12 Angry Men

The original 1957 classic "12 Angry Men" is the film based on the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt.

The story begins in a courtroom where an 18-year old boy from a New York city slum is on trial for allegedly stabbing his father to death. Final closing arguments are presented, and the judge then instructs the jury to decide whether the boy is guilty or not. The twelve-man jury retire to a private room where they have immediately decided that the boy is guilty and plan to return their verdict quickly without any discussion. A preliminary vote is taken and the result is 11:1 in favor of the the guilty verdict. Eleven jurors have raised their hand for the guilty verdict except for one, juror #8. Only one vote is holding them back and now they have to discuss the trial once again. Juror #8 who voted not guilty refuses to just jump to conclusions and brings up incredible possibilities that can always make a man think of "reasonable doubts." The rest of the film's focus is the jury's difficulty in reaching a unanimous verdict. As time goes on, some of the jurors change their minds and find that there is enough reasonable doubt not to convict and by the end, all the jurors reach a unanimous decision of not guilty.

The film was an excellent courtroom drama with a unique twist. Instead of following the trial itself, the viewers have the chance to observe the events behind close doors of a jury room. The entire film takes place within one room, enabling all attention to be focused on the details of the case. The plot of the film is excellent and it's fascinating to see what little things can influence which way a verdict goes. Once the deliberations really hit their stride and the arguments are flying back and forth, the film never fails to fascinate.  With quiet probing, one juror appeals to curiosity, truth, and intellect over emotional hysteria, popular opinion, and snap judgments.

The film's greatness lies in its bringing together twelve different men who have never met each other before and the interaction of their characters as each man brings his own background and life experiences into the case. The characters are not given names and are only known as juror numbers. The characters themselves are so cleverly developed that even after a small amount of dialogue you can see the cross section of society sitting around the table becoming apparent, a very ordinary group of men. There are no bad guys or good guys. All you see is a group of men, each one having a slight difference in attitude, who initially believe they are right with their views.

Lizzy  =)