Preview

12 Angry Men

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
261 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
12 Angry Men
Josiah Bont- to what degree should he be excused given his own history of abuse (200 words)
Are men capable of anything extraordinary--- do they have emotional capacities

Who is the juror who most disappoints you
Juror 7 is disappointing because he selfishly wants to go to the ball game. Initially he believes that the judgement will be made rapidly and he becomes increasingly frustrated when it is evident that the vote won’t be unanimous. The disappointing aspect is that he has a voice but lacks any reasoning, dismissive of logic in preference to a speedy outcome. Some may suggest that he is simple, but he is so caught up in his own world that he refuses to see or acknowledge the emotional needs of others. He may well offer chewing gum to those around, but the reality is he has no real concern for the needs of others. He is blinded by the immediate, unable to see beyond his own needs. It is disappointing that he is depicted as the man on the street, the knock about bloke off to the ball game who is largely inoffensive. Yet his apathy is offensive as it presents a narrow world where people do not care for others.
Who is the juror that challenges your own beliefs?
Which juror is most pitied?
Which juror is most changed as a result of the trial?
Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose ‘Twelve Angry Men highlights the importance of seeing things from more than one perspective.’
Discuss.

12 Angry Men by Reginald Rose skilfully explores

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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
  • Better Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages

    3. “I’m going to kill you,” and the kid screamed it out at the top of his lungs. Don’t tell me he didn’t mean it. Anybody says a thing like that the way he said it, they mean it.…

    • 892 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a classic movie depicting how one determined leader can alter an entire crowd. Through dedication, curiosity, and the pursuit for the truth he is able to persuade a group of twelve to second guess even themselves. Within this heterogynous group are a dozen different personalities - some of which were leaders and most of which were not.…

    • 1445 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • 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
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages

    already got their mind made up. In the play juror 8 is used to represent a juror who is doing his duty the…

    • 1230 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages

    In today’s fast-paced world we often find ourselves making hasty, split-second decisions on the seemingly unimportant matters with which we are faced. According to The Critical Thinking Handbook “...critical thinking evaluates reasons and brings thought in line with...” our best sense of what is true enabling us come to insightful conclusions on which we base our actions. In Twelve Angry Men a group of twelve ordinary citizens are faced with an important choice whose consequence is the fate of a sixteen-year-old boy accused of killing his father. Initially deemed an open-shut-case, throughout the play we witness the jurors, under the direction of Juror 8, slowly break down the evidence and testimony on which they later base their final verdict. Each juror with his unique approach to reasoning raises important arguments, suggesting both the innocence and guilt of the accused and further adding to the complexity of the case. In Twelve Angry Men, three pieces of evidence that proved crucial in shifting the jury in favor of acquittal were the murder weapon, the old man’s testimony, and that of the woman who claimed to have seen the murder from across the street.…

    • 1063 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good 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
  • 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

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages

    This was a meeting of 12 jurors to deliberate the fate of an eighteen year old boy. The meeting was more of a verbal structure. The jury foreman was the team leader of the meeting. I feel as though the beginning of the meeting started strong with his decision of voting for guilty or innocence that lead to a hung jury. There was no planning really or discussing the trial at the beginning, and the jurors did not work together in a timely manner. The presentation of evidence was to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt that the teen was either guilty or innocent. A closer look at the evidence presented brought good points as to why the boy was innocent. The example in which the knife was used, the question being brought up about if the teen really lost the knife used to kill his father before going to the movies was even possible, or did he really even go to movies were all valid points that needed to be revisited. Also the demonstration of the elderly man being able to make it to the door in fifteen seconds to see if the person going down the stairs the man’s son or someone else clearly helped to head the meeting in a different direction. Along with the demonstration it was discovered that the elderly man would not have been able to hear clearly with the noise from noise from the L train. Most important of all was the question of the lady across the railroad tracks in another apartment really sees the murder take place while the L train was passing in ten seconds without her eyeglasses. All these points helped to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the boy was innocent. Finally all the jurors agreed on a not guilty plea and presented it to the judge.…

    • 379 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 595 Words
    • 3 Pages

    A juror’s verdict can also be shaped by apathy. If a juror does not care about the outcome of a case, there is little chance that he or she will treat his or her verdict with the attention and forethought it deserves. For example, if one examines Juror 7’s quote, the affects of indifference on a juror’s deliberations are clearly shown. “All this…

    • 595 Words
    • 3 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Twelve Angry Men

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Twelve Angry Men is a very interesting play about an unfortunate young man, who was convicted of killing his dad. The worst part was, the young man was only nineteen, and his life was just starting. The jurors listened to all the evidence, then came the hard part, making the decision: guilty, or innocent. Eleven jurors said guilty and only one said innocent. There was a lot of peer pressure involved. I decided to write about different peer pressures three of the jurors used. The three jurors I picked are juror #10, juror #7, and juror #8.<br><br>The first juror I want to write about is #10. Juror #10 was using a lot of sarcasm, whenever he was trying to prove his point, or prove someone else wrong. I think that this method of peer pressure is one of the most powerful ones. I believes so, because when you are embarrassed in front of 11 other people (in this case jurors) you do not know, really lowers your self-esteem. It may lower it to the point where you will say guilty, eve though deep down inside, you will feel that the person is innocent. This is a quote I picked to illustrate sarcasm skillfully used by #10: "You're a pretty smart fellow, aren't you?" I think this one sentence could really put anyone down, and make anyone feel embarrassed, and maybe stupid. <br><br>Another juror I decided to write about is #7. He was muscle flexing most of the time. Muscle flexing means, he was raising his voice, even screaming at everyone, as if he was the boss. Whenever #8 was trying to present reasonable arguments to the rest of the jurors, #7 would start screaming, even jumping out of his chair, calling seven crazy. Although a lot of evidence was really convincing, he tried to prove it unconvincing and use sarcasm to convince other jurors otherwise. One example of #7 using sarcasm would be this quote: "Why don't we have them run the trial over..." I think this quote clearly shows that juror #7 is trying to convince other jurors, that court's evidence proves the young man is…

    • 662 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Research Paper

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages

    His emotional prejudice gets in the way of his critically thinking through the evidence because he has emotional conflict with his own son. He is grouping all teens together because of his altercation with his son, and Juror 3 is just punishing the young man on trial because he cannot come to turns with his own failings as a parent with his child. Towards the end of the play Juror 3 is all alone on the vote count; he “looks around at all of them for a long time. They sit silently, waiting for him to speak, and all of them despise him for his stubbornness. Then, suddenly, his face contorts as if he is about to cry, and he slams his fist down on the table” … (thundering) All right” (30).…

    • 919 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    12 Angry Men

    • 344 Words
    • 2 Pages

    the streets... he's got to die! Stay with me." (23) But Four sees the truth that…

    • 344 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays