Great actors; somewhat preachy script; still worth watching

Rating: 7/10 (25 August 2005)

I won't repeat the details of the plot as many comments above summarize the plot and even the 12 jurors in depth...
Briefly, Fonda's character challenges the rest of the 12 man jury to take time to reexamine the evidence before they send a very young man to the mandatory death sentence.
A fair challenge. Even tho the case (as one juror argues ) seem so "open and shut".
Here, the best thing about the film (to me) is the use of logic. Why? As the 12 men examine each bit of proof, they discover several possible logical flaws or false assumptions. Sound too dry? Not the way it is presented.
My criticism is that Fonda's character is just too perfect, too right and (for most of the movie) too free from perspiration, unlike the rest in that hot jury room.
Fonda early questions some jurors as to whether there's any possibility for error. If he said "It's possible" one more time, I was going to scream. (I remember various evil characters getting off on slim technicalities...! ) But fortunately, his questioning leads others to question evidence and to find REAL doubt that the testimony, etc. is valid.
Their use of logic to pick out the evidentiary flaws is fascinating. Thus, this is still an excellent movie worth watching!