Preview

12 Angry Men

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2201 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men
12 Angry Men
“Life Is In Their Hands -- Death Is On Their Minds!”

The dynamics of group decision-making is the central focus in the film 12 Angry Men. This is one such movie which shows how group dynamics can actually lead to success or failures.12 Angry Men is a classic movie which was released in 1957. In the movie 12 men are put in one single room to discuss a case and reach a final decision on it. Until they don’t come up with a final decision no one is allowed to leave.
Group dynamics is related with the structure and functioning of groups as well as the different types of roles each individual plays. In the film, twelve men are brought together in a room to decide whether a boy is guilty of killing his father.
In the whole movie, each member has been crafted very carefully. He has been given a proper role to play in the group dynamics. The whole spectrum of humanity is represented in this movie, from the bigotry of Juror #10 to the coldly analytical Juror #4. Whether they brought good or bad qualities to the jury room, they all affected the outcome.
At the outset, without even discussing a single shred of the evidence presented at the trial, 11 members vote the accused as guilty and try to leave the room. Nobody is actually bothered to think what their decision means for the individual. One is too rigid to change and the other wants to go to his baseball match and doesn’t bother what becomes of the accused. Only one brave juror refused to vote guilty i.e. Juror #8 and ultimately saved an innocent man’s life. He openly admits that he does not know whether the accused is guilty or innocent and that he finds it necessary to simply talk about the case.
What follows is not only a discussion of the particular facts of the case, but also an intense examination of the personal baggage that each jury member brings to the room.
Group Development W.R.T the movie 12 Angry Men:
Groups have cycles similar to people. They are born, grown, developed and often

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    The leader in the beginning of the deliberation was the high school football coach, juror number one. He tries to keep order in the hostile jury room. The role evolve to the Architect in the course of the film because he was the only odd ball in the room who vote not guilty and he manage to change everyone vote by the end of the film. His successful strategies for leading the group include encouraging equal and inclusive participation and taking time to deliberate slowly.…

    • 996 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    On the other hand, juror 10 is a loud mouthed, racist bigot. He scolds people he doesn’t agree with and a low opinion of people living in slum areas. Juror #10 is the character who brings in the most prejudice to the jury room as he has formed his decision from the moment he saw the young boy and sees no reason for him to waste any time debating on whether the defendant is guilty. His prejudice comes from the fact he used to live in the “slums” and considers people like the defendant to be “trash”. This is established when he states “well take a look at them…you can’t believe a word they say…they act different… they don’t need any big excuse to kill someone. (59) This man is very…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Juror # 10: He is an abhorrent character whose bigotry becomes more and more obvious as the movie progresses.…

    • 394 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men Flaws

    • 1116 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Also juror number 1 had some character flaws too. Juror number 1 was the foreman and he was very relaxed and lacks intelligences, but most importantly he is very obedient. In the description of jurors for one says “Not overly bright”(The script) When the jurors go to the jury room and after everyone's gets settled in and down, he says “I’m not going to make any rules,” which sounds like he does not really care and relaxed (The script). Juror 1 gets talked over a lot and not taken serious by the others jurors, which makes him obedient to majority of the group. Well as juror number 3 is way different than juror number 1, he lacks moral courage, sadists and very opinionated. In his description it says that he is “extremely opinionated and detected a streak of sadism”(The script). Some things he say such as: “ We don’t need sermon” to juor 9, way he talks about his own kid “Rotten kid,” after juor 9 explains about the old man eyewitness and “Well, that’s the most fantastic story I’ve ever heard” (The script). Juror 3 is really rude and making his own feelings on what happen to his own son's relationship get away from the real…

    • 1116 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The American justice system is intended to be fair and unbiased. It is founded on the ideal that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty, and ensures the duty of proving a dispute charge rests with the prosecution. However this system has inevitable flaws as every individual’s beliefs, values and morals are affected by their own experiences and factors. While such factors could potentially be the systems weaknesses, they could also be its biggest strength bringing experience and understanding to the courtrooms. It is this contradiction that Reginald Rose aims to explore through his portrayal of jurors in his play “Twelve Angry Men.’ The play presents the possibility that some jurors are driven by prejudice, while others self-interest motives can jeopardize the rights of the defendant through aspirations to speed up the case. However Rose portrays a voice of reason through the ethical juror 8 and the unbigoted juror 11, these jurors help to represent Rose’s view that a fair trial can be held in a jury room full of flawed human characters that symbolize the spectrum of society.…

    • 1008 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1.How do you think you might have acted as a juror in this case ? How would you had interacted ?…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 2099 Words
    • 9 Pages

    The movie Twelve Angry Men provided an example of a work group and a service group, because they had the goal of finding the man innocent or guilty on behalf of the organization of the court system and assisted a worthy cause that helped people outside the group. The judge said, “One man is dead. The life of another is at stake. If there is a reasonable doubt in your minds as to the guilt of the accused . . . then you must declare him not guilty. If, however, there is no reasonable doubt, then he must be found guilty. Whichever way you decide, the verdict must be unanimous. I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully.” This is the goal that the men are striving to achieve and what makes them a working group and the man they are helping makes them an example of a service group.…

    • 2099 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 angry men

    • 884 Words
    • 3 Pages

    I believe in the beginning the 2 main jurors who were basing their decisions on prejudice were mainly Jurors #3 and #10. Juror #3 more based on prejudices of young men, particularly because he had such a horrendous relationship with his own son, I feel like this case really hit him close to home and really affected him in a personal way. I believe he let his feelings got in the way of his logical thinking and was practically projecting the anger he had towards his son towards the young men on trial, who had been accused of a horrible crime against his father. Juror #10 was more prejudice of the young suspects race, making statements like; “You know how they are,” and “They’re all the same, all born liars”.…

    • 884 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Juror 10

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The first time we get a glimpse of juror 10’s prejudice is on page 7 when he says “It’s the element. I’m telling you they let those kids run wild up there. Well, maybe it serves them right.” He believes that anyone coming from a poor neighborhood is less than human. We can see right from the start that the verdict that the defendant is undoubtedly ‘guilty’ is locked in his mind simply because he has a personal grudge against people like the defendant. Next, on page 10 and 14, he states “You can’t believe a word they say” and “The kids who crawl outa those places are real trash”. Clearly it can be seen that he has a certain unfounded prejudice towards the defendant, viewing him as a liar and a piece of trash, with no supporting evidence. This prejudice most surely influences his verdict of ‘guilty’ without view of any evidence. If that is not enough, starting on page 62 Juror 10 begins a speech lasting 2 pages in which he spews out his views of people like the defendant: “Human life doesn’t mean as much to them as it does to us…And they are-wild animals.”…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The movie twelve angry men was a movie about different people from backgrounds, races, and religions. They were all different and being in a group dynamics class we learned about how personality affects people and other things that people tend to do.…

    • 455 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginad Rose the twelve jurors have to decide if a young boy is guilty or not guilty. The boy is accused of the murder of his father. His fate lies in the hands of the twelve jurors. Will he get the death penalty? Will they prove that the young boy is not guilty? Will he get to live the rest of his life? There are many different versions of this story including William Friedkins film version produced in 1997. Friedkins film version is easier to comprehend because it includes more detail than Rose’s original play version of Twelve Angry Men. Friedkin goes more in depth in his version of the story unlike Rose. Its more effective to the reader because of the message its telling us.…

    • 563 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Josiah Bont- to what degree should he be excused given his own history of abuse (200 words)…

    • 261 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Juror #3 came into this trial with a moral dilemma long before hearing the facts of the case. Given his past experiences, he would feel more inclined to vote guilty as to punish and make an example of this boy so that other kids would think twice. In this case if the jury decided on a guilty verdict, the defendant would be put to death. People might make rash decisions based…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Jurors 9 and 11 are crucial in supporting juror 8’s quest for justice. Juror 8 is able to acknowledge that the real truth may never be known, but he would rather, if there was any doubt, see a guilty man live rather than an innocent man die. Juror 8’s calm, reasoned delivery of facts and his ability to refute some of the evidence means that other jurors start to realise that a fair verdict means letting go of their preconceived notions and prejudices about the defendant and his background, ‘No one can really know, but we have reasonable doubt, and this is a safeguard that has enormous value in our system’. Like juror 3, Juror 9 is able to view the defendant objectively without letting prejudice cloud his judgement, ‘I don’t think the kind of boy he is has anything to do with it’. Juror 11 takes a similar rational and sensible approach to the likes of jurors 8 and 9 establishing that he is ‘simply asking questions’ and that ‘we [meaning the jurors] have a responsibility’ to uphold, not abuse. Juror 3’s blinded focus on discovering the truth (manipulated by his predetermined ideas) restricts him from passing a fair verdict on the defendant. Juror 3’s overlook of the case is tarnished as he mirrors his broken relationship with his son to the defendants and…

    • 534 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Juror 10 is clearly motivated by his prejudice. He uses his intolerance to determine his vote for the accused defendant. For instance, in the beginning of Act I, Juror 10 haphazardly said, “ Look at the kind of people they are, you know them,” (13) without even digging deep into the case. It is quite obvious that Juror 10 is generating an “opinion” of the defendant based on the color of his skin and his background. He does not refer to them as regular people, but as “they” and “them” on certain pages. In the courtroom though, no juror is to have any judgments, they are supposed to bring the facts to the table, not their opinions. Juror 10’s outlook of the defendant is blinding him from thinking of any reasonable doubt. Further more, when Juror 10 said, “…I lived among em’ all my life, you can’t believe a word they say. You know that,” he yet again was referring to the defendant’s people as “em” and “they”. You can clearly infer that while Juror 10 was living amongst them, he must have experienced or witnessed situations which has caused him to have judgments on these specific people. These same judgments he brings to the courtroom just add difficulty into solving the case. Following Juror 10’s views further, when Juror 5 was explaining how the person who did stab the father was…

    • 717 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays