respects process, and wants others to do what is right. For the most part he is controlled in his emotions and we only really see him get fired up when juror 7 wants to change his vote simply to hurry the process so that he can make the baseball game for which he has tickets. He is disgusted that someone would not take their role seriously especially when a boy’s life is at stake. He pushes hard at the juror and demands that he explain why he changed his vote. He speaks with such conviction that seven
The film Twelve Angry Men shows many social psychology theories. This film presents some jurors who must decide if an accused murderer is guilty or innocent. In the beginning, all but one juror voted for guilty. Eventually, however, they come to a non-guilty verdict. It shows how a various group of individuals react to a situation that no one wants to be involved in. Twelve Angry Men exhibits so many examples of the true power of informational social influence and normative social influence. According to informational social influence, individuals tend to comply with others because they believe that another individuals version of a situation is more valid than their own. Normative social influence is a type of social influence that leads to conformity. This theory seems to fit in along with this movie because of the way the juror’s decisional processes went. Informational social influence is aggravated by obscurity and doubt of situation, importance of being correct, time constriction, and presence of those recognized as professionals. Just within the first few minutes of the movie, social influence is shown. In the jury room, a heated debate is prevented by an initial vote. This vote, which was taken publicly, was vulnerable to normative social influence or conformity from the fear of seeming in submissive. An obvious feeling of doubt is presented as the jurors vote. This hesitance can be perceived as weak conviction swayed by the guilty majority’s influence. Time constraints intensify informational social influence and possibly helped play a role in causing some of the jurors to cast guilty, conformist votes. Majority influence and social impact theory generate conformity. These theories are relevant in the jury context and are relevant to an explanation of Twelve Angry Men. Social impact theory specifies the situational and personal factors that bring on conformity. Conformity is enhanced by the immediacy element of social impact theory which brings to belief that without anonymity conflict is increasingly difficult. Perception of norms is apparently a factor that also brings out conformity. Stereotyping and prejudice were rampant at the time Twelve Angry Men was filmed. The director and writers cleverly
Several pairs of eyes trail the prosecutor as he puts forth his reasons as to why the defendant should be guilty. Several pairs of ears listen intently in a trance like mode, also cautious of every detail. The prosecutor presents the facts with great gusto, painting a picture of the defendant in a bad light. Once he is done, the defendant’s lawyer takes the stage and he too, with great effort, puts forth reasons as to why his client is innocent. In the end, when everything is said and done and it time for the verdict, only one voice answers to the court clerk out of the 12 men and women. These 12 people are the jurymen and they play an equally important role as the lawyers and judges of a court trial. In fact, a jury is the sole decider, based
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.
The jury on Twelve Angry Man was formed by common people that had a different experience in life, whose the background was unknown to everybody else. Those people were to do a simple task, declare if the boy were guilty or not. It seems to me that most of them didn’t want to be there, so they wanted to finish the trial as soon as possible, external factor such as the hot weather was affecting their thinking and how they view that boy. The first diversity problem is presented in the way they treat the boy, with bias and stereotypes. They assume that because the experiences the boy had in life and the place he grows up was a factor to consider his guilt.
These statements display that the 8th Juror, as an individual, know exactly what he has to do as a jury member and is also honest, moral and trustworthy enough to lead the other jurors. For that reason, we observer the 8th Juror stepping forward to become a ‘saviour’ of the jury system.
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.
Ignorance and racism are seeded deep within the nooks and crannies of our society. While it may not be visible at first glance I can assure you, it is engraved in the back of the brains of a portion of our population. A literary example of such behavior can be found in Twelve Angry Men, By Reginald Rose. The book is set in a jury room where 12 men debate the innocence or guilt of a teenage boy accused of murdering his father. However, one of the Jurors (Juror 10) has racist beliefs that greatly affect the debate. Should men like Juror 10 be on a jury?
3. Social identity (10 points): What role(s) does social identity play in the movie? Discuss SID in relationship of the jury to the accused. (Define your terms and give two examples of how they apply).