Benefit
Bluelighter
12 Angry Men is one of the finest films ever made, and certainly one of the best from the 1950s, a decade that didn't feature all that many enduring classics.
The plot is simple. Twelve men drawn from a broad cross-section of American society are sequestered in a jury room to deliberate on the fate of an 18 year old ethnic minority from the slums who is accused of stabbing his father in the chest. The case appears to be open and shut and everyone is eager to vote and get on with their lives. Henry Fonda, who turns in yet another stellar performance in a career that is full of them, is the only dissenting voice. He argues that the accused is entitled to at least a few minutes of discussion (the mandatory sentence for murder at that time being the death penalty).
The rest of the film revolves around Henry Fonda trying to convince the other 11 jurors to change their votes. It gradually reveals the facts of the case, as well as the personalities (and underlying prejudices, pasts and beliefs) of the diverse jurors who range from blue collar workers to advertising execs. It is an expert exploration of group dynamics and, more overtly, of the criminal justice system in this country. It tangentially treats some racial and socioeconomic issues, but does not explore them in depth.
The film is obviously based on a stage play due to the total dominance of dialogue and utter lack of conventional dramatic flair. It is twelve guys talking in a room for 100 minutes. The discourse is excellent, as is the interplay between characters. All the actors do a good job of internalizing the motivation and personalty of their characters. It's a very intelligent examination of the somewhat arbitrary nature of the US jury system - how the fate of another human being is subject to the whims of twelve total strangers.
Very well filmed, well acted and beautifully written. You might not think that a movie about twelve guys in a room talking for an hour and a half would be interesting, but if you don't have ADD then 12 Angry Men is a must see.
The plot is simple. Twelve men drawn from a broad cross-section of American society are sequestered in a jury room to deliberate on the fate of an 18 year old ethnic minority from the slums who is accused of stabbing his father in the chest. The case appears to be open and shut and everyone is eager to vote and get on with their lives. Henry Fonda, who turns in yet another stellar performance in a career that is full of them, is the only dissenting voice. He argues that the accused is entitled to at least a few minutes of discussion (the mandatory sentence for murder at that time being the death penalty).
The rest of the film revolves around Henry Fonda trying to convince the other 11 jurors to change their votes. It gradually reveals the facts of the case, as well as the personalities (and underlying prejudices, pasts and beliefs) of the diverse jurors who range from blue collar workers to advertising execs. It is an expert exploration of group dynamics and, more overtly, of the criminal justice system in this country. It tangentially treats some racial and socioeconomic issues, but does not explore them in depth.
The film is obviously based on a stage play due to the total dominance of dialogue and utter lack of conventional dramatic flair. It is twelve guys talking in a room for 100 minutes. The discourse is excellent, as is the interplay between characters. All the actors do a good job of internalizing the motivation and personalty of their characters. It's a very intelligent examination of the somewhat arbitrary nature of the US jury system - how the fate of another human being is subject to the whims of twelve total strangers.
Very well filmed, well acted and beautifully written. You might not think that a movie about twelve guys in a room talking for an hour and a half would be interesting, but if you don't have ADD then 12 Angry Men is a must see.
