12 Angry Men
Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Klugman; Directed by Sidney Lumet
Jury duty. It is an event which most people dread, and the twelve men who are called to the courthouse on one particular weekday are no exception. They must make a decision that could send an eighteen-year-old boy to the electric chair for the murder of his abusive father. While eleven of the jurors are content to ‘speed things up’ by giving the judge the most obvious verdict (guilty), it doesn’t sit well with Juror #7 (Henry Fonda) to make such a hasty decision without a little discussion first. The others are grossly unwilling to waste any more of their day on an open and shut case such as this, but no amount of insulting or temper tantrums thrown will prevent Juror #7 from at least leaving the courthouse with a clear conscience. He must convince each juror, one by one, to consider the slight possibility of the boy’s innocence. But with personal demons that will have to be battled with first, it will be a far more difficult task than he could have ever imagined.
The first ten minutes of the film is a bit slow as each character is introduced, each with his own distinct traits. Broker, banker, salesman, watchmaker, men who are humble and arrogant, young and old, upper-class and lower-class, - there is virtually no territory left uncovered when it comes to personality and circumstances. It is not hard for an audience member to look into that jury room and recognize a personal acquaintance in real life, or perhaps even see a little of themselves sitting in the room. Things heat up almost immediately when a few of the men’s faults are rapidly brought to attention - bigotry and below-the-belt insulting among them. One un-movie like quality about this work is that it is not a film with clean, clear dialogue. The men are almost always shouting over each other and interrupting one another, making for a more realistic feel. It is a wonder to see that an agreement is even possible between such people by the end of the film. It is also fascinating to see the case broken apart piece by piece and examined. We are drawn into the case, not only because a life hangs in the balance, but also because we are forced to choose sides along with the rest of the jurors. Our values and votes are being questioned. Our beliefs are being put to the test. Juror #7 is fighting to change our minds as well as everyone else’s. We do not know any more or any less than the rest do, and this interactive quality is one of the things which has made this film so successful.
No one could use the phrase ‘eye-candy’ to describe this film. Filmed in one location for a good ninety percent of the time, this black and white forum doesn’t offer the cinematographer too many chances to get wild and crazy. Wide shot, medium shot, close-up - this is camera work at its most basic. It serves the story well enough, and no one should be disappointed as long as fireworks or gunfights aren’t expected. Although the film almost never leaves the jury room, the action inside almost constantly holds the attention of the audience. There is never a dull moment, and this is mostly attributed to the fine acting in the film. Each actor is able to portray diverse individuals - each with a different breaking point, each with various levels of integrity and respect. We are brought to feel disgust at some points, and admiration at other times. It is a character study more than anything else. However, the case and the arguments made in the film are also completely believable, making it an excellent courtroom drama as well. Yet another reason to browse the ‘Classics’ section the next time you’re scouting around for a movie to rent.
Story = A-
Originality = A
DVD Features = C
Acting = A
Enjoyability = A-
Visuals = B-
Overall = A-
|
