Preview

Twelve Angry Men

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1445 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Twelve Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men is a classic movie depicting how one determined leader can alter an entire crowd. Through dedication, curiosity, and the pursuit for the truth he is able to persuade a group of twelve to second guess even themselves. Within this heterogynous group are a dozen different personalities - some of which were leaders and most of which were not. The strongest leader in this movie by far is the Architect in the White Suit. Right off from the beginning at the original vote the Architect stated clearly his position in the matter. Against the rest of the group he strongly held his ground and fought for what he believed. Most people in his position would have changed their opinion immediately after realizing that he was completely outnumbered. …show more content…
He acted as the leader for the people who believed the defendant was guilty. He, like the Architect, is a natural born leader. He loudly argued his opinions about the case and refused to back down from his stance. Even in the end when he was completely out numbered he fought for his belief despite the persuasion of others. He couldn't care less what they thought of him. He was there to do his job and wouldn't be easily influenced by others. He perhaps was influenced by the pulling tactics. He used the tactics of legitimating. He tried to convince the group that they were there to protect democracy. A man had committed murder and needed to be punished for it. He was so overshadowed by the rules that he missed the humanity in the situation. He was in effect referencing the higher authority and the rules that needed to be followed. The government says that a murderer must be punished and he was going to see to it. He also uses pushing tactics with pressure. He threateningly reminds the other that a murder has occurred and that the accused must be punished. He makes them feel guilty when they even consider for a moment that the accused may be not at fault. When the jurors slowly change their minds he becomes very defensive and tries to make the others feel like they're screwing up by feeling the way they …show more content…
In the first vote, the Old Man raises his hand last only after seeing what the other members all voted. Clearly he was a follower of the crowd. Yet sometime between that vote and the next he led a personal fight within himself to overcome his lack of leadership skills and make a brief but powerful leadership stance. Standing up to the crowd he made an argument that theres more to this case than what they've looked at and that he wants to consider the details more. Really his argument was nothing more than that and he made little contribution to the group after. But for the two minutes in the movie that he made his change of vote he completely altered the fate of the case. However he was not driven to do this because of his natural ability to lead. Instead he had an insurgence of ethics and voiced his priceless opposition. Had he remained silent the group would have been swayed the other direction and left right then. This decision is by far the most valuable one made in the movie and it completely altered the fate of the trial and the boys

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    3. Juror #8 displayed this ability throughout the entire movie. He always had a persuasive but yet argumentative approach to the deliberations. His relevant use of his perspective to others is what gave him the ability to sway others to his direction.…

    • 336 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory 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

    The leader in the beginning of the deliberation was the high school football coach, juror number one. He tries to keep order in the hostile jury room. The role evolve to the Architect in the course of the film because he was the only odd ball in the room who vote not guilty and he manage to change everyone vote by the end of the film. His successful strategies for leading the group include encouraging equal and inclusive participation and taking time to deliberate slowly.…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1.How do you think you might have acted as a juror in this case ? How would you had interacted ?…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In today’s fast-paced world we often find ourselves making hasty, split-second decisions on the seemingly unimportant matters with which we are faced. According to The Critical Thinking Handbook “...critical thinking evaluates reasons and brings thought in line with...” our best sense of what is true enabling us come to insightful conclusions on which we base our actions. In Twelve Angry Men a group of twelve ordinary citizens are faced with an important choice whose consequence is the fate of a sixteen-year-old boy accused of killing his father. Initially deemed an open-shut-case, throughout the play we witness the jurors, under the direction of Juror 8, slowly break down the evidence and testimony on which they later base their final verdict. Each juror with his unique approach to reasoning raises important arguments, suggesting both the innocence and guilt of the accused and further adding to the complexity of the case. In Twelve Angry Men, three pieces of evidence that proved crucial in shifting the jury in favor of acquittal were the murder weapon, the old man’s testimony, and that of the woman who claimed to have seen the murder from across the street.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Judge Danforth was not an effective judge, because of his power thirst, and self centered mindset. Judges should be held and strive to the highest level of integrity. Good judges are impartial and fair. Danforth, on the other hand, worried about his reputation too much. As a result of Danforth not being impartial, the trial was taken way out of proportion, and innocent village people…

    • 589 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages

    right way. He is patient , tolerant and thinks about reasonable doubt. Even tho juror 8 was shadowed by…

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Imagine having to decide a young boy’s fate who is accused of murder in the first degree. This is the case in “Twelve Angry Men”, the prize-winning drama written by Reginald Rose. Some jurors address relevant topics, while others permit their personal “judgments” from thoroughly looking at the case. After hours of deliberation, the jurors reached the decision that the boy is not guilty, due to the fact of reasonable doubt. While few jurors are motivated by their respect and determination for the justice system, Juror 10 is motivated by his personal prejudice.…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a play about a young boy on trial for murdering his father. If the boy is found guilty, he will be sentenced to death. The jury men are very aware of this fact, most are perfectly fine with sending this boy to die as one man searches for the empathy of his jury peers. One by one the jury begins to sway toward the not guilty plea, as every fact thrown into conversation gets disproved. Now, one lone juror faces not the pressure of his peers but the pressure of his emotional attachment to the case to see that the boy be punished. This finally leads to Juror #3’s inevitable surrender of not guilty.…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a very interesting play about an unfortunate young man, who was convicted of killing his dad. The worst part was, the young man was only nineteen, and his life was just starting. The jurors listened to all the evidence, then came the hard part, making the decision: guilty, or innocent. Eleven jurors said guilty and only one said innocent. There was a lot of peer pressure involved. I decided to write about different peer pressures three of the jurors used. The three jurors I picked are juror #10, juror #7, and juror #8.<br><br>The first juror I want to write about is #10. Juror #10 was using a lot of sarcasm, whenever he was trying to prove his point, or prove someone else wrong. I think that this method of peer pressure is one of the most powerful ones. I believes so, because when you are embarrassed in front of 11 other people (in this case jurors) you do not know, really lowers your self-esteem. It may lower it to the point where you will say guilty, eve though deep down inside, you will feel that the person is innocent. This is a quote I picked to illustrate sarcasm skillfully used by #10: "You're a pretty smart fellow, aren't you?" I think this one sentence could really put anyone down, and make anyone feel embarrassed, and maybe stupid. <br><br>Another juror I decided to write about is #7. He was muscle flexing most of the time. Muscle flexing means, he was raising his voice, even screaming at everyone, as if he was the boss. Whenever #8 was trying to present reasonable arguments to the rest of the jurors, #7 would start screaming, even jumping out of his chair, calling seven crazy. Although a lot of evidence was really convincing, he tried to prove it unconvincing and use sarcasm to convince other jurors otherwise. One example of #7 using sarcasm would be this quote: "Why don't we have them run the trial over..." I think this quote clearly shows that juror #7 is trying to convince other jurors, that court's evidence proves the young man is…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jury Trial Research Paper

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Mr. Simpson was on trial for the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Brown Simpson and her friend Ronald Goldman. Simpson had a team of defense attorneys on his side, most famous being Johnny Cochran. He came forth with the famous line “if the gloves don’t fit, you must acquit”. The jurors found the verdict to be not guilty on all charges. This impacted the case in a huge way. People say that O J walked due to the fact that it was a jury trial, he was a famous football star and actor with many fans. Due to the fact that he was a celebrity, he probably had fans within the jurors which were a huge advantage for him. Even though he was found not guilty on all charges doesn’t make him innocent. A jury trial has many pros and cons.…

    • 1140 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The American jury system, wherein citizens are judged by their peers, is one of the most democratic in the world. Nonetheless our system is far from perfect. There are many dangers in a system in which humans are asked to make decisions that could mean life or death for another person. Bias ranks amongst these dangers for it can affect the way jurors interpret testimonies and facts. Indifference is another factor; it too, can heavily affect a juror’s thinking. Personal feelings and experiences can stand in between a juror and the attainment of truth. The American jury system is intrinsically flawed in that it relies on intrinsically flawed humans to make life or death decisions…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 12 keeps to himself and seems distracted and not interested. He plays noughts and crosses and draws sketches of his advertisements. Cannot articulate his reasoning and changes his vote on multiple occasions…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve angry men, by Reginald rose demonstrates that humans are flawed. Rose shows the flaws across those involved with the trial including the defendant himself, the twelve jurors and the witnesses. The play shows that flaws are not only a negative but can be as a positive. The play advocates accepting the realities of our flaws so that we may carry on with our lives in the best way possible.…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    E’Ek rukaa hua faisla’’ , remake of Hollywood classic ’’Twelve angry men’’ an Oscar Winning Film widely used in Management Schools & corporate for understanding ‘HUMAN BEHAVIOR’ and “LEADERSHIP STYLES’ ….. Let’s take a look at the plot first to be familiar with this movie.…

    • 1326 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays

Related Topics