But one of the other jurors brings up the fact that the woman wore glasses and wouldn't have had time to put them on before looking out her window. Henry Fonda Henry Fonda or juror number eight in the film is known as one of the 50 all-time greatest movie heroes. This new understanding of himself enables him to think more clearly and objectively. Probably he recognizes some voices like his and decides that it is time to set up a coalition strategy. In the United States, a verdict in most by jury must be unanimous. It also explores the power one person has to elicit change. This is one of the reasons why in the remake of the film in 1997 black actors participated as well and later there even women were introduced in the team for certain theatrical versions.
He refused to reason with others and absolutely believed that he was right. Adding to this, juror10 weights the value of the young boy less than the cost of a trial. Lesson Summary When a piece of literature has cultural value, it reveals values that are part of a society regardless of the generation. At first, each juror is convinced of his verdict except one. They took a vote to see were everyone stood on their decision and there were 11 guilty and 1 not guilty votes. Juror Three bristles at the need for the door to be locked. If found guilty, he will receive a.
Why would a young man kill his beloved father with a switchblade knife? It is not until Juror 8 is able to poke holes in the evidence that even Juror 10 realizes that he has reasonable doubt as to the defendant's guilt. Once they are all inside, the guard locks them in. The film is thus a purely naturalistic wonders where all the action happens in real time, except for the film's beginning and end, in one place. He has no opinion on this case and wants to leave as soon as possible. This is the case with Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men. By gradually lowering his camera, Lumet illustrates another principle of composition: A higher camera tends to dominate, a lower camera tends to be dominated.
She also told the audience of law students that, as a lower-court judge, she would sometimes instruct juries to not follow the film's example, because most of the jurors' conclusions are based on speculation, not fact. For example, if one reviews the testimony information, one realizes that its accuracy is significantly lowered. Juror 11 is a refugee from Europe who has faced many hardships and injustice. Secondly, it allows him to vent his frustrations. The purpose of this paper is to explore the creation of cooperative communities as well as positive leadership in group settings and additional practical implications. I would say that the most evident styles of conflict in the movie are accommodating, compromising and collaborating conflict resolution styles.
Davis casts a not guilty vote. This the key question during the murder trial of a young man accused of fatally stabbing his father. We learn that this is a murder case and that, if found guilty, the mandatory sentence for the accused is the death penalty. A group of men are given the job to deliberate the life of a young boy who has been accused of murdering his father. He lashes out against the accused kid because he cannot lash out against his own son from whom he is estranged. But the real problem is that they can't see problem around themselves, they can easily send innocent boy to electric chair, without asking themselves is this fair. The 1957 film, , can teach us a lot about the process of group communication — both the positive and negative aspects.
This brilliant film is based on the concept of a fair trial to a young man, aged eighteen, who has been accused of stabbing his own father to death. Marshall4A rational stockbroker, unflappable, self-assured, and analytical11th Jack Klugman 5A young man from a violent slum, a Baltimore Orioles fan3rd Edward Binns6A house painter, tough but principled and respectful6th Jack Warden7A salesman, sports fan, superficial and indifferent to the deliberations7th Henry Fonda8An architect, the first dissenter and protagonist. Positive Leadership and Group Practices Beyond the example of a cooperative community that was established among the jurors in 12 Angry Men, we can draw from the film examples of how leadership can minimize rivalries, constructively integrate opposing views, and contribute to developing effective coalitions. I read the novel and saw both movies but my favorite was the Broadway play we saw as a class. Juror 3 used the experience of his own son and applied it to the boy. Few filmmakers have been so consistently respectful of the audience's intelligence.
Words: 1304 - Pages: 6. It is safe to say that our actions, beliefs, and choices separate us from animals and non-livings. Six adds the testimony of the people across the hall who heard the father and son arguing earlier that night. Submitted By Bastet Words 525 Pages 3 12 Angry Men Film Analysis 25 October 2010 Film Analysis The film, 12 Angry Men 1957 , is a drama about a jury that was to decide the fate of a teenaged boy who was facing the electric chair for supposedly killing his father with a switchblade knife. Bibliography: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 13, 14 — Ellsworth, James, Laura Gini-Newman, and IlanChapter 2: Introducing Human Nature Danjoux. The first action scheme is when he places the similar knife on the table. Many times it may be difficult for a jury to come to such a significant conclusion.
The judge was very specific when he said that the decision must be unanimous. During the course of the debate within the jury room Juror 8 summarises the evidence presented and the conclusions drawn by his fellow jurors, by asking questions like, what do we know about that? The named Juror 8, played by , 28th. The reason is that by having a greater number of juries the system of justice achieves higher levels of democracy with less possibilities of getting unfair decisions combining the memory, the knowledge and the experience of each member and eliminates any prejudiced behaviors. He tells the jury that they must come to a unanimous verdict before the clerk dismisses them to the room where the entire play takes place. The cast included only one bankable star, Fonda, but the other 11 actors were among the best then working in New York, including , Lee J.