Throughout the movie 12 Angry Men, there were many factors that went into their final decision. All jurors except for one thought the young man pleaded guilty, but one by one began to believe he wasn’t guilty after all. Factors like the temperature, time, and past experiences affected the overall decision of the small group within this film. The temperature was a major factor to all of the jurors throughout the movie. It was stated to be the hottest day of the year that specific day and was shown to be very evident. All of the men were sweating and becoming very fractious the more they stayed in the room discussing the case. In addition, there were several complaints of no air conditioning and the fan not working that kept instigating an exasperated attitude to the jurors. The more irritable they became because of the heat, the more relentless the men were to talking through the evidence and possibly rethinking their vote. Later one once Juror #7 figured out how to operate the fan, all of their moods lightened and seemed more reasonable to consider both point of view’s. This factor plays a big part in our lives today. We don’t easily adapt to irregular temperatures, and often become irritable when we encounter them. For example, when sitting in a classroom with 30 others on a humid day, students often become very snarly and relentless to do any work. When we become too hot, we begin to sweat or when it’s too cold, we begin to shiver focus on the room temperature, and how
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 by Reginald Rose, the character development of the 7th juror highlights both the benefits and challenges of the jury system, illustrating the importance of critical thinking, personal biases, and the power of persuasion in the pursuit of justice. The character of the 7th juror undergoes significant development throughout the play, initially demonstrating a lack of engagement and a desire to reach a quick verdict. At the beginning, he seemed more concerned with attending a baseball game than carefully considering the evidence presented in the case. However, as the deliberations progress, he begins to take his responsibility more seriously, engaging in thoughtful discussions and reconsidering his initial assumptions. “For group decision-making, it is crucial to obtain information from each member in a way that they are independent.
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.
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
In “12 Angry Men,” the murder case of a 19-year old is being decided by 12 jurors. In the opening scene, a near-unanimous decision is reached at a guilty verdict by all the jurors except juror number 8. Throughout the movie, through use of rhetoric, juror number 8 attempts to convince the other jurors of the innocence of the defendant. A thorough examination of the evidence he presents can show why this goes on for two hours, rather than a shorter period.
All twelve jurors had to be confined in the same room for however long it took for them to reach the outcome decision of the kid. The jurors showed signs of being very hot in the room, they were sweating and drinking plentiful amounts of water during the decision making process. The jurors were all arguing and some arguments almost led to physical altercations. Juror number seven was very sweaty and was very tired of discussing the verdict of the accused. Juror number seven had baseball tickets to a game and was ready to be out of the courtroom. Due to being hot, sweaty and impatient to get to his ball game it caused him to reverse his decision of what was originally guilty to now not guilty. Being in a closed hot room with twelve people caused hunger, thirst and people anxious to get out. They did open up the window and get the fan to work but it did not seem to help their decision to get out any
The film Twelve Angry Men which was produced in 1957, demonstrates how a jury room took place in the 1950’s. The whole film except the first few minutes of it, takes place in a jury room without air conditioning. It demonstrates how steamy and tense things can get between jurors when it comes to deliberating a case. It is apparent that the theme of this film is justice. Why should this 18-year-old boy who could possibly be innocent, receive the death penalty when he still has a whole life ahead of him? The jurors deliberated on the trial of a first-degree murder case of this young boy who was accused of stabbing and killing his father. Their opinions are expressed and all evidence is presented in order to conclude the verdict of the boy.
The group type presented in the film 12 Angry men appears to be a task group. Task groups typically come together to accomplish a specific charge. In this case, their task was to decide a verdict of guilty or not guilty for the boy on trial. According to our text, some feature of this task group would include those listed under the “teams” category such as appointed leadership and focus on a specific task or charge. The members’ bond is simply there interest in the task, as they have no previous relationship. The composition of the group is based on their common interest, shared purpose, and investment in community through their task on the jury. The communication style began as being relative to the task and low member self-disclosure. I believe near the middle and end of the movie the communication moved into more informal member-to-member discussion, formulation and implementation of tactics and strategies for change. We began to see higher member self-disclosure in relation to social problems – both under the teams approach. (Toseland & Rivas, 2012, p. 30)
The movie Twelve Angry Men is about the twelve jurors that could adjust their influence in a decision-making process for conviction an eighteen years-old boy, whether the boy guilty or not guilty in murdering of his father. It represents a perfect example for applicable of a work group development framework. It also has examples of influence techniques among a group’s members. This paper is looking at those specific examples in the movie and focusing in analysis the reasons why Juror 8 is so much more effective than others in the meeting.
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.
The seventh juror, the baseball fan, played a self-centered role because he was more concerned about the Yankees’ game than the trial. He was one of the more difficult jurors because he made inappropriate remarks and jokes, he didn’t contribute very much to the discussion, he insulted a few of the other jurors, and he changed his vote without having a reason other than, “I don’t think he’s guilty.” Henry Fonda’s character was an architect and who played a task and maintenance role. He was the first person to say not-guilty and started the entire discussion which ultimately made everyone change their vote to not-guilty. The ninth juror, the wise elderly man, played a maintenance role. At one point in the movie the architect decides that after a vote he would say guilty if the rest of the jury still voted guilty. After the vote, the old man was the only person to change to not-guilty because he felt that standing alone isn’t easy and he wanted to hear more facts about the trial. The tenth juror, the garage owner, was a self-centered bigot and seemed to stick to the fact that the accused was guilty because of his race or social level. After a while it seemed that the race of the accused was the only grounds that he had to argue
It is not until the end of the film that the audience fully understands why Juror #3 is hostile and angry. He hinted earlier in the movie that his son and he got into a fight and his son left. This anger that he shows through the movie is the anger that he has for his son leaving. Because of this anger, he does not think critically. He heard the basic facts and made his decision off of that. Without questioning the evidence, he is quick to form an opinion and defend it despite the other details presented by the other jurors. He lacks the ability to successfully critically think because he does not analyze the evidence nor does he present his own arguments skillfully. He only defends his stance based off of personal pathos which hinders his ability to critically think.
When they all came into the deliberation room, everyone seemed to be getting along together. After the first vote, eleven of the twelve jurors turned against the one who voted not guilty. This one juror slowly begin to gain relationships with the other jurors and begin to win their trust in what he was saying. There were also points when relationships were troubled due to prejudice. The juror who was not from the United States and the juror from the poorer part of town were both discriminated against due to where they were from hindering the relationship of the group. In the end, I think they had a built a relationship that trusted each other.
This essay will compare & contrast the protagonist/antagonist's relationship with each other and the other jurors in the play and in the movie versions of Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men. There aren't any changes made to the key part of the story but yet the minor changes made in making the movie adaptation produce a different picture than what one imagines when reading the drama in the form of a play.
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.