12 Angry Men Film Analysis
Twelve Angry Men
Reginald Rose’s film, Twelve Angry Men, revolves around the decision of twelve white male jurors to confine a young Hispanic man behind a prison cell. Initially juror eight stood alone as he put forward a notion that human memory is fallible, and could not be relied on as evidence. Through the jurors, Rose captures the essence of what`s wrong in the american justice system. Rose pursues the concept of prejudice, status, racial discrimination, arrogance, justice and the need for it to be served in the justice system.
During the course of the film prejudice was instrumental in acting as the defining factor to prove whether the boy was guilty or not. Juror 3 on many occasions linked the case of a boy killing his father with his personal …show more content…
Juror 8 was instrumental in changing the racial discrimination discussion that came into play by the other jurors. Juror 10 on multiple occasions brought up the fact that the boy is hispanic and as such he was raised to be a killer and that he doesn't value life as much as they do. Through this event, Rose captures the core fault in the american justice system, racism.
Class was also a key factor in the decision of whether the boy was innocent or guilty. Juror 10 often repeated that where you are brought up influences who you are. As he done this he kept on reminding the jurors that the boy was raised in the “slums”. This really hit close to home for juror 6 as he was brought up in the slums as well. Which ultimately let to the unanimous verdict of not guilty. Through juror 10 and 6, Rose sets fourth the injustices of classism in the american justice system.
In conclusion, Rose expounds the corruption of the american justice system. He sets forward the gamble of being tried as someone who isn't from the same status or race as the
Reginald Rose’s film, Twelve Angry Men, revolves around the decision of twelve white male jurors to confine a young Hispanic man behind a prison cell. Initially juror eight stood alone as he put forward a notion that human memory is fallible, and could not be relied on as evidence. Through the jurors, Rose captures the essence of what`s wrong in the american justice system. Rose pursues the concept of prejudice, status, racial discrimination, arrogance, justice and the need for it to be served in the justice system.
During the course of the film prejudice was instrumental in acting as the defining factor to prove whether the boy was guilty or not. Juror 3 on many occasions linked the case of a boy killing his father with his personal …show more content…
Juror 8 was instrumental in changing the racial discrimination discussion that came into play by the other jurors. Juror 10 on multiple occasions brought up the fact that the boy is hispanic and as such he was raised to be a killer and that he doesn't value life as much as they do. Through this event, Rose captures the core fault in the american justice system, racism.
Class was also a key factor in the decision of whether the boy was innocent or guilty. Juror 10 often repeated that where you are brought up influences who you are. As he done this he kept on reminding the jurors that the boy was raised in the “slums”. This really hit close to home for juror 6 as he was brought up in the slums as well. Which ultimately let to the unanimous verdict of not guilty. Through juror 10 and 6, Rose sets fourth the injustices of classism in the american justice system.
In conclusion, Rose expounds the corruption of the american justice system. He sets forward the gamble of being tried as someone who isn't from the same status or race as the