Juror 7 Jack Warden has an ingrained mistrust of foreigners; so, to a lesser extent, does Juror 6 Edward Binns. However, Juror 9 reveals it was he that changed his vote, agreeing there should be Twelve angry men does the discussion.
At the end of the film, he reveals to Juror 9 that his name is Davis, one of only two jurors to reveal his name; played by Henry Fonda. Most of the others turn their backs to him.
Juror 8 suggests a secret ballot, from which he will abstain, and agrees to change his vote if the others unanimously vote "guilty". If found guilty, the boy will receive a death sentence. Lumet stated that his intention in using these techniques with cinematographer Boris Kaufman was to create a nearly palpable claustrophobia.
Juror 9, seeing Juror 4 rub his nose which is being irritated by his glasses Twelve angry men does the, realizes that the woman who allegedly saw the murder had impressions in the sides of her nose, indicating that she wore glasses, but did not wear them in court out of vanity.
He is the eleventh to vote "not guilty"; played by E. Jurors 10 Ed Begley and 11 George Voskovecso certain of the infallibility of the Law, assume that if the boy was arrested, he must be guilty. Jurors 3, 4 and He is polite and makes a point of speaking with proper English grammar.
Sidney Lumetwhose prior directorial credits included dramas for television productions such as The Twelve angry men does the Hour and Studio Onewas recruited by Henry Fonda and Rose to direct. Marshall is an advocate of dispassionate deductive reasoning.
He is the fourth to vote "not guilty"; played by George Voskovec. Juror 11 also changes his vote, believing the boy would not likely have tried to retrieve the murder weapon from the scene if it had been cleaned of fingerprints.
As Fonda persuades the weary jurors to re-examine the evidence, we learn the backstory of each man. A European watchmaker and naturalized American citizen who demonstrates strong patriotism.
He finally loses his temper and tears up a photo of him and his son, but suddenly breaks down crying and changes his vote to "not guilty", making the vote unanimous. He is the second to vote "not guilty". A flop when it first came out surprisingly, since it cost almost nothing to makeTwelve Angry Men holds up beautifully when seen today.
Weiler of The New York Times wrote, "It makes for taut, absorbing, and compelling drama that reaches far beyond the close confines of its jury room setting. Juror 12 then reverts his vote, making the vote 8—4. Some jurors just want to avoid this whole annoying process.
A wisecracking salesman and sports fan. Shortly after, a thunderstorm begins. He is the only juror to change his vote more than once during deliberations, initially voting "guilty", and changing three times. Juror 8 accuses him of being a sadist. In a preliminary vote, all jurors vote "guilty" except Juror 8, who argues that the boy deserves some deliberation.
Had he not felt such sympathy, he might not have held out, which shows that people can be prejudiced in their insistence on lack of prejudice too.
Outside, Jurors 8 Davis and 9 McCardle exchange names, and all of the jurors descend the courthouse steps to return to their individual lives. Fonda later stated that he would never again produce a film. The experiment proves the possibility but Juror 5 then steps up and demonstrates the correct way to hold and use a switchblade; revealing that anyone skilled with a switchblade, as the boy would be, would always stab underhanded at an upwards angle against an opponent who was taller than them, as the grip of stabbing downwards would be too awkward and the act of changing hands too time consuming.
If there is any reasonable doubt they are to return a verdict of not guilty. Eleven of the jurors vote for conviction, each for reasons of his own. To start with, each juror has a different take on his civic duty: An assistant high school American football coach.
A simple representation of the criminal justice system might be named Twelve Serious Men, and portray those men as diligently, rationally, and single-mindedly going through the evidence until they uncover the facts that reveal what actually happened between the son and his father on the night of the murder.
When the remaining "guilty" voters are pressed to explain themselves, Juror 4 states that, despite all the previous evidence, the woman from across the street who saw the killing still stands as solid evidence.
Juror 3 gives a long and increasingly tortured string of arguments, building on earlier remarks that his relationship with his own son is deeply strained, which is ultimately why he wants the boy to be guilty. Juror 8 argues that reasonable doubt exists, and that he therefore cannot vote "guilty", but concedes that he has merely hung the jury.
Since many jurors were, in the end, trying their hardest to figure out what happened, the play also confronts us with the possibility that there is no room for an absolute idea of objective truth in any concept of justice where humans are involved.
Juror 5 then changes his vote.12 Angry Men is a American courtroom drama film adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose. Start studying TWELVE ANGRY MEN: MORE QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS. Learn vocabulary, terms, and more with flashcards, games, and other study tools.
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.
12 Angry Men Questions and Answers. The Question and Answer section for 12 Angry Men is a great resource to ask questions, find answers, and discuss the novel. Bringing the big screen to life with description and analysis of Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) in 12 Angry Men.
Jul 29, · '12 Angry Men' is an outstanding film. It is proof that, for a film to be great, it does not need extensive scenery, elaborate costumes or expensive special effects - just superlative acting. The twelve angry men are the twelve jurors of a murder case/10(K).Download