Preview

12 Angry Men

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
862 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men
Twelve Angry Men Leaders are defined by two separate characteristics; those who are appointed as the leader and those with no special title that emerge as influential. In the movie Twelve Angry Men, Henry Juror#8 portrays a character that gains respect by others for emerging as a leader. Along with holding leadership abilities, his actions also resulted in classic communication techniques.

At the beginning of the movie, it may seem that Juror #8 is displaying deviant behavior. The scene opens with the jurors casting guilty votes to determine a thoughtless verdict. All eleven jurors, except one (Juror#8) voted guilty. As a viewer watching this movie, you have to give the character consideration since he decided to go against the norm and
…show more content…
This is also a deviant trait. However, this deviant trait leads into an emerging leadership that the other characters respect. As a leader, Juror #8 stands out for various reasons. One of the most prominent is at the beginning of the movie. Juror #8 begins to display task-related functions by offering up a new idea to the group. In this case, it was the idea of the boy being not guilty.

Although the men were upset with him, the thought had crossed their mind long enough to realize he may be right. By offering up his opinion and a new suggestion, he opened the door for character development of the other jurors. This then creates new options and processes for the group to explore. However, this also creates secondary tension and new power struggles.

Juror #8's point was that he had no substantial evidence to prove that he knew the boy was not guilty, but he had enough doubt to make the claim. Since the rest of the jurors had their minds focused in "guilty-mode", the secondary tension arrives to disrupt their substantive
…show more content…
For example, a power struggle is constantly brewing between Juror#8 and the juror with the picture of his son. Out of all the jurors, he outs up the most vicious fight. In the beginning, certain traits, such as his aggressiveness or persuasiveness, may have identified him as a leader. Although in the end, he had become the deviant to the other members of the jury. However, even as the secondary tension is increasing, Juror#8 begins to emerge as the leader by elaborating on what every juror was trying to say or making suggestions to keep the group

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Satisfactory Essays

    4. I believe this was an example of win-win negotiations. I feel this way because towards the end of the movie the other 11 jurors need to come to a conclusion based on facts that were given, and they had to use deductive reasoning to do so. The boy was acquitted with the charges dropped, as a result of the win-win negotiations.…

    • 336 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Juror number 8 came with a reasonable argument to the jurors that changes the 9th juror’s perspective. The argument convinces the 9th juror to be an advocate for the boy/support the boy. Even though the 9th juror is convinced and sees the case from a different view than before, the other jurors are still not convinced. The 8th juror makes a tough but smart decision when voting to take time and sit and talk a bit more throught the case to find a conclusion. At first he says that the defendant is not guilty but he then reevaluates his decision and says “i don’t know.”…

    • 105 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In a crowded jury room, opinions collide as discussions about the innocence of a young boy are decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are presented. The two men that cannot put their personal emotions aside are juror 3 and juror 10. These men are motivated by their emotions rather than the evidence.…

    • 491 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    He believes that Juror 8 and Juror 9’s input is driven by biases that are “a bit far-fetched” (Act I, page 32). However, Juror 8, as the center of the discussion, constructively points out certain aspects of the case the makes Juror 4 skeptical about Juror 8’s statements. For example, when Juror 8 wonders how long it takes for an elevated train to pass a given point, Juror 4 inquisitively states, “All right. Say ten Seconds. What are you getting at?” (Act I, page 34). This conveys that he understands that Juror 8 has a point to make, but his intentions are not truly rational in accordance with the facts. Furthermore, Juror 4 claims “You’ve made some excellent points. The last one… was very persuasive. But I still believe the boy is guilty of murder. I have two reasons. One: the evidence given by the woman across the street who actually saw the murder committed. Two: the fact that the woman described the stabbing…” (Act II, page 66). According to Juror 4, the woman’s claim makes logical sense. Although Juror 4 is not yet convinced that the young man is not a murderer, he does value Juror 8’s…

    • 1257 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    His words, ’there are facts for you’, ‘you can’t refute facts’ and his listing of reasons why he thinks the boy is guilty are persuasive to other jurors and the audience as well. Nevertheless, as the play goes on, the 3rd juror starts to be blindfolded by his aggressive feelings about his own son, making his opinion extremely bias and he even uses threatening language, ‘ let go of me, god damn it! I’ll kill him!’ ‘I’m telling you now!’ to force others agree with him. His shouting towards 8th juror, ‘The nerve! The absolute nerve!’ and also his bad behavior make others feel antipathetic towards…

    • 583 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    This is because probably once his connected his own experiences, he was intolerant and ignorant to anything or anyone in favor of his side. This is why when Juror Eight was initially disagreeing, he became rapidly short tempered and made seemingly meaningless comments about how the kid just has to be guilty. He had no actual evidence, but because he was biased, he saw that as reason enough. Also, his description describes to having a streak of sadism. Sadism is defined as the tendency to derive pleasure from inflicting pain, suffering, or humiliation on others. This child being convicted guilty would cover all of his sadist bases. The child just being convicted would be humiliating, he would suffer in prison, and he would of course be killed eventually. Why wouldn’t Juror Three want him to be convicted as guilty. It is in his personality to want to make people suffer. Even when there was substantial evidence of his innocence, he still voted guilty. It was in his character to be biased towards this kid. From his background to his central personality, he was prejudice against him from the very…

    • 637 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 8 simply puts out questions and asks people to challenge their own beliefs. He is prepared to allow anyone to keep their own opinion without compromising his own.…

    • 1927 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men Analysis

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The first Juror to votes not guilty in the initial vote is the old white man who works as an architect. As when sitting on his office and drawing blueprints for constructing a building, He was very quiet and respectful in the room. He wasn’t convinced that the boy is innocent, but he wants to compare what’s really happened with the testimony’s evidence. At the end of the film he introduces himself to one of the jurors as Davis. He is free of prejudice, and he believes in justice for all. Although in his job he can be sure about the construction material and similar things,…

    • 664 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Juror Three has a strong prejudice for the murder because he has a similar experience with his son. He transfer his anger to the suspect, and keep his prejudice for the murder is guilty. Because Juror Three’s…

    • 653 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Juror 3‘s relationship with his estranged son conflicts with the case and how he is intolerant to young kids (ageism) he also believes that a common way of handling conflict in his family has always been with physical violence. Dependence on violence as a problem-solving strategy.…

    • 1675 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful 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

    Jury and Angriest Juror

    • 899 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Juror #Eight Also insists that, “during the trial, too many questions were left unasked”. “He asks for the murder weapon to be brought in” and says that “it is possible that someone else stabbed the boy’s father…

    • 899 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1)Because he is the first to agree with juror number eight , deciding that there is not enough evidence to sentence the young boy to death.…

    • 611 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    each juror has there own deficiencies or less than ideal qualities, these emerge through their interactions with eachother or their attitudes towards their trial. juror 10 is predjudice regularly using stereotypes to condemn the defendsant without actually considering if what he is saying is true. such as ‘a very big drinker’ or a born liar’ the third juror is guilty of stereotyping the defendant based on age, and he defends his opinions and stereotypes violently in the jury room, such as his near attack on 8th juror at the end of the first act. the play does not let a single character escape unflawed. even 8th juror,…

    • 559 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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