12 Angry Men Movie Review

12 Angry Men (1957)

Rent 12 Angry Men on Amazon Video (paid link)
Written by: Reginald Rose
Directed by: Sidney Lumet
Starring: Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, E. G. Marshall, Jack Warden
Rated: Approved [G]
Watch the trailer

Plot
The jury in a New York City murder trial is frustrated by a single member whose skeptical caution forces them to more carefully consider the evidence before jumping to a hasty verdict.

Verdict
So many movies resort to elaborate set pieces or action sequences to entertain, but this movie manages to be completely gripping while never leaving the jurors' room. We didn't see the trial, left to piece together the case from what we're told as one juror urges them to at least devote time to discussion before they sentence someone. It's that discussion that leads to minds changing, biases surfacing, and genuine debate about what might have transpired. The writing is excellent as arguments crumble while the jury debates the events and ramifications of their vote.
Watch It.

Review
This jumps right into it with the judge instructing the jury. It's the jury's ultimate responsibility as he puts it, but the judge seems tired or bored. This is likely something he does often, following a routine, but that's not the case for the jurors. They retreat to the juror's room and take a preliminary vote where eleven vote guilty and one votes not guilty. Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) doesn't know, but he wants to talk about it. When you're voting on someone's life you need to take more than five minutes.

As the audience, we don't even know the case or what happened. We hear what transpired from the jurors; their recollection of the case and opinions. They discuss the defendants background and upbringing. Not knowing the case helps the movie as we're eager to figure out what happened, piecing it together as jurors recount the case. Each of them provides additional information that develops the case.

Henry Fonda, Martin Balsam play Juror 8, the Foreman

This might be the epitome of a single set movie. When you don't change location, the movie relies fully on the story and actors. This is such a tight and well written script.

The jury votes again and now they're two not guilty votes. It's not that they believe the defendant is not guilty, but they both desire more discussion. As they start to analyze the witness testimony, they find inconsistencies. How could one witness hear what was yelled if a train car was passing by as another witness claims? They argue amongst themselves with the foreman (Martin Balsam) trying to prove a point, he states the witness was an old man, how can he remember anything and that statement directly undercuts the point he is trying to make. You can't dismiss the testimony you don't like without dismissing all of it. Later the foreman gets mad and blurts he'll kill another juror. Juror 8 calmly asks, you don't really mean that do you?

With yet another vote the jury is split six to six. A decision that was nearly unanimous at the start is now divided after discussion and analysis. All the while Juror 8 allows that he may well be arguing for a guilty man. More of the jury begin to have doubts. Soon the foreman is the lone holdout. He refuses to elaborate on his verdict before his bias is finally revealed. He's mad at his own son. What a way to conclude a story for one amazing movie.