Preview

12 Angry Men: Movie

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1690 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men: Movie
12 Angry Men In a world where the jury is the voice of the people's justice, twelve men sit in a room poised to determine the fate of one boy's life. Did he do it? If he didn't, who did? Why would a young man kill his beloved father with a switchblade knife? The moment that the jury-comprised of twelve Caucasian men, abhorrent in today's society-entered the small, blank, bleak room, they had already come to the conclusion that the young man was guilty as charged without deliberation. One lone man stood his ground and had the guts to stand up to the others and profess that he believed the man could not be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt due to conflicting information. How could he prove it?
Through verbal and nonverbal communication, the one lonely juror convinced the other eleven men of the young man's innocence. One can never underestimate the power of persuasion; even in the face of extreme prejudice, bias, ignorance, and conflicting personalities the juror persevered. Juror number eight was clever, cunning, and persuasive in his arguments for a not guilty verdict. He was able to point out the inconsistencies of eyewitnesses and the lackadaisical representation of the court appointed attorney provided. The turning point for juror number eight’s argument came when he reenacted the scene of the murder to prove that the eyewitness could not have made the journey from his bedroom to the hallway in fifteen seconds. The jury came back with a not guilty verdict due to the unrelenting juror who believed in the innocence of one man.
One of the most profound scenes in the movie is the entrance of the jurors into the deliberation chambers of the courtroom and the initial vote. This scene shows the jurors in their glory as they begin to voice and discuss their thoughts and beliefs about the cases and the accused. The jurors’ perception of the boy was solid upon entering the jury room due to their stereotyping of the boy and his rearing. Many

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, juror 10 is a loud mouthed, racist bigot. He scolds people he doesn’t agree with and a low opinion of people living in slum areas. Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to waste any time debating on whether the defendant is guilty. His prejudice comes from the fact he used to live in the “slums” and considers people like the defendant to be “trash”. This is established when he states “well take a look at them…you can’t believe a word they say…they act different… they don’t need any big excuse to kill someone. (59) This man is very…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Analysis

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the movie twelve angry man, after the twelve jurors listened to the facts in the trail, the judge gives her instructions to them. The judge told them that the man could face the death penalty if he found guilty. The 12 man gather in a stifling hot room to have a concluding about the case. They start arguing and adding their own experience, culture, and understanding of people's motives as a way of reconsidering the facts. Although all the jurors had listened to the same stated facts and they were in the same situation, each one of them interprets the facts differently. This reflects the differences in people and the different ways that we view the same things.…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The movie 12 Angry Men depicts a typical scene today: twelve jury members meeting to discuss a case presented to them and determine guilt or innocence of a young man accused of killing his own father. Usually the jury room is a place for discussion and debate, but the evidence has swayed all but one of the jurors into voting guilty. The group in the movie is a jury of 12 men with various backgrounds and age groups. They were placed in a deliberation room where the entire move took place.…

    • 1676 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Eyewitness In 12 Angry Men

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages

    The film 12 Angry Men is about a murder trial conducted in a courtroom. The judge gave the jury its final instruction telling them that a guilty verdict will result in a death sentence for the defendant, an 18-year-old boy who was accused of murdering his father using a knife! One juror had a personal connection with the case. He has not seen his son for more than two years. He claims that the young boy is guilty and that all young kids are criminals. The juror has bias towards the trial because he see his son in the young boy. Out of the twelve jurors, eleven jurors voted for conviction. Another juror states that he has doubts about the case and hopes to give the boy a favorable decision. The young boy had a hard life living in the slum. A third juror claims that each of the…

    • 1026 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the drama Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, there are twelve jurors to discuss and deliberate if the murder in the first degree is guilt or not. Because the verdict must be unanimous, twelve jurors have a critical thinking in their discussion and finally made the vote from eleven jurors vote for guilty to unanimous vote for not guilty. During the development of the voting, Juror Three is hardly to persuade because he has a serious prejudice to the murder. If Juror Three does not admit the murder is not guilty, they cannot settle a lawsuit. Therefore, Juror Three’s prejudice should be the key to get the final verdict.…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Biased testimony towards the defendant resulted in a prejudice jury. Very frequently, statements like ‘We heard the facts, didn’t we?’ or ‘Pay attention to the facts’ are expressed in the jury room. The 4th Juror cited that the murder weapon was a knife so unique that ‘the storekeeper who sold it to him identified the knife in court and said it was the only one of its kind he ever had in stock.’ The 8th Juror argues that ‘It’s possible that the boy lost the knife and that someone else stabbed his father with a similar knife.’ None of the Juror’s believes this possibility as they have already established their prejudices against the accused. The 10th Juror says ‘Let’s talk facts. These people are born to lie… They think different. They act different.’ These are not ‘facts’ but prejudice opinions made by the 10th Juror about the socio-economic status of the boy. It can assumed that the ‘facts’ presented in this case can be viewed as biased opinions and reports that impairs the true facts.…

    • 853 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    A final piece of evidence comes from the murder weapon, which the boy admits he bought; the prosecution states that the switch knife is incredibly unique and is not sold in any of the nearby areas. However, a juror is able to find an identical knife sold in the same area, which once again proves there is a reasonable doubt in the case. Throughout the play it is made apparent that the defense for the boy was lacking, and they did not strike many of the necessary possible jurors during voir dire. For instance, Juror 10 is a complete bigot who believes anyone who comes from a poor area, like the boy, is not trustworthy. In the play the jurors unanimously decide on a not guilty verdict based on the untrustworthy evidence. After their hours of careful discussion, it is clear that their decision was not made hastily, which once again shows that the lacking defense led to the appearance of guilt. In this fictional case, many jurors pushed for a hung jury, however, ultimately it was decided that evidence made possibility for reasonable doubt, and delivered a not guilty…

    • 450 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    At the conception of Twelve Angry Men, Rose exposes the audience to the devastating heat in the jury room which over looks the "New York sky line" on what is described as "the hottest day of the the year". At this stage it is revealed to the audience the apathetic nature of jury members, uninterested in the "grave responsibility" they have in deciding the fate of the "16 year old boys life" and more interested with the goal of escaping the plain, oven like jury room. With each juror being blinded by the thick glaze of heat In front of them a verdict of guilty becomes the instinctive state of mind and the room for reasonable doubt is eliminated from all but one. The author, Reginald Rose displays through juror 8 that to be doubtful when challenging a majority becomes a harder state of mind, "as it's not easy to stand alone against the ridicule of other" at this moment juror 8 initiates his campaign that we can never be certain about anything, we can only make assumptions based on the information provided.…

    • 740 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Justice In 12 Angry Men

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages

    It’s the hottest day of the year in New York City, and 12 clammy men, who were put on a jury, are locked into a room, where the fan doesn’t work and the windows stick, to discuss the case of an 18 year old accused of murder. In the opening scene, the judge states that is it a first degree murder and if found guilty the teenager will receive the death penalty. The 18 year old is accused of killing his father with a “one of a kind” switch blade. The 12 jurors must decide if there is enough evidence to convict the teen of murder. When the initial vote is taken it is 11-1. The one vote for not guilty is juror eight, whose real name is Davis. He is a well-spoken man, wore a suit and tie and had his dark hair slicked back for the trial. Davis admits that he doesn’t know if the teen is innocent but says he could be. In the movie 12 Angry Men, Juror eight shows true justice…

    • 666 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve men from all walks of life were gathered in a small room to make a life-or-death decision of a 16-year-old boy on suspicion of murder of his own father. Eleven of twelve jurors were strongly convinced that the boy is guilty based on the evidences that suggest the boy is guilty. However, one of the jurors had reasonable doubt about it and started to convince the others. They started to look at the case and evidences precisely again, and discovered that those evidences are incorrect.…

    • 675 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    After six days of trial, now the jury needs to decide whether this eighteen-year-old boy is the murderer of his father. It is a hot afternoon, and 12 men are locked in the jury room to discuss the case. In the first vote, 11 men think the boy is guilty; only one doesn’t vote guilty simply because he thinks it is too soon to make this decision. The other men get angry about his words and try to show the evidence to persuade him: the noise heard by the old man living under stairs, the crime motive, the murdering scene seen by the woman across the EI line, the boy’s lies about the films he watched but cannot remember that night. Their words not only show their thoughts but their attitude to the boy and the whole case. Even though everyone gives a speech to change his mind, #8 juror doesn’t be convinced, yet under this pressure, he request another vote and promise to give up if other 11 still think the boy is guilty. Fortunately an old man besides him chooses to suppose him. Then as they continue to discuss the details, #8 juror and other jurors find more and more contradictions towards all the testimonies; through the disputation, each juror reveals their own mind obstacles and conquers their own prejudice. The vote changes from 10:2, 9:3, 8:4, to 11:1. In the end they convince the #3 juror who has personal prejudice to agree to the reasonable doubt.…

    • 2051 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    It only takes one man out of twelve to sway the minds of the rest of the people in the room. That is the main moral this story is trying to teach. It doesn’t matter quantity when it comes to opinions but the quality. Juror member number eight changed everyone’s mind in the jury from thinking the boy was guilty to not guilty. Juror eight did probably one of the hardest things in life, to stand up for your views when everyone else sees everything opposite from you. “It’s not so essay for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.” Juror eight even said so himself it wasn’t easy what he did, but he still followed through with it because he deeply believed the boy wasn’t guilty. Juror eight persuaded each other juror by proving each story of how the boy killed his father wrong. At the end, every juror did not have any reasonable doubt that the boy killed his father. Juror three was the last one to agree. “Well, you’re not going to intimidate me! I’m entitled to my opinion.” After a brief second he sucked up his stubbornness and voted not guilty. In the end it shows how one man can have a great influence on the minds of many.…

    • 420 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages

    3. “I’m going to kill you,” and the kid screamed it out at the top of his lungs. Don’t tell me he didn’t mean it. Anybody says a thing like that the way he said it, they mean it.…

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The movie 12 Angry Men is a very abstract movie. It gets the audience thinking about the clues and the fact of the matter which is if the boy is actually guilty. This movie shows many of the concepts that are talked about in our book and in our class. The movie is about an 18 year old boy whose mother has died when he was 9. He has lived in many orphanages and has a juvenile record. His father has been in and out of jail for many things, and on one night that the boy apparently kills him they have gotten into a terrible argument. The jury has to deliberate on whether or not the boy is guilty of killing his father. The minute the jury got into the holding room to talk about it, they immediately wanted to charge him with the guilty verdict so they can get out and about. Something that's done often in small groups so the situation is solved fast. This movie is mainly about prejudice and how they take a toll on our decision making and views.…

    • 772 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Throughout the film, there is seemingly more than one “leader” throughout the jury as according to Nick’s definition of a leader being that there were multiple influences and instances that persuaded the decisions of others. Initially the situation is composed of a biased and opinionated jury that is almost unanimously convinced the defendant is guilty. Throughout the scene, there is a slow but sure change of mind throughout the jury as the protagonist, Juror #8, successfully persuades the other jurors who initially voted the boy guilty of murder to further investigate and examine the fact which eventually leads to the confirmation and agreement of reasonable doubt among the jury.…

    • 520 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays