At stake is the fate of a year-old boy who is on trial for the murder of his father.
If you only ever see one Black and White movie, make this it. This film blew me away however; how ignorant can I be about old films? What strikes me most about this film is how progressive it is for its day. Indeed the issues this film makes about American society of the s, still ring true for western society today.
This film concerns twelve jurors debating the sentence of an 18 year old Puerto Rican boy who on the face of it, has no real alibi.
However one man, played brilliantly by Henry Fonda, is ill-at ease putting a young boy to death without even debating his case, much to the despair of the other jurors.
What especially struck me about this film is how ordinary most of the characters are, none of the jurors are shown to be especially bad men, indeed most are portrayed as honest everyman type people. The use of ordinary characters is the films master-stroke because as one by one they begin to question their initial instincts, the flaws of society that have let this Puerto Rican boy down are presented to the audience.
Tragically it appears that many of the issues that were beginning to be discussed in the s have only got worse.
For me there is one immortal comment in this film: How ironic is it that some grumpy old men of today who may not even of have been born when this films was made, still say exactly the same thing?
Finally a quick look at the cast shows that Fonda aside many of the cast were only moderately successful after this film. I urge you all, if you have not yet seen this film, please do so now. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote. The over-used term "classic movie" really comes into its own here!
Even had it BEEN as good - so what? There could be few, if ANY film-goers reading this who are unaware of the plotline and in any event many others have re-hashed this for you. The brilliance of the film is evident in so many aspects.
Marshall, Jack Warden etc etc amongst them! Their very "ordinariness" is where the film succeeded. Everyone can identify with at least ONE of those characters. Whether or not he may WANT to is a different matter. Welcome to society folks! I dislike society in the main - doubtless a reason I found this film to be such a revelation.
Lumet, working within a minimal budget here, delivers unstinting brilliance in both direction, character portrayal and script interpretation. He had of course superb acting talent at his disposal although some of the most memorable performances are from the lesser players.
I think however he was to a great degree playing himself here, not to an audience. His, is a study in deliberation and logic not show-pony stuff, but hell that never WAS Fonda was it?
This is a great great movie, as is evidenced by the extremely high user-vote worldwide. My problem is that it is so perfect, so seamlessly polished, it is hard to appreciate the individual excellences.
The acting is top notch. I believe that monologue acting is quite a bit simpler than real reactive ensemble acting. Most of what we see today is monologues pretending to be conversations.
But in this film, we have utter mastery of throwing emotions. Once the air becomes filled with human essence, it is hard to not get soaked ourselves as the camera moves through the thick atmosphere.
Yes, there are slight differences in how each actor projects Fonda internally, Balsam completely on his skin The writing is snappy too.
You can tell it was worked and worked and worried, going through several generations. It is easy to be mesmerized by this writing and acting, and miss the rare accomplishment of the camera-work. This camera is so fluid, you forget you are in one room. It moves from being a human observer, to being omniscient, to being a target.
It is smart enough to seldom center on the element of most importance, so expands the field to all men.The adult point of view of a lower class teenager in the play 12 angry men by reginald rose american folklore a paper on the folktale the palatine The Value Analysis differentiates steps that add value in t Board of Directors.
The Adult Point of View of a Lower Class Teenager in the Play 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose ( words, 4 pages) 12 Angry Men EssayNo matter how many changes are made overtime, people are selfish.
Throughout the years, culture has changed, but values and human behavior has not. One of the "holy grails" of live network drama, the celebrated Reginald Rose play, Twelve Angry Men, is finally presented in what appears to be a complete kinescope (the kinescope found recently in a lawyer's personal effects).
However, due to the saturation availability of the Sidney Lumet theatrical version of the play, this Bob Cummings. Written by Reginald Rose, Twelve Angry Men was originally presented as a televised play on CBS's Studio One. The teleplay was broadcast in The teleplay was broadcast in By , Rose's drama was adapted into a stage play.
Activities and Handouts for the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose Twelve Angry Men (Juror This play was my first Drama in High School.
It was such a pleasure to perform in, as well as watch (as it was double-cast). Men. Rose won an Emmy for the script of Twelve Angry Men in He was nominated for an Academy award for his screenplay for the film version of Twelve Angry Men in Won a Writer's Guild of America Award for Best Written American Drama in for Twelve Angry Men.
In Rose was honored.