12 Angry Men Analysis
12 Angry Men Analysis
12 Angry Men is a movie, directed by Sidney Lumet, about twelve jurors who are deliberating a murder trial. An 18 year old has been accused of murdering his father and the jury has retired to determine his fate. The jury performs a preliminary vote and the results came out to be eleven for guilty and one, the architect played by Henry Fonda, for not-guilty. The rest of the jury then begins to persuade the architect that the accused is actually guilty. Each member of the jury played a key role in the development of the group and the task at hand. The foreman played a major task role and was almost like a manager of the group. He didn’t have much to contribute to the discussion of the case, but he tried to maintain order, initiates the votes, and determine breaks and when to continue. The only thing he seemed to contribute other than that was his vote. The bank teller was a quiet intellectual person and played a maintenance and a task role. He spoke often but was often interrupted by the louder jurors. Physically he was one of the weaker characters, but he was very smart and made some very good arguments during the discussion. The third juror was the angry father and was a key task role and self-centered role. He was the average dad, back in the fifties, that was very short tempered and was the final holdout once everyone had changed their votes’ to not-guilty. He played a significant role for the opposing side to the architect and turned the entire discussion into a win or lose situation. The stockbroker was the rich wall street guy and played a self-centered role. He was rather quiet and, in regards to looking at the evidence, was just like the angry father. The stockbroker looked at the facts specifically and thought the accused was guilty, but didn’t yell at the other jurors when they changed their votes. The former gang member played a maintenance role and brought the criminal experience into the discussion. His
12 Angry Men is a movie, directed by Sidney Lumet, about twelve jurors who are deliberating a murder trial. An 18 year old has been accused of murdering his father and the jury has retired to determine his fate. The jury performs a preliminary vote and the results came out to be eleven for guilty and one, the architect played by Henry Fonda, for not-guilty. The rest of the jury then begins to persuade the architect that the accused is actually guilty. Each member of the jury played a key role in the development of the group and the task at hand. The foreman played a major task role and was almost like a manager of the group. He didn’t have much to contribute to the discussion of the case, but he tried to maintain order, initiates the votes, and determine breaks and when to continue. The only thing he seemed to contribute other than that was his vote. The bank teller was a quiet intellectual person and played a maintenance and a task role. He spoke often but was often interrupted by the louder jurors. Physically he was one of the weaker characters, but he was very smart and made some very good arguments during the discussion. The third juror was the angry father and was a key task role and self-centered role. He was the average dad, back in the fifties, that was very short tempered and was the final holdout once everyone had changed their votes’ to not-guilty. He played a significant role for the opposing side to the architect and turned the entire discussion into a win or lose situation. The stockbroker was the rich wall street guy and played a self-centered role. He was rather quiet and, in regards to looking at the evidence, was just like the angry father. The stockbroker looked at the facts specifically and thought the accused was guilty, but didn’t yell at the other jurors when they changed their votes. The former gang member played a maintenance role and brought the criminal experience into the discussion. His