NOW WATCH...

12 ANGRY MEN
A movie review from Adrian Kang

BASIC INFORMATION

Rating: 8.9/10
Movie: 12 Angry Men
Director: Sidney Lumet
Genre: drama 
Made in 1957
Running time: 96 minutes

“12 Angry Men” has an interesting

plot with a twist. Twelve juries
unanimously decide whether or
not the accused is guilty of
murdering his father. The pieces
of evidence provided in the court
indubitably portray that the
accused is guilty of the murder.
However, one jury alone claims,
“Not guilty.” The fire is on. It’s 11:1.
Can the man persuade all the
other men in the room to prevent
the boy from being electrocuted
to death? Listen to the juries’
discussions and stream of
thoughts connected one after
another.
Jury number 8, the protagonist of this movie, is a brave young man. Five minutes was
enough for the 11 men to vote “guilty,” but jury number 8 stands against them and
says, “It takes a great deal of courage to stand alone even if you believe in something
very strongly.” Throughout the movie, jury number 8 receives a lot of criticisms from
the other men. Regardless, he unwaveringly challenges the wide-spread belief alone.
He also shows humanity when he says, “There were eleven votes for ‘guilty.’ It's not
easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.”
Lastly, he is very logical when he casts doubt on the pieces of evidence.  He uses step-
by-step reasoning to verify whether the facts can confirm that the accused is guilty of
murder; he asserts, “Facts may be colored by the personalities of the people who
present them.”

While jury number 8 attempts to

approach the problem with fair
logic and reasonable doubt, other
juries display apathetic, selfish, and
stubborn images of themselves. Jury
number 7 shows selfishness and
lack of empathy towards the
accused when he changes his
verdict from guilty to not guilty just
to end the council early to go watch
a baseball game. Jury number 3 sees
the case with colored lenses. He
cannot stay non-judgmental as jury
number 3 himself was once hit by
his son in the face, and he
automatically assumes that the
accused would have acted violently
towards his father as well Overall,
the other juries represent different
examples of social injustice and
misunderstanding that people may
encounter in their lives.
 This movie mainly focuses on communicating
the theme that we should challenge even the
most upright truth if you think it might be
wrong. The first man who had claimed, “Not
guilty,” is refuted by the other 11 men.
However, that man stands bravely on his own
and starts casting doubt on the testimonial
and tangible evidence. With the presumption
of innocence in mind, some of the other men
start to think that the accused may indeed be
innocent. The movie also delivers a message
that human life is precious. Jury number 7 is
quick to claim the boy guilty in hopes of
wanting to go watch a baseball game.
However, when a number of men shout for
“Not guilty,” he changes his mind to “Not
guilty.” Then, one of the men criticizes his
action, arguing, “Who tells you that you have
the right to play with this young man’s life?”
With clear criticisms towards jury number 7
who chose a baseball game over a decision
that may take a human life, the director
conveys a message that all human life should
be respected.

One of the merits of this movie is that it has a plot that nobody could have ever
expected. The twist in the plot, which involves the protagonist’s persistence and
logical thinking, will keep you on your toes. If you are interested in lawsuits or if
you are an law student, you need to watch this movie. The central message of
the movie which spotlights the presumption of innocence will attract your
interests and may help you in the court. Furthermore, anyone who likes
detective movies or other movies that concentrate on logical processes would
like this movie since the movie proceeds with the question, “Is it  possible that
the accused may not be guilty based on the testimonial and physical evidence
provided in the court?”
Although this movie was made in 1957, its overall auditory quality is not bad
so as to interfere with understanding the dialogue. However, in some scenes,
the mumbling sounds may hinder people engaging in this movie because of
the broken flow of logic and interactions which could ultimately make the
audience lose their ability to concentrate. Moreover, the director of the film
does not explain the plot; the movie does not show what actually happens in
the court. Therefore, the audience must extract the essence of the plot based
on the juries’ discussions. If the audience fails to listen to or understand what
one jury said about the material presented in the court, the missing gap will
hinder the audience from understanding the sequence of ideas. Thus, the
movie may have been better if more information was explained at the
beginning.

Overall, this movie, the 12 Angry

Men, is a great movie with
provoking messages: never lose
courage while challenging the most
popular belief and always respect
human life. Although made in 1957,
the movie does not lack
characterization or theme and
delivers its point that is relevant to
modern society. The well-organized
dialogues and the smooth verbal
flow present a story that nobody
could anticipate. “12 Angry Men” is
not only a great storyteller but also
a powerful public speaker, and our
hearts will abide by its central
message.