I watched this classic to overcome the disastrous effects of watching one really painful movie : ‘1:40 ki last local’ , which is, without doubt, the worst movie that I have watched this year. ’12 Angry men’ not just helped me overcome the bad taste, it also made me feel quite refreshed.
The movie is a 1957 movie, and a brilliant portrayal of a jury’s examination of a case. The case under trial is that of murder, where a young man brought up in slums is alleged to have stabbed his unkind father in a fit of anger. As the discussion begins, 11 out of the 12 men are convinced that the verdict is guilty and there is no room for further discussion. However, when asked to give reasons/explanations, there are very few who are able to give logical arguments. Each of them has simply presumed guilt given the circumstances. As the discussion unfolds, a lot of hidden agendas of the jury members come out – prejudices against thankless sons, prejudices against the slum dwellers, urgency to wind up and go for a baseball game and inability to go against the majority.
The movie is quite fast paced, realistic and engrossing. It brings out beautifully the responsibility of justice and how easy it is for people to sometimes shrug it. It also depicts how each man can bring to the table some new perspective accumulated from his life, which could be very relavant to making the decision.
Henry Fonda was remarkable in his role as the sole propenant for a “Non guilty” verdict. The other jurors too did not fail to leave a mark and lent remarkable drama to what could otherwise have been just a discussion amongst 12 men.
Great classic, with a theme that is not dated even today.