12 Angry Man

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 118
  • Published : January 22, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
12 Angry Men

By:

Zachary Bunting

Steven DiGirolamo

Jacob Timko

Daniel Troiano

May 1st, 2012

Table of Content:

Introduction ………………………………………………………………………. 1

Summary…………………………………………………………………………. . 1

Characters & Personalities………………………………………………………… 1

Tactics………………………………………………………………………….. … 3
Power……………………………………………………………………….. 3
Presentation of Facts………………………………………………………. 4
Emotions…………………………………………………………………… 5
Bias…………………………………………………………………………. 5
Power and Persuasion……………………………………………………… 6

Conclusion………………………………………………………………………… 7

Works Cited……………………………………………………………………….. 7

Introduction:

This movie analysis will focus on the movie 12 Angry Men. There will be comparisons between the movie and the different negotiation tactics used in the movie and even in class. There were lessons learned from this movie and it gave new ways of thinking. This movie does a great job of using negotiation to win over a case when you are the odd man out.

Summary:

This movie focuses on a jury deliberating a first-degree murder charge on an eighteen year old boy. The boy is accused of stabbing his father to death. If found guilty of the charges, the eighteen year old boy will face the death sentence. There are many reasons as to why the boy looks guilty. He has a weak alibi, he claims to have lost the knife he bought, which was the same knife found at the murder scene, and there are witness’s saying they either saw the killing or saw the boy leaving the apartment. Out of the twelve jurors, eleven of them think the boy is guilty, except one. This is juror number eight. He claims he just does not know if the boy is guilty or not guilty, and wants to talk. The entire juror’s quickly begin naming all the reasons why the boy is guilty. For each reason, juror number eight questions each reasoning the other jurors bring up. He states a lot in the movie “is it possible?” This question starts to put doubt in the other juror’s minds about the boys’ guilt. Also with the ongoing deliberation, the jurors are starting to learn more about themselves and their personalities and this is causing them to vote “not guilty“. Some realize they are prejudice or are holding grudges, or they are simply voting guilty because of their backgrounds. With each reason and deliberation, juror number eight continues to attempt to convince the other jurors that voting “not guilty” may not actually be correct.

Juror eight is hesitant about sending a boy to die without talking about it first. He does think that from the trial the boy is guilty, but he’s just not too sure about it. He remains calm throughout the whole deliberation. The only time he shows signs of anger is when two other jury members start playing tic-tac-toe. This bothers him because everyone should be paying attention to what is going on and not playing games. He questions every incident with “Is it possible?” The best negotiators spend time asking questions, staying curious, and uncovering the other side’s views of the situation, facts, interests, and priorities. Throughout the deliberation, he uncovers information never presented at the trial, and helps the other jurors to think that it just may not be possible the boy could be guilty.

Characters & Personalities:

Each character in the movie has a different personality about them which influences their decision on the verdict and they each express their own opinions based on their characteristics. Each juror plays a part in the movie where their personalities reflect back on a certain argument in the case.

Juror one (Martin Balsam) is also known as the foreman of the group. He is put in charge to run the deliberation between all of the jurors. He likes that he has authority to run the group, but isn’t very assertive in doing so.

Juror two (John Fiedler) is quiet and goes along with what everyone else says. He changes his vote early, though, to not...
tracking img