12 Angry Men Analysis
The movie 12 Angry Men was released in 1957. Its opening scene is in a courtroom where the judge is giving directions to the jury. An 18 year old boy has been accused of murdering his father with a knife. The death sentence is mandatory if the boy is convicted and the verdict must be unanimous, either guilty or not guilty.
The remainder of the movie is set in a hot, stuffy jury room. An initial vote is taken and the count is 11 guilty and 1 not guilty. As the vote is taken it is clear that some jurors are sure he is guilty and others seem to be going along with the majority. Most jurors seem to just want to deliver a verdict so they can leave. There is a level of stress in the room caused by the heat, the pressure of being force to deal with …show more content…
Fonda does not think that the defense attorney did a very good job questioning the prosecutions assertions. When he is asked why he thinks that the boy is innocent he responds that he does not necessarily believe that the boy is innocent, he just is not certain that he is guilty. He questions the facts as presented in order to establish doubt that the defendant is guilty, rather than trying to convince the others that the boy is not guilty. Fonda is similar to Socrates in many ways. Neither one claims to know the truth, but only claims that he does not know the truth. By the end of the movie, Fonda appears to have been the wisest, as the other 11 are convinced that he is correct. Like Socrates, Fonda is willing to admit not knowing, willing to ask questions and search for the truth. The more questions Fonda brings up the more the facts seem uncertain. The other jurors are upset with Fonda for going against what they believe is obviously true. They reacted with anger, just as the people reacted with anger to Socrates when he questioned their …show more content…
Marshall) was a stockbroker who was only concerned with the facts of the case. He is in many ways like Fonda, who was an architect. Both appear to be fair, thoughtful, and rational, but they come to opposite conclusions. This is a good illustration of how difficult the search for truth can be. Two men, both seemingly intelligent and not biased or prejudiced, hear the same testimony and see the same evidence, but come to different conclusions. Marshall felt that the facts pointed to the defendant being guilty. He is eventually persuaded that there is a reasonable doubt as to the boy’s guilt.
The movie 12 Angry Men revealed many different approaches that people take in evaluating and assessing the information they are provided or confronted with in life. Many arguments made to back up different positions can be shown to be wrong. We need to be careful to properly assess the truth of our own and others arguments to make sure they have valid
The remainder of the movie is set in a hot, stuffy jury room. An initial vote is taken and the count is 11 guilty and 1 not guilty. As the vote is taken it is clear that some jurors are sure he is guilty and others seem to be going along with the majority. Most jurors seem to just want to deliver a verdict so they can leave. There is a level of stress in the room caused by the heat, the pressure of being force to deal with …show more content…
Fonda does not think that the defense attorney did a very good job questioning the prosecutions assertions. When he is asked why he thinks that the boy is innocent he responds that he does not necessarily believe that the boy is innocent, he just is not certain that he is guilty. He questions the facts as presented in order to establish doubt that the defendant is guilty, rather than trying to convince the others that the boy is not guilty. Fonda is similar to Socrates in many ways. Neither one claims to know the truth, but only claims that he does not know the truth. By the end of the movie, Fonda appears to have been the wisest, as the other 11 are convinced that he is correct. Like Socrates, Fonda is willing to admit not knowing, willing to ask questions and search for the truth. The more questions Fonda brings up the more the facts seem uncertain. The other jurors are upset with Fonda for going against what they believe is obviously true. They reacted with anger, just as the people reacted with anger to Socrates when he questioned their …show more content…
Marshall) was a stockbroker who was only concerned with the facts of the case. He is in many ways like Fonda, who was an architect. Both appear to be fair, thoughtful, and rational, but they come to opposite conclusions. This is a good illustration of how difficult the search for truth can be. Two men, both seemingly intelligent and not biased or prejudiced, hear the same testimony and see the same evidence, but come to different conclusions. Marshall felt that the facts pointed to the defendant being guilty. He is eventually persuaded that there is a reasonable doubt as to the boy’s guilt.
The movie 12 Angry Men revealed many different approaches that people take in evaluating and assessing the information they are provided or confronted with in life. Many arguments made to back up different positions can be shown to be wrong. We need to be careful to properly assess the truth of our own and others arguments to make sure they have valid