My 12 Angry Men review
Intro: How can I call myself and movie buff if I don’t review at least one Black and White movie?
12 Angry Men: This movie is about 12 jurors trying to decide whether or not a young man is guilty of killing his father. This seems like a simple trial until one of the jurors voted not guilty, so the other jurors try to convince him why they think his guilty without killing each other. This is the best Black and White movie I’ve seen so far! That’s not saying a lot because I haven’t seen a lot of Black and White films.
I'm not saying this movie isn't popular it's just no one talks about it. The premise may sound boring but it's not, the director made this scenario interesting. This movie shows you the dos and don’ts of having an argument or a debate. Like I said before the purpose of an argument is to reach an understanding, not change people's minds or make people feel dumb about their point of view. Also, when you make a choice you think, deliberate and understand your choice.
That’s my gripe with Bench Trials the Judge should have two other judges to talk to about his or her decision. (If they do, do that then I stand corrected.)
What made this movie hold up is the dialogue because of it you think this movie was made in the current time for the most part. The movie isn't just about the concept of Justice or being on one accord. It's about the value of life, when you're in a position to decide whether or not someone should live or die, we shouldn't take that lightly. Watching the jurors interact with each other is not only entertaining they help each other see things about the case that they missed or didn't consider.
I’ve only seen the popular ones.
I'm not saying this movie isn't popular it's just no one talks about it. The premise may sound boring but it's not, the director made this scenario interesting. This movie shows you the dos and don’ts of having an argument or a debate. Like I said before the purpose of an argument is to reach an understanding, not change people's minds or make people feel dumb about their point of view. Also, when you make a choice you think, deliberate and understand your choice.
That’s my gripe with Bench Trials the Judge should have two other judges to talk to about his or her decision. (If they do, do that then I stand corrected.)
What made this movie hold up is the dialogue because of it you think this movie was made in the current time for the most part. The movie isn't just about the concept of Justice or being on one accord. It's about the value of life, when you're in a position to decide whether or not someone should live or die, we shouldn't take that lightly. Watching the jurors interact with each other is not only entertaining they help each other see things about the case that they missed or didn't consider.
Juror # 8 is the one who voted not guilty because he's skeptical about the case. My issue with him is that he did something that could have caused this movie to have a different ending. Also, he didn't do the best job of proving his points to the jurors.
Juror # 3 is a hothead and strongly believes that the boy is guilty. He could have the other jurors on his side if he didn’t alienate them and contradict himself, that’s what happens when you don’t think before you speak. The movie hits that this case is personal for him however the movie didn’t do the best job of being settled about it.
Juror # 4 is the rational one. He would make a better adversary for Juror # 8 than Juror # 3 because he made some good points as to why he thinks the boy is guilty.
Juror # 2 is the youngest of the other Juries, seriously he sounds like he hasn’t hit puberty.
Juror # 10 is biased to the point where no one takes him seriously.
Juror # 7 is not taking this case seriously which rubs the other Jurors the wrong way. Plus, he proves some of the humor in this movie.
One of the problems I have with this movie is the other Jurors didn't give Juror # 8 much of a challenge. Some of them bring their own prejudice or projects onto the case. The rest have nothing to say. Considering how one-sided the rest of the Jurors are about this case this movie could have been called 12 stupid men. The movie missed out on other details about the case. Speaking of the case it's too circumstantial for most of the Jurors to think the boy is guilty. There is a plot hole with the murder weapon, I can't get into that without spoiling anything.
Juror # 7 is not taking this case seriously which rubs the other Jurors the wrong way. Plus, he proves some of the humor in this movie.
One of the problems I have with this movie is the other Jurors didn't give Juror # 8 much of a challenge. Some of them bring their own prejudice or projects onto the case. The rest have nothing to say. Considering how one-sided the rest of the Jurors are about this case this movie could have been called 12 stupid men. The movie missed out on other details about the case. Speaking of the case it's too circumstantial for most of the Jurors to think the boy is guilty. There is a plot hole with the murder weapon, I can't get into that without spoiling anything.
Overall, this movie stood the test of time! I would recommend this to everyone because we can't have a conversation without it turning into a fight or censoring each other.
Rating = Treasure Chest
No comments:
Post a Comment