top-rated free essay

Twelve Angry Men

By johnboy12345678 Apr 21, 2015 850 Words
Twelve Angry Men
This essay will show the comparison and contrasts of Juror 3 and Juror 8. The first comparison of the jurors is, Juror 3 is very opinionative, and Juror 8 is factual. Another comparison is juror 3 has a lot of anger which makes him aggressive, and juror 8 is calm so he is passive. The final comparison that will be discussed is that juror 3 is a bully and yells on top of his lungs to get his way, and juror 8 is a natural leader who persuades the jury with his facts. This movie was based on 12 men who just finished listening to 6 days of a trial. A young 19 year old boy is on trial for the murder of his father. He has a past criminal record and for this very trial he has a lot of evidence against him. If he is found guilty, he will receive a death penalty. So, it is up to the 12 men who are on the jury to decide if the defendant it guilty or not guilty. The first comparison is that Juror 8 is factual and willing to keep going through the evidence presented. In the movie Juror 8 was the only one who voted “not guilty”. He was the only Juror who wanted to take time to talk about the evidence and the small details. For example he said “According to the testimony, the boy looks guilty... maybe he is. I sat there in court for six days listening while the evidence built up. Everybody sounded so positive, you know, I began to get a peculiar feeling about this trial. I mean nothing is that positive? There're a lot of questions I'd have liked to ask. I don't know, maybe they wouldn't have meant anything, but... I began to get the feeling that the defense counsel wasn't conducting a thorough enough cross-examination.” Juror 3 seemed very opinionative throughout the movie. When they took the first vote he was one out of eleven who voted “guilty”. There is no doubt in his mind that the defendant is guilty. He was very antagonistic throughout the trial and seemed very confident in his vote. For example he said “What’s the matter with you guys? You all know he's guilty! He's got to burn! You're letting him slip through our fingers!” The second comparison was that Juror 8 was very passive and stayed calm throughout the decision. He made multiple comments about how the jurors should think about all the little details. For example when while they were going into detail about the old man who heard the father scream, he said “There's something else I'd like to talk about for a minute. Thanks. I think we've proved that the old man couldn't have heard the boy say "I'm gonna kill you", but supposing he did...” Juror 3 was very aggressive throughout most of the movie; he always stood up, and talked down to the other jurors. At one point of the movie he and Juror 8 were arguing back and forth he says, “Brother, I've seen all kinds of dishonesty in my day, but this little display takes the cake. Y'all come in here with your hearts bleedin' all over the floor about slum kids and injustice; you listen to some fairy tales... Suddenly, you start gettin' through to some of these old ladies. Well, you're not getting through to me, I've had enough. ”and then Juror 3 stood up and threatened Juror 8 by saying, “I'll kill him! I'll - kill him!” The final comparison is that Juror 3 is a bully and yells at the other jurors. He always seemed as if he was the right one and everyone else was wrong. He always talked down to Juror 3, and wanted all the other men of the jury to be against him. “Now listen, this guy's tryin' to make you believe things that aren't so! The kid said he was gonna kill him, and he *did* kill him!” Juror 3 was confident in his vote, so he showed aggressiveness to prove it. Juror 8 always acted like the mature and natural leader. He never yelled or begged for the others to believe that the defendant was “not guilty”. He would portray each evidence with care, and went into detail immensely. “Let me ask you this: do you really think the kid would shout out a thing like that so the whole neighborhood could hear him? I don't think so; he's much too bright for that.” Most of the jurors were indecisive throughout the movie; they changed their votes from “guilty” to “not guilty” multiple times. Consistently, Juror 3 was convinced that the defendant did kill his father and was always ready to give him the death penalty. As oppose to Juror 8 who from the start was positive that there was more to the story, and the matter needed to be discussed in detail, because the life of a 19 year old boy was in the hands of 12 angry men, who were the jurors.

Cite This Document

Related Documents

  • 12 Angry Men Essay

    ...‘Twelve Angry Men is a play about how power can be misused.’ In Reginald Rose’s Twelve Angry Men a theme explored is how people can misuse the power they have. Set admits the ubiquitous beauty of the New York skyline is a jury room, the arena in which the fate of a young man’s life is decided. 12 jurymen are burdened with the power to ...

    Read More
  • Movie: Twelve Angry Men

    ...Movie: Twelve Angry Men The movie Twelve Angry Men begins with an eighteen year old boy from the ghetto who is on trial for the murder of his abusive father. A jury of twelve men are locked in the deliberation room to decide the fate of the young boy. All evidence is against the boy and a guilty verdict would send him to die in the el...

    Read More
  • Film Analysis: Twelve Angry Men

    ...The movie "Twelve Angry Men" is about a young man who is accused of stabbing his father to death. The twelve jurors have to decide whether the defendant is guilty or innocent. If the young man is found guilty, there is a mandatory death sentence (the jury needs to be unanimous in their decision). At the preliminary vote, eleven of the twelve jur...

    Read More
  • 12 Angry Men

    ...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 ...

    Read More
  • 12 Angry Men - 7

    ...Hum115 12 Angry Men The character in this movie that was the most effective critical thinker was juror 8(Henry Fonda). The types of characteristics that Fonda, exemplify is provisionalism, creativity, and critical thinking. By doing this he is uncover new ways of interpreting evidence, turns to certainty and shortsightedness when arriving at c...

    Read More
  • Film Techniques in 12 Angry Men

    ...Film Techniques in Twelve Angry Men Summary: Reviews the film Twelve Angry Men, directed by Sidney Lumet. Discusses the director's use of cinematic techniques, including lighting, music,and set design, to reinforce the themes of the story. ________________________________________ "Twelve Angry Men", directed by Sidney Lumet, is a film which...

    Read More
  • 12 Angry Men

    ...12 Angry Men This movie tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt. The film begins in a New York City courthouse, where an 18-year-old boy from a slum is on trial for allegedly stabbing his father to death. If the boy is found guilty, the judge inform...

    Read More
  • Twelve Angry Men

    ...Dr. Colman COM 353 2/20/13 The movie Twelve Angry Men provided an example of a work group and a service group, because they had the goal of finding the man innocent or guilty on behalf of the organization of the court system and assisted a worthy cause that helped people outside the group. The judge said, “One man is dead. The life of an...

    Read More

Discover the Best Free Essays on StudyMode

Conquer writer's block once and for all.

High Quality Essays

Our library contains thousands of carefully selected free research papers and essays.

Popular Topics

No matter the topic you're researching, chances are we have it covered.