12 Angry Men (Twelve Angry Men) Reviews
A boy is accused of murdering his father. The twelve jurors retire to the jury room to determine whether he's innocent or guilty. Only 1 of them thinks he's not guilty and he has to persuade the other men why he thinks so.
I personally found this to be extremely amazing. The movie was able to keep my attention for the whole way through. It was interesting seeing the men say counter arguments back and forth. Also, 1 of the jurors appears to be a sadist who just wants the boy to be put to death regardless of what evidence he's presented with. In my opinion, he is the best character in the movie because his acting performance makes him a very convincing character.
Speaking of the acting, it was strong on all parts. As I said, Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb) gave the best performance in the movie. However, there are several more actors who did a great job as well. Jurors #8 (Henry Fonda) and #9 (Joseph Sweeney) gave exceptional performances and the other 9 jurors gave convincing performances also. I don't think that they could've given a much better performance.
Also, I found the movie to be very easy to follow. It gives a brief explanation of its plot at the beginning so everyone knows what's going on right before the 12 jurors meet. Also, the movie was very well-written. The fictional murder case set up was well and it contained a lot of elaborate plot points to it which were brought up during the movie.
I can see why this movie has gotten as much praise as it has now. It is one of the most engaging and tense movies I've ever seen. The tension doesn't really come from action like many other movies do. The tension comes from the arguments brought up and how the jurors behave. I just watched this movie yesterday and I already want to watch it again. So far, this is one of my favorite movies of all time and it might even had the ability to become my #1 favorite. I'll just wait and see.
Each one of the men lays out their arguments to why they think the boy is guilty, and No. 8 counters with the possibility of some of the facts possibly not being true. He is not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt with some of the circumstantial evidence presented. As he begins to counter some of the evidence and testimonies of the case, he begins to persuade more and more jurors, despite strong resistance and anger from 3 particular jurors who are sure he is guilty. As the more and more get convinced they must counter the most staggering element in the case that a woman saw the boy kill the father. They question the witnesses eye sight, which convinces all but Juror No. 3 (Lee J. Cobb) who vehemently was angriest and most sure of the by being guilty throughout the film.
12 Angry Men is a powerful and riveting drama. It shows that how close a possibly innocent boy could have been taken to the chair had one juror not spoken up. The film does not show the case, which leaves the evidence and testimonies gradually unveil through the film. All the performances are brilliant and the film only features one location. The direction is superb and 12 Angry Men is without a doubt a timeless classic.
First film (1957) by Sidney Lumet, first and gigantic success and even
with nearly 60 years later, the film still has as much power. A superb
legal drama, a masterpiece, a magisterial behind-the-scenes, superbly
realized with an incredibly efficient scenario and which, in addition
to a remarkable interpretation of the actors of this masterpiece,
Anthology if any. A must.