12 Angry Men Movie Analysis

In: Business and Management

Submitted By sln5045
Words 782
Pages 4
Twelve Angry Men Analysis BA 321

Reaching a unanimous vote, beyond a reasonable doubt, was a difficult task for the jurors represented in the film, 12 Angry Men. All but one were convinced the boy on trial was guilty of first degree murder based on eye witness testimony and circumstantial evidence. Uncomfortably hot and sweaty, one intent on getting to a ball game, eleven of the twelve jurors had no intention to stop and think about the life contingent on their verdict. The entire story was motivated by the reasonable doubt, communication competence, and persuasion of one man. Had they not discussed the evidence in further detail and investigated potential explanations, the boy would have been executed. The purpose of the group was to determine guilt or innocence across the board. Just as the jurors did not know the defendant, they did not know each other. No juror shared his name and the men were only identified by juror number. The lack of trust, combined with various backgrounds and beliefs, created communication barriers between the jurors. Yelling, side conversation, walking away, preexisting bias, game playing, doodling and unbearable heat are all examples of the communication barriers the jurors were challenged to overcome throughout the film. The relationship between the jurors was complex and appeared to only be important in the short-term. They were forced to communicate with each other for the duration of the deliberation. As the conversation advanced, the jurors unintentionally gained insight to their own empathy and behavior tendencies. These are both attributes characteristics of long-term relationship. As the jurors shared individual information driving their position changes, the relationships among the group changed. The intensity of their relationships grew quickly once small talk was replaced with emotional opinions and…...

Similar Documents

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men The 12 Angry Men movie was a perfect example of the Bruce Tuckman Scheme. Once the Jurors go in for deliberation they immediately start two get into the stages of the scheme. Once they are all in the juror’s room and get settled they start the storming stage. As soon as the juror’s get into the storming stage there is a lot of arguing. By the time they start the norming stage the juror’s are still arguing with one another but they are starting to listen to the people who are trying to show there opinion of reasonable doubt. By the end they all get to go home once they come to a unanimous decision. When the juror’s enter the room at the beginning of the movie they automatically start the forming stage to get each to know each other. When they first get into the jurors room most of them are ready to vote guilty and go home. When juror eight votes not guilty all the other jurors got really mad. At that moment they entered into the forming stage. Juror eight explains to the others why he felt that the defendant was not guilty. They all voted again and anonymously and one juror had changed his mind. After the second vote the other ten jurors got even more upset because they new they were going to be there even longer. The jurors entered into the norming stage as juror eight explained all the reasons why he had voted not guilty. As he explained each of his reasons for not voting the defendant guilty, one by the jurors started to change there opinion about......

Words: 445 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men Negotiation Analysis

...12 Angry Men PROC 5840, Negotiations, Midterm Case Analysis Table of Contents Table of Contents……………………………………………………….……………………………….…2 Character Listing…………………………………………………………………………………………...3 Major Case Issues…………………………………………………………………………………………..5 Analysis of Juror Number Eight……………………………………………………………………………7 Analysis of Juror Number Four…………………………………………………………………………...13 Analysis of Juror Number Nine…………………………………………………………………………...17 Bibliography……………………………………………………………………………………………….19 12 Angry Men Character Listing Juror Number One (Martin Balsam): The jury foreman, he got off to a shaky start. However, he took his role seriously and facilitates voting. He was generally passive. Outside of the jury room he was an assistant high school football coach. Juror Number Two (John Fielder): This shy bank clerk was initially reluctant to participate and seemed intimidated by other jurors. Although he exhibited a tendency toward avoidance, eventually he contributed to the discussion. His opinion was easily swayed and he appeared to parrot other jurors. Juror Number Three (Lee J. Cobb): This small business owner shared the story of his turbulent relationship with his own son. He was aggressive and confrontational, using hard bargaining tactics such as intimidation, threats, and insults to influence others. He was the last juror to change his mind. Juror Number Four (E.G. Marshall): A calm, rational, and self-assured stockbroker, he......

Words: 3945 - Pages: 16

Small Group Analysis of ’12 Angry Men’

...Small Group Analysis of ’12 Angry Men’ Interpersonal and Group Dynamics – SOSC 301 Instructor: Mr. Crisp Bryant & Stratton College October 31, 2012 A Small Group Analysis of ’12 Angry Men’ Set in a large U.S. city, in the 1950’s, Twelve men of a jury are sequestered in a room and are unable to leave until a weighty decision is made, one that will either condemn a young man to death or set him free. The twelve strangers are trapped within the confines of the jury room until the goal is achieved. They melt in the hot humidity, which is worsened by the room's stuffiness and by the stress as they grapple with each other and with their responsibility (Lumet,1957). The characters of each of the twelve men was carefully crafted into a particular role within the group dynamics. A complete spectrum of issues among the different characters was developed to add chaos to the group decision-making process. From the bigotry of Juror No.10, to the coldly analytical No.4, each character brought good and bad qualities to the jury room; they all had to be addressed to reach an outcome (Lumet,1957).  At the beginning of the movie, as the twelve men sit down to begin the deliberation process, there is no discussion and they decide to begin by a vote of guilty or not guilty. Eleven of the jurors quickly vote ‘guilty’ and try to leave the room. Nobody even bothers to think what their decision means for the accused. Juror No. 4 is too rigid to change and Juror No. 7 just wants......

Words: 1787 - Pages: 8

12 Angry Men

...• Study Guides and Literature Essays • Editing Services • College Application Essays • Writing Help • Q & A • Lesson Plans • Top of Form [pic][pic] Bottom of Form [pic] Home : 12 Angry Men : Study Guide : Quotes and Analysis 12 Angry Men Quotes by Reginald Rose [pic]                  [pic] [pic] • Buy PDF • Buy Paperback Quotes and Analysis 1. JUDGE'S VOICE: ...and that concludes the court's explanation of the legal aspects of this case. And now, gentlemen of the jury, I come to my final instruction to you. Murder in the first degree - premeditated homicide - is the most serious charge tried in our criminal courts. You've listened to the testimony and you've had the law read to you and interpreted as it applies to this case. It now becomes your duty to try and separate the facts from the fancy. One man is dead. The life of another is at stake. I urge you to deliberate honestly and thoughtfully. If this is a reasonable doubt - then you must bring me a verdict of "not guilty." If, however, there is no reasonable doubt - then you must, in good conscience, find the accused guilty. However you decide, your verdict must be unanimous. In the event you find the accused guilty, the bench will not entertain a recommendation for mercy. The death sentence is mandatory in this case. I don't envy your job. You are faced with a grave responsibility. Thank you, gentlemen. 6 This...

Words: 8375 - Pages: 34

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men By pacaf123 | Studymode.com 12 Angry Men Mid Term PROC 5840 Directed by: Sidney Lumet Writing credits: Reginald Rose (story and screenplay)   Table of Contents Table of Contents2 Cast3 Major Case Issues4 Juror #85 Juror #49 Juror #312 References15   Cast 1957 ActorJuror #Character DescriptionOrder of 'not guilty' vote Martin Balsam1/The ForemanThe jury foreman, somewhat preoccupied with his duties; proves to be accommodating to others. An assistant high school football coach9th John Fiedler2A meek and unpretentious bank clerk who is at first domineered by others but finds his voice as the discussion goes on.5th Lee J. Cobb3A businessman and distraught father, opinionated and stubborn with a temper; the antagonist12th E. G. Marshall4A rational stockbroker, unflappable, self-assured, and analytical11th Jack Klugman 5A young man from a violent slum, a Baltimore Orioles fan3rd Edward Binns6A house painter, tough but principled and respectful6th Jack Warden7A salesman, sports fan, superficial and indifferent to the deliberations7th Henry Fonda8An architect, the first dissenter and protagonist. Identified as "Davis" at the end1st Joseph Sweeney9A wise and observant elderly man. Identified as "McCardle" at the end2nd Ed Begley10A garage owner; a pushy and loudmouthed bigot10th George Voskovec11A European watchmaker and......

Words: 3647 - Pages: 15

12 Angry Men

...which illustrate jury trial system in the US, is Twelve Angry Men (1957). American Film Institute revealed that the movie was the second best film in the Court Drama genre (AFL’s 10 Top 10). Exploration of this film, when jury trial does not happen in Islamic Court, deeply influenced the concepts such as the true judgment and justice in my mind as a Muslim. This paper is aimed to discuss and analysis several instances of defiance behaviors, which are displayed in the movie. It also considers strategies groups utilize to extinguish defiance in each instances of defiance. The first scene; all jurors sat around the table exception for the foreman who concerned to keep formal procedure in the group. He mentioned if all jurors get a unanimous verdict, the defendant would charge mandatory death sentence. He started to count the votes “guilty”, while jurors were raising their hands. Juror number 1, 3, 4, 7, 10 and 12 quickly put up their hands but jurors 2, 5, 6, 11 and 9 raised with slightly pause. Juror number 8 was the only person who believed the boy is not guilty and he had not been conceived to put someone into a death sentence:”It's not easy to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first...We're talking about somebody's life here. We cannot decide in five minutes.” Certainly, it would be hard to become alone against the group. The juror number 8 is the first defiant in the movie that tries to convince others for finding reasonable......

Words: 1304 - Pages: 6

Movie Paper (12 Angry Men)

...COMM 132 October 2, 2014 Movie Paper (12 Angry Men) In the Movie, 12 Angry Men, 12 jurors were tasked with finding a young man guilty or not-guilty of murdering his own father. In order for the men to fulfill their duty as jurors, they had to come to a consensus of whether the young man was guilty or not by working together, as a group, in order to analyze the trials evidence and testimonies, to then come to an agreement on the defendant’s guilt or innocence. As a group that was formed solely for the purpose of achieving a goal of determining someone’s guilt or innocence, the men face many of the challenges that come with having to deal with group communication, such as working with strangers, successfully interacting with them, and having uncooperative members, among other challenges involving the elements of group communication. First of all, the 12 individual members of the group of jurors had to move past the awkwardness that comes with primary tension. In accordance to Tuckman’s Group Development Stages, during the jurors forming stage many of the jurors seemed to feel uncomfortable working with the other members of the jury. Some of the members were evidently uninterested in even working with the group to achieve the group’s goal. For example, Juror 7 and Juror 12 were the most expressive of their lack of interest as Juror 7 just wanted to get a verdict in so that he would be able to go to his much anticipated baseball game, while Juror 12 would started with......

Words: 1487 - Pages: 6

12 Angry Men

...The 12 Angry Men Case Dennis Ojwang Organizational Management 701 February 26, 2015 When this movie was made, no one could have depicted that it would greatly speak of the ever changing dynamics of our world today. Immigration and diversity seem to have plagued the world now more than ever and it is no surprise that the business world has been changed tremendously. When this movie came out in 1957, there wasn’t much diversity as we see it today. Upon watching this movie, various topics covered, ranging from power and influence, ethical decision making and diversity, group formation and dynamics, cultural diversity, organizational culture, conflict management and then, there’s an introduction of Fiedler’s leadership model. The setting of the movie offers consistency, investment, rigidity, autonomy and fairness in terms of assessing different levels of conflict and negotiation. I would say that the most evident styles of conflict in the movie are accommodating, compromising and collaborating conflict resolution styles. The jury is involved in a high profile case about a young boy who, if found guilty, then he will be sent to the electric chair. There are several topics that are related to organizational management class that will be portrayed throughout this jury process. The jury, in determining the fate of the young man, who murdered his father, must closely work together and whether consciously or unconsciously, they have been introduced to the forming, storming,......

Words: 1735 - Pages: 7

12 Angry Men Analysis

...12 Angry Men Analysis The movie starts off with a preliminary vote to see where everyone’s head is at but is found to be 11 to 1 in favor of the guilty verdict .Ultimately, they decide to go around the table, explaining why they believe the boy to be guilty, in hopes of convincing 8th Juror. When a discussion about the murder weapon, which was identified as the knife purchased by the defendant, a “one-of-a-kind” knife, begins, 8th Juror surprises the others by presenting an identical knife he had purchased in a pawn shop two blocks from where the boy lived a few nights prior, shattering the claim that the knife was so unique and identifiable. 8th Juror makes a proposition that the other eleven of them could vote, and if all of them voted “not guilty,” he would not stand alone and would go along with their guilty verdict. They agree to this and vote by secret ballot. The vote is 10 “guilty” votes and 1 “not guilty” vote, and so the debate continues. 8th Juror calls into question the validity of the testimony of the old man living downstairs. 9th Juror provides the possibility that the old man was only testifying to feel important. 8th Juror concludes by saying that even if he did hear him say, “I’m gonna kill you,” that very well could be taken out of context as just a figure of speech. With this 5th Juror changes his vote to “not guilty,” and the vote is 9-3 in favor of guilty. After a brief argument, 8th Juror brings into question whether or not the downstairs neighbor,...

Words: 519 - Pages: 3

12 Angry Men

...GT Intro to films Analysis to film «12 Angry men» The film 12 angry men unique in its minimalism, all the action takes place in a small room, scene built on some conversations and subtle dissection of facts. Although whole film was about deciding whether boy was guilty or not, we could see nature or temper of every character, by how he made his decision about guiltiness of that boy. Representatives of different social classes: a successful businessman, architect, coach of the school football team, temporarily unemployed, single pensioner – typical social archetypes. About the life and position of each the audience learns as if by chance, by fits and starts and accidentally by thrown to the wind phrases. We can see that not for everyone this case is very important, one tries to be on time for the game, another is afraid to get under the rain, three person even played games during discussion and other were talking about their jobs. All of them are agree with others, only just to close this case and go home. 11 Angry men were ready to vote for the verdict without a dissentient voice. But the real problem is that they can't see problem around themselves, they can easily send innocent boy to electric chair, without asking themselves is this fair. I think in this film producer tried to show the audience how it is important to be fair, not judge a person on their own. But rather compare facts, make real decisions. In this film I loved the camera shot. I could see wheter it was......

Words: 372 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men Film Analysis

...12 Angry Men Film Analysis 25 October 2010 Film Analysis The film, 12 Angry Men (1957), is a drama about a jury that was to decide the fate of a teenaged boy who was facing the electric chair for supposedly killing his father with a switchblade knife. The twelve men were locked into a small, claustrophobic jury room on an unbearably hot summer day until they came up with a unanimous decision - either guilty or not guilty. Over the course of the film the votes went from eleven guilty and one not, to a unanimous vote of ‘not guilty’. The movie provides many examples of persuasive speaking, group communication and conflict, and different communication climates. In the movie Henry Fonda’s character made good use of his persuasive speaking skills. He personally had nothing to gain from either verdict, but found the ease with which the others were willing to sentence a young man to death disconcerting. He was firm, but not confrontational when he gave his reasons for voting not guilty. He simply said that he was not convinced ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’ that the boy had committed the crime and asked that they review the evidence. With each piece of cosmetically ‘concrete’ evidence he discredited, he slowly placed doubt within the minds of his fellow jurors. He never out-right said he thought that the defendant was innocent, only that he believed there to be some doubt as to the certainty of his guilt. “It's always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like......

Words: 525 - Pages: 3

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men Writing Assignment Final Exam Project Due: ________________________________________ (EDMODO) You will see a lot of psychological phenomena exhibited in the movie 12 Angry Men. Many of these phenomena are listed in the boxes on the next page. Your task for this assignment is to watch the movie, take note of these various psychological phenomena, and then write a cohesive 2-3 page paper discussing these themes. In writing your paper you must pick at least 5 separate incidences from the movie. For each incidence, describe how it relates to psychological phenomenon. Be sure to use concepts from across all of psychology. Do NOT, for example, just pick examples from social psychology (such as conformity and stereotyping); use examples from cognition, memory, sensation, and perception, etc. as well. In order to construct a cohesive essay, you should structure your discussion of the 4 incidences around a central area. That is, your paper needs to be more than just a loose collection of summary points. Consider how you can tie all the incidences together around a central psychological idea. * Behavior is determined by multiple causes: For any complex human behavior, multiple reasons exist as to why that behavior was done. For example, consider your study behavior. It is determined by intelligence, memory and attentional constraints, and social factors. * Behavior is shaped by cultural heritage: At several points in the semester we discussed how the......

Words: 717 - Pages: 3

12 Angry Men

...Juror 3- angry, loud opinionatedJuror 4- opinionated, nervous motion (he tends to pace the room), serious, logicalJuror 5- reasonable, uses his own experiences to make his arguments.Juror 9- would be seen as the mediator, the man who brings harmony to the process. He is older, retired, and he stands up for what he believes in without flinching.Jurors 12 and 7 are the followers of the group. They simply go along with whoever is talking at the moment.Juror 2- calm, shy, quietJuror 10- angry, loud, prejudicedBackgroundThe movie 12 Angry Men begins with a boy who is on trial for murder of his father. The jury, comprising of 12 men is locked in a room to decide the verdict of the case. 11 out of the 12 jurors are convinced that the boy is guilty, however one juror believesthat there is reasonable doubt for the boy to not be guilty. In the rest of the movie, the jury discusses the case and slowly the juror who believes the boy is not guilty, convinces the rest that there is reasonable doubt in the case.Communication barriersJuror 1 – This juror takes the lead and tries to keep the discussion in order. He tries to be fair to all jurors despite thinking the boy to be guilty.Juror 3 – This juror’s argument lies on his own prejudices and life experiences. He comes across as very angry, loud, opinionated and aggressive. He uses definite words like “I know”, “You can’t” etc. He fails to listen to the other jurors and stubbornly stick to his stand.Juror 4 – This juror tries to bring logic...

Words: 440 - Pages: 2

12 Angry Men

...12 Angry Men Analysis In the movie “12 Angry Men” there is a young man on trial for murder. The year is 1957, so the jury consists of all white, middle class to upper class, middle aged and up men. Some of their occupations consist of architect, salesman, broker and a man in advertisement. Which if you know anything about a jury today it is completely different. You have many different people of all race, gender, and social class, within that community, to receive a more fair trial. Also you can’t bring in any previous information into the trial or bring any emotional attachment into the case. Having a jury like in the “12 Angry Men” is not having a fair jury or trial what so ever, they are either going to all agree with each other, persuade one another or think like each other. One of the characters played by Henry Fonda goes against the grain, and votes not guilty. This really sends the other jurors up the wall, more particularly the head strong jurors. They want nothing to do with him and don’t want to listen to what he has to say. Henry Fonda speaks out and votes the opposite of all the other jurors. He does so because he wants to discuss the facts and the evidence, he isn’t convinced he is guilty or he is innocent. Fonda wants to do so because he does not want to but a boy to his death without discussing this matter into more depth. This is the boy’s life they have in the palm of their hands after all, and he couldn’t live with the guilt if he would have been peer......

Words: 1022 - Pages: 5

Movie Review 12 Angry Men

...Ans 6. “Prejudice always complicated the truth.” The movie 12 Angry Men, by means of several situational examples, reaffirms the fact. The first case in point is of the boy on trial who is born and brought up in slums. Many of the jury members, especially jurors 10, 7, 4 and 3 are heavily influenced by the prejudices they hold against children from the slums. In one of the scenes, juror 10, goes into a rage and explains why people from the slums cannot be trusted and calls them little better than animals who gleefully kill each other off for fun. Juror 4 had earlier pointed out that slums are breeding grounds for criminals and that these slum children are a threat to our society to which 10 adds that they are “real trash”. This is where juror 5 who himself has been born and brought up in slums interrupts and reveals about himself to which others try and convince him that it isn’t about him and that he should not be taking it personally. Juror 11 makes a point at this juncture and empathizes with juror 5 saying that he can understand his sensitivity about the slum issue. It is to be noticed hear that this juror 11 is Hispanic origin and himself had been a victim of such treatment out of held prejudices. One such instance comes in one of the movie scenes as well when juror 7 makes a remark on juror 11 and says “they” are all alike who come running for a life and before you can take a deep breath they get on your head and calls him arrogant. Towards the end juror 10 again......

Words: 601 - Pages: 3