12 Angry Men
|
Our Price: $23.99 Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $6.48 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
Canada
Movie Reviews of 12 Angry Men
Movie Review: Worth seeing again and again
Summary: 5 Stars
"That cause is strong which has not a multitude, but one strong man behind it." (James Russell Lowell)
Henry Fonda is that one strong man in this absolutely riveting drama that unfolds in one single room where 12 jurors - the "12 angry men" of the title - are assembled to decide on the fate of a teenager accused of having murdered his father. At the outset, 11 jurors, for various reasons, are in favour of the verdict of "guilty", the lone dissenting voice being Fonda's, who believes there is enough room for doubt regarding the boy's guilt to warrant a verdict of "not guilty".
The "facts" of the case are few and simple, and the logic by which Fonda and - in due course of time - other members of the jury unravel the supposed indisputability of those facts is also simple. What makes this film different and, in my view, important is that it deals with the subject of our implicit prejudices and inappropriate priorities and the way they affect our every judgement. Supposedly "indisputable facts" are very often the products of our selective memory, which in turn is dictated and coloured by our prejudices and priorities.
Take, for instance, the character played by Jack Warden - a man who will go along with any verdict as long as he can catch the baseball game that evening to which he's got tickets. He "believes" the boy is guilty only because the majority is in favour of the "guilty" verdict. When later the opinion of the majority has turned in favour of the verdict of "not guilty", he sees fit to side with the majority not because he now believes there is enough reason to doubt the boy's guilt but only because it will help the jury reach a unanimous decision quicker and enable him to reach the baseball game on time. Warden's priority is baseball, and the fact that a teenager's life is at stake holds less significance for him than watching the game.
Ed Begley's character believes the boy is guilty because the latter comes from a slum and, according to him, slum-dwellers are all the same - violent, antisocial, dangerous beings genetically inclined to stealing and murdering - and the boy therefore deserves to be condemned to death for the safety of decent society.
Then there's Lee J. Cobb's character, who lets his own deep personal anguish cloud his reason and prejudice him towards wanting to see the teenager sentenced to death.
What I gathered from this fascinating film is this: We frequently see, hear and recall events not as they have actually occurred but in a manner that will help fulfill our priorities or reinforce our existing beliefs and prejudices. While making decisions and passing judgements, we often choose to ignore the objective reality and to replace it with our own subjective (and unreliable) interpretations of the same, in order to support those priorities and prejudices.
This film must rank as one of the greatest and most important films of all time. Henry Fonda's quiet strength and dignity pervade the film, but it is Lee J. Cobb who turns in an astounding performance and steals the show as far as I am concerned.
A must-see and must-have for all lovers of good and meaningful cinema.
Movie Review: Decisions - A reflection of who we are..
Summary: 5 Stars
A record hot day and a man's life is at stake as he is about to be sentenced to death by 12 jurors from various backgrounds. These 12 jurors, all men, represent Caucasian America of the 1950s, and the values within the American fabric. The 12 men are all assembled in a small conference room after the trial where they should all agree upon the man's guilt or innocence. Juror No. 3 (Lee J. Cobb) spits out that it is an open and shut case as the man is obviously guilty as the jurors sit down to discuss the man's guilt. The only person that seems to disagree is Juror No. 8 (Henry Fonda), who feels that the man might not be guilty after all.
The battle of persuasion begins as the majority of the group tempts to pressure Juror No. 8 into submission as they all want to leave the hot room without a fan and return to their daily tasks. However, Juror No.8 believes that when a man's life is at stake, one should take more than a few minutes to ponder the guilt as they could be wrong. This notion is exactly what the film wants to depict as it becomes a lesson of the Constitution and people's right to a fair trial.
12 Angry Men takes place in the small conference room where the audience is to be enlightened about the characters and their values. As the story unfolds it becomes apparent that the values of the jurors' influence their decision making. The decision of sentencing a man to death will be a reflection of their own background, education, and upbringing. In essence, the decision is a reflection of each juror. This decision making is drawn into the light through lengthy discussions based on their personal notions. This means that the audience is presented with meticulously brilliant character study.
Sidney Lumet directs a brilliant post-courtroom drama, which is supported by an excellent script. The cast carries the script to higher grounds as the cast's performance is outstanding. The cast consists of talented actors such as Martin Balsam, Jack Warden, E.G. Marshall, Henry Fonda, and Lee J. Cobb.
The cinematography enhances the hot claustrophobic atmosphere in the conference room, which pushes the film to the top. For example, the camera is being held with a slight superior angle in the beginning which progressively moves to an inferior angle toward the end. This intensifies the claustrophobic atmosphere as the ceiling is being observed within the shot with constant use a closed shot. The slow movement of the camera into an inferior angle also augments the importance of the characters, which is essential as character traits are a dominant part of the film.
In the end, the audience will have received an important political story of people's rights in a democracy, which will offer much to ponder. The film also offers a terrific character study as the many jurors' decisions will reflect upon their character. Lastly, 12 Angry Men offers a solid introduction into film making as it displays brilliant use of the camera, mise-en-scene, and performances in front of a camera, which comprises a complete and brilliant cinematic experience.
Movie Review: Anatomy of a jury.
Summary: 5 Stars
One of the best character studies ever filmed is "Twelve Angry Men," written by Reginald Rose and directed by the great Sidney Lumet. An eighteen-year-old boy is accused of killing his brutal father. On the hottest day of the year, eleven men file into a stifling jury room convinced that this is an open and shut case; the boy obviously did it. They are all anxious to go home as quickly as possible.
The one dissenting voice is juror number 8, a thoughtful individual with a conscience. He doesn't know whether the accused murdered his father or not, but he thinks that it is the jurors' duty to carefully examine the facts before condemning the young man to death. Can they be absolutely sure that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt? The other jurors, with great reluctance, agree to discuss the details of the case.
As they deliberate, the jurors reveal their frustrations, hopes, disappointments, and prejudices. Every part in this film is perfectly cast. Lee J. Cobb is a standout as a man who is estranged from his son and who wants all ungrateful children to pay for their sins. Ed Begley is juror number 10, a vicious individual who proudly parades his bigotry before his fellow jurors. Joseph Sweeney, juror number 9, is the oldest of the twelve. When juror number 8 starts making some good points, the old man is quick to acknowledge that there may be more to this case than meets the eye. Also noteworthy is E. G. Marshall as juror number 4, a low-key and dispassionate individual who never seems to sweat, no matter how overheated the jury room becomes. Henry Fonda, in one of his finest roles, is the embodiment of integrity, courage, and compassion.
Certain aspects of this film are dated, particularly the hokey music which is jarring to the modern ear. However, the give and take between the men is mesmerizing, and the questions raised are still valid today. How can twelve ordinary people effectively separate fact from fiction? How much time and effort should the jurors expend before they bring in their verdict? If they are not one hundred percent sure that the defendant committed the crime, should the jurors let him go free?
Since this movie was filmed in 1957, there was no DNA testing or detailed forensic evidence to consider. With juror number 8 leading the way, the men consider the credibility of the eyewitness testimony, the behavior of the accused after the crime, and even the methodology of using a switchblade knife. Soon, disagreements erupt; the jurors start shouting at one another and they nearly come to blows.
"Twelve Angry Men" is about one individual's ability to stand up for what he believes, even when others ridicule him. It is also a powerful study not just of our criminal justice system, but also of the diversity of human experience, the nature of peer pressure, and the difficulty of ever fully knowing the truth.
Movie Review: Simply magnificent
Summary: 5 Stars
This classic is seen by many to be the best ever within the sub-genre of courtroom dramas, at times switching places for the no. 2 seat with "Witness for the prosecution", as it happens made in the same year.
As is not surprising the theme of justice takes center stage, but looked at from a unique angle, the eyes of twelve jury members who have to deliberate on the matter of guilt of a teenager who supposedly killed his father and is up for the death penalty. One could say this is the entire movie in a nutshell, but what drama unfolds! None of those present will ever forget this particular hour and a half, nor will the viewer I dare say.
The amount of evidence against the boy seems overwhelming: a weak alibi, a knife,which looks exactly like one he used to own and which he now claims to have lost, found at the crime scene and even an old lady maintaining she saw him commit the murder.
One might conclude a clearcut case and it is with no surprise that the first voting round results in 11 of 12 guilty verdicts. As a unanimous vote is required the 11 are annoyed that one of them is what most of them deem to be wasting their time. That one jury member turns out to be Henry Fonda, who is not so much convinced the boy to be innocent, but feels they should at least discuss the case for a while as a life is at stake.
Obviously clearly fighting an uphill battle an analysis of the case commences, raising an increasing amount of doubt in most jury members' minds, but what is more interesting about this movie is the character study of these pillars of the community, of which one couldn't care less as long as he still makes it in time to the ball game, while another is consumed by racial hatred (the accused is black) and yet another projects his own personal drama with his own son on the accused. One could argue therefor that the whole judicial process has not so much to do with justice as with personal predispositions of its dispensers.
The film adheres to the classic unity of time and place and clearly shows its theatrical history. The cast is sublime and especially Lee J. Cobb as the embittered father makes an unforgettable impression. Same goes for Ed Begly as the bigot and last bot not least Henry Fonda playing the common man with simple dignity. Ah well, there simply is no weak link in this terrific ensemble piece.
This is the kind of movie that contains dialogue like metal sparks coming at you from the tv screen, where social commentary is still taken seriously and mankind is viewed in all its weaknesses and prejudices, taking a moral stance without cynicism, which may seem outdated in our day and age, but in no way deminishes the impact the movie still has to this day. It's still as fresh and more important contemporary as it was all those years ago.
Movie Review: Not Just a Courtroom Drama-Micro-spective of the Human Condition..Must SEE!!
Summary: 5 Stars
This black and white masterwork of film is a must see for all. This is a not just a courtroom movie, but an examination of ourselves and how we see each other. Reginald Rose's original play reads like a powerhouse, even in a highschool english class, but given the direction of Sidney Lumet, the dynamite cast and the beautifully stark black and white cinematography it becomes a legend on film.
This movie centers on the diverse jury and it's deliberations in the murder trial of a young Puerto Rican man accused of killing his own father. It is an examination of our perception of one another, our selfish nature, our apathy when a crisis occurs-but does not affect us and our preconceived ideas of each other NOT based not upon fact, but upon our own experiences and traumas. It sheds light on how we process our decisions and how we can be easily yet unknowingly swayed away from the truth and yet believe we make honest and fair evaluations of fact, when in all truth we do not.
This was the ONLY film in which Henry Fonda starred AND was the producer and it was slow to take off at the box office. But within a few years this film became an american film mainstay. Regardless of the stunning performances and positive reviews, he never produced again.
This film has many of the early television and film greats and each gives a RIVETING PERFORMANCE!!! There's Jack Klugman, Martin Balsam, John Fiedler, E.G. Marshall and Lee J. Cobb who gives one of the most memorable performances in the film. Cobb, who was known for his moving portrayal of Willie Loman in Death of a Salesman, is aggravating and compelling. Fonda depicts the "voice of reason" juror that is neither self-righteous or bleeding-heart wimpy. He challenges the other jurors and the viewer alike to rethink their conclusions and recalculate them by utilizing ALL the facts. Anyone that sees this movie will recognize at least someone they know that is like each juror, which are designated only by number throughout it's entirety, in their daily lives.
Don't let the black and white format sway you, this DVD is presented in a lovely widescreen format that intensifies the expert cinematic talents of the golden age of the silver screen. This is considered an essential for anyone that loves film. My thirteen year old actually sat mesmerized through the whole film and began to watch some of my other DVDs (To Kill a Mockingbird, Inherit the Wind, Judgement At Nuremburg, to name a few) and at that tender young age, he is determined to spread the word and keep the tradition of sharing these movies of great distinction..
Metaldiva Sez: This is one of the essential films you should watch and share with your friends and family. This is an excellent price to own and to share. Get it today....