At the beginning of the movie, Twelve Angry Men, a juror of twelve men are assembled to decide the death penalty case of a young Latino man who is being prosecuted for killing his father. The story is not really about the defendant though. …
Download file to see previous pages...
It is about the group dynamics of the jury and how they change throughout the movie. To start with, the group comes from a wide range of backgrounds and beliefs, but what is more important is how they view the purpose of their task. Most want to just “get it over with” regardless of the outcome. Because it does not affect their lives in any significant way, they do not apply much critical thought to the evidence. Instead, they assume because the police and courts are prosecuting the young man, he must be guilty. Thankfully for the defendant, one man, Juror #8, uses critical thinking and takes the instructions from the judge seriously. Twelve Angry Men can be divided into five sections of group development. The first stage, known as “forming,” begins the dynamic and usually involves working out of purpose, structure, and leadership. In the movie this part of the group development is portrayed at the beginning of the jury deliberations. Juror #1, the jury foreman (Martin Balsam), is ready to start and seems unclear on how to proceed. He clearly demonstrates that he is not really a leader type. He politely asks two of the jurors to have a seat so they can get started without seeming the least bit managerial. Then when the men assemble around the juror’s table, the foreman hesitantly discusses the various ways to proceed. He says he is not sure which is best and readily accepts the suggestion of one of the other men, a much more authoritarian type, that they take a vote so they “can all get out of there” (Henry Fonda). The foreman readily concedes and the vote is eleven to one in favor of guilty with Juror #8 (played by Henry Fonda) being the holdout. One of the more extroverted jurors says, “Boy oh boy, there’s always one,” which seems to imply that Juror #8 is only voting not guilty to cause trouble, gain attention, or for some reason other than the fact that he truly believes the defendant is not guilty. The juror who implies this accusation acts passively aggressively to bully Juror #8. He wants Juror #8 to feel like everyone is against him, so that he will change his vote and then they all can “get out of there.” Yet, he does not come right out and say it directly. This leads directly to the next stage of group development, “storming.” Storming involves intergroup conflict and disagreement over who should be in control of the group even if it is not blatantly exerted. Juror #10 (played by Ed Begley) challenges the authority of Juror #1, the jury chairman, and Juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb) tells Juror #2 (John Fiedler) "to keep silent." Both Jurors #3 and #10 intervene when Juror #9 (Joseph Sweeney) wants to give his opinion. Then, Juror #6 (Edward Binns) physically threatens Juror #3 because he does not think he is showing Juror #9, who is the oldest of the group, due respect. Another instance that reveals the personalities of the group occurs when Juror #11 (Georg Voskovec) says, “I beg pardon. To which Juror #10 says, "I beg pardon? What are you so polite about?” And, Juror #11 answers, “For the same reason you are not: it's the way I was brought up” (Henry Fonda). This clearly demonstrates that there are vast differences in background and personality in the group. From the revelation of these differences and likenesses, as with any group, small cliques begin to form. “Norming” is this clique forming stage and occurs when the group begins to develop close relationships among its members. Most of the group participants are encouraged to participate. In Twelve Angry Men, even the more silent members of the group (Jurors 2, 5, 6) were encouraged to contribute their opinions to the discussion. During norming, groups will generally demonstrate cohesiveness, yet in the movie, total unity never quite develops. In
...Download file to see next pagesRead More
12 Angry Men and the Psychology of the Jury Room Twelve men, all of them strangers to one another, are shut up in a small, hot room to decide the fate of a young man from the slums. They literally hold the man’s life in their hands—if they vote guilty, he will be put to death for the crime of which he is accused.
In the process of this anonymous situation, individuals must put aside their differences, backgrounds, and biases in order to see things objectively and with clarity. Some of the jurors in the film cannot complete this requirement and shut themselves down trying; others in the jury room are capable of viewing the case objectively and reach a consensus through remaining rational.
They are uneasily brought together to deliberate after the trial and hearing of 'facts' in an apparently open-and-shut murder trial case. They withdraw to a jury room to perform their civic duty to provide a just verdict for the indigent 19-year-old minority defendant with a criminal record and whose fate is uncertain.
The jury then right away goes into the jury room and starts deliberations. It becomes obvious early on into the discussions, that more than a few of the men have a lot of personal prejudices that have a great effect on their decision.
Juror 8, is one of twelve men, each coming from different backgrounds, careers, prejudices and beliefs, asked to judge one of their peers. The defendant is an 18-year old kid who allegedly has killed his father with a switchblade knife, in a heated fight.
If there is a hint of doubt that the defendant is guilty then according to the legal system the defendant must be acquitted of the charge.
This mandate is dramatized in the movie “12 Angry Men”, directed by Sidney Lumet. In the film a son is accused of stabbing
“Twelve Angry Men” is a film that falls under the genre of American drama film and was released in the year 1957. The film is also remarkable for the continuity and exclusive use of a single set. Also the film will leave a long lasting impression on the minds of its audience because of its outstanding opening scene.
As depicted in the movie and from the reading, appeal to force occurs when an individual poses a summary to another individual and informs that person that some harm or damage will occur to him or her if she or he does not give in to the conclusion or
They lead dissimilar high school social lives. Jenifer happens to be shallow and extroverted unlike David, who is an introvert and spends most of his time on the television. Their different social characters
2 Pages(500 words)Essay
GOT A TRICKY QUESTION? RECEIVE AN ANSWER FROM STUDENTS LIKE YOU!
Let us find you another Essay on topic Twelve Angry Men for FREE!