You May Also Find These Documents Helpful
-
Twelve angry men is a 1957 American Film that originated from a play of Reginald Rose and has been directed to a film by Sidney Lumet. The movie is not just about the outcome of the trial of a Puerto Rican youth who has been accused of murdering his father, but also shows how the beliefs and attitudes of the twelve jurors lead to his acquittal. Aside from that, this movie also shows Leadership traits that can help every individual on developing their leadership capabilities. The story started when the twelve jurors were put together in a sweltering deliberation room somewhere in America where they have been asked for their verdicts whether to put the child on chair or not. Eleven of them unanimously voted that the youth is guilty and must be…
- 225 Words
- 1 Page
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 -
In the play Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose, Juror 4 undergoes a series of questions regarding his confidence that a young man is guilty of murder. From the beginning to the end of the play, Juror 4 gradually changes his mind about his initial vote, through the constructive discussions lead by Juror 8. Juror 4 moves from a belief that all legal witnesses are faultless to truly experiencing some sort of “reasonable doubt.” He is left with a clearer picture of the case, looking beyond his personal prejudices and biases.…
- 1257 Words
- 6 Pages
Good Essays -
1. Each Act takes happens in the same place. The entire play takes place in the jury room of a New York City court of law in 1957 during a very hot summer afternoon. It is a large, dull, minimalistic room with three windows in the brick wall which the skyline of New York City can be seen. There is also a wash room and lavatory off the jury room. There is a large, scarred table in the centre with twelve chairs around it. There are pencils pads and an ashtray on the table. There is also a water cooler in the room with plastic cups. The dullness of the room may signify and provide a mood for the act and is evident in the interactions between the jurors. The Twelve jurors are all seemingly awkward and uneasy towards each other once they enter the room.…
- 1553 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
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 -
In the play, Twelve Angry Men, juror #3 is an excitable, stubborn, and prejudiced man. He seems to be of middle class background because he can afford to look down on people from slum areas. From the way he refuses to listen to any other person’s opinions, if it contradicts his own, juror #3 marks himself as an ignorant and obstinate individual. He is quick to judge and eagerly jumps at any opportunity to engage himself in an argument, such as the dispute he starts with juror #5 over a changed verdict: “We’re trying to put a guilty man in the chair where he belongs and all of a sudden somebody’s telling us fairy tales – and we’re listening.” The third juror uses ethos to no avail and comes across as an unpleasant, partial, and uneducated man.…
- 609 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Juror 5 lived in slums and could relate to the accused but he chose to vote guilty as he felt attacked by the other jurors…
- 1675 Words
- 7 Pages
Powerful Essays -
Throughout the years of America, we had many juries during criminal trials to decide if the defendant guilty or not guilty. In the 1957 movie, 12 Angry Men shows the best representation of American jury system and how people change their minds. 12 Angry Men shows that personal feeling get in the way in their votes. The movie is about how 12 jurors decide the fate of young boy that persumed he killed his father, while during the initial vote only Juror 8 raised his hand not guilty. Then throughout the movie and script each of the 11 jurors for various reason change their votes to not guilty. The 12 jurors change their votes from guilty to not guilty through character flaws, positive personality traits, expertise on the evidence, and pattern of behavior.…
- 1116 Words
- 5 Pages
Good Essays -
Reginald Rose’s play, Twelve Angry Men, is about a jury’s decision making process in a murder trial. The facts in this play become blinded by the prejudices that some Juror’s possess. A prejudice jury became formed due to a biased testimony and the facts became clouded as generalisations were formed by the Juror’s. Some Juror’s bigotry can be based on their past experiences and discrimination didn’t only happen to the defendant, but it was also experienced by Juror’s themselves…
- 853 Words
- 4 Pages
Good Essays -
For fans of courtroom dramas and crime television, these court case movies all revolve around the courtroom. Unlike the orderly process of a real courtroom, the stories are filled with drama, intrigue and corruption. Getting to the truth is seldom as straightforward as it appears within these hit movies.…
- 610 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
The play Twelve Angry Men tells a story of a tainted jury nearly sending a nineteen year old from the slums of Chicago to death row with reasons based solely on bias. Two of the narrow-minded jurors include Juror Three; a sadist, and Juror Ten; a bigot. The entirety of the play is Juror Eight attempting to give a man a fair trial while others would rather send him to death, than discussing the fact he might be innocent. Rose, through Juror Eight, forces the jurors to ask themselves why they are so convinced he is guilty and why they have such biased toward him, and one juror responds “I just think he’s guilty. I thought it was…
- 476 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays -
Throughout my life I have been presented with opinionated questions to answer and a lot of the times I found it difficult to answer them without asking around a bit. Looking back on that I believe that is it impossible to remain truly impartial. You may start off with your own idea but one everyone else around you starts presenting their ides you may begin to change your mind. If it is something that someone believes in there is a good chance that they will have a convincing argument to back up their statement. Due to these kinds of things they may sway your mind and alter your judgment therefore you are no longer truly impartial.…
- 678 Words
- 3 Pages
Satisfactory Essays -
In the play, 12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose, characterization is an important literary element. Juror 8 character is an intelligent men who is the only one who stay with his belief, even when others was disagreeing. He demonstrate his truth to others, convince the others to change their votes to “not guilty”. Juror 8 is a person who obey his conscience, within consequence of the Jurors who did not agree.…
- 620 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
In analyzing 12 Angry Men the first theory that came to mind is the Universal Theory of Leadership. The theory is defined as the belief that certain personal characteristics and skills contribute to leadership effectiveness in many situations. This shows true with Juror #8. Juror #8 was the architect who emerged as a real effective leader. The architect showed self-confidence and assertiveness. He convinced the jury that once all thought the young man was guilty to believing he was innocent due to the lack of proof and questionable assumptions. He showed himself as respectable, knowledgeable, and authentic. The architect rose question as to whether or not the circumstances could be possible by re-enacting the situation. He challenged the process completely by doing this. He was also a leader of integrity because he was loyal to rational principles, practiced what he preached, and did this regardless of the social pressure from fellow jurors’. With these characteristic traits the architect proves to be an charismatic and effective leader.…
- 681 Words
- 3 Pages
Good Essays -
Each juror had a history that they brought with them into the decision making process of the boys fate. None moreso than that of juror #3. A man who had a hard time dealing with his own son. He was embarassed when his 9 year old son ran away from a fight, so he “Taught him what it was like to be a man.” Years later, he got into a physical altercation with his son and they no longer spoke. After being so stubborn and adament that the boy was guilty, he throws his wallet and out falls a pitcure of him and his son. It was at that moment that he realized that the boy was not guilty and changed his…
- 465 Words
- 2 Pages
Good Essays