One room, no color, and one of the best movies I have ever seen

Rating: 10/10 (14 April 2020)

Simplicity. Despite the setting and a lack of modern video editing skills, this movie manages to keep me on my toes from the beginning until the end. I think that this movie conveys many wise messages through the remarks of the jurors.
It's fascinating to me how a variety of different character traits are portrayed in these jurors, so I'll write my view of the most influential people presented in the movie.
Juror #8 - The protagonist of this movie, and the wisest person in the room. I learned a very valuable lesson from him, which is to always leave room for a reasonable doubt whenever I try to think independently about anything in life really. He is a true example of a smart, calm individual who acknowledges the fallibility of a human and therefore knows that witnesses' statements need to be questioned, especially in a situation where a young man's life depends on it. He is also articulate and very respectful of others, and that's why he became my role model for having a constructive argument with people. Another thing that strikes me is that he is able to defend his original opinion despite the fact that 11 people in the room disagreed with him. He didn't succumb to the pressure and just blindly follow the crowd. Instead, he showed us how we should behave, especially in today's world where manipulation is dangerously easy with social media and other technologies. I think he was able to do this because he values his own morality more than anything else, which is another reason why I consider him a very good person that I want to aspire to be.
Juror #4 - The perfect antagonist. He is presented as a man that doesn't sweat which indicates his extreme level-headedness that is very useful in their situation. He is the only person who had reasonable arguments to back up his vote for "guilty". He thought that the kid was guilty until the very end when he changed his mind after being convinced by the counterarguments presented by other jurors. That was when he realized that there is a lot of reasonable doubt in the case and that a person mustn't be hung when there are so many unclear evidences. I respect him because he was respectful to others and always articulated his opinions logically which helped create a satisfying debate.
Juror #3 - Inherently not a bad person, and I'll explain why. He is very prejudiced about this case because of his terrible relationship with his son that made him think subconsciously that all kids are bad. He's actually deeply scarred because of this bad relationship and that's why he tries to present himself as a strong, confident, and loud person. He is also very emotionally unstable as he shows many times, and even admits himself. It's in the end that he shows who he really is - a vulnerable man that still mourns his family relationship. He experiences a breakdown and starts crying while changing his vote to "not guilty" which shows that he finally realized the flaw in his prejudiced thinking. This is the reason why I don't consider him a bad person, but just a person that has gone through rough times which influenced his subconscious.
Juror #10 - He was obviously raised improperly which is why he grew into a racist, terrible human being that is full of hatred. Along with being a bad person, he also proves to be unintelligent to say the least. He repeats the same few sentences throughout the film, interrupts other people constantly, and never brings anything constructive to the debate. He is a true example of a shallow person that doesn't deserve anything good in life. Even though I developed despise toward this character, I think it's very useful to be encountered with this juror in the movie because he is a good reminder that people like him exist in the real world and that I should stay away from them.
Juror #7 - Along with juror #10, he is the worst person in the room. He is so selfish that he prioritizes his entertainment at a sports game over the conversation that will decide whether the boy is going to live or die. He acts this way throughout the debate and shows his stupidity and shallowness by his various acts. He was just so annoying to me that I had to write a special paragraph to recognize what I should never become.
Other jurors are all good people in my opinion and they were all slowly realizing the complexity of the case and why it's necessary to discuss it deeply. They are all different of course, but I don't feel like it's necessary to write about any of them after discussing the juror #8 who encapsulates all the good traits that can be found in these other jurors.
To conclude, this is one of the best movies that I've ever seen because of its meaningful messages and I would recommend it to everyone who loves to think deeply about life.