Delight in black and white.

Rating: 10/10 (31 August 2011)

Courtroom dramas don't work well with everyone. Neither do movies in black and white, people find them dull, boring and lack-lustre. 12 Angry Men falls in both these categories. Yet, it manages to astound you with its breathtaking brilliance and subtle perfection.
A boy is convicted of murdering his father. Witnesses, good lawyers, bad past record, motive; an open and shut case. Three minutes into the movie and the twelve jury members are in their chamber. They have all got their priorities and schedules - one has a baseball match, another has his garages going to pot. Everyone wants to leave; it is not their butt that is going to land on the electric chair anyway. Prior to a discussion of any sort, an initial vote is held with the hopes of making a quick, clean job out of it. Eleven are convinced he is guilty. One isn't quite so sure. And hence unfolds one of the greatest dramas Hollywood has ever seen.
The movie doesn't waste time in showing the lawyers fighting like shark. It doesn't show a depressed teenager sobbing his guts out in the box. The camera focuses on him but once, and that single look is enough to convey a farrago of emotions - fear, exhaustion, uncertainty and a certain innocence. Instead, it does what it is meant to - focus on the twelve men that matter; in whose hands resides the fate of the accused. They are regular people from everyday spheres of life - a coach, architect, bank clerk - men who don't overanalyze when presented with facts. They naively, yet innocuously, take things at their face value which compels them to reach the guilty verdict; after all, the evidence is overwhelming. The lone man (Henry Fonda) who contradicts them, however, realizes the onus that has befallen them and refuses to reach a hasty conclusion, for he believes that there is the possibility of there being reasonable doubt and as the American Constitution states, a man is innocent until proved guilty. Initially, the others are merely taken aback at the trivial inconvenience due to this rebellion of sorts. But this soon turns to resentment, finally boiling to anger - something that beautifully justifies the title of the movie.
Henry Fonda does a convincing job as juror number eight. He is brooding, intelligent, pragmatic and at the same time calm with a mild demeanour. His acting isn't artificial as he thoroughly indulges himself in his role. The performance is powerful and both the jury members and viewers find it hard to counter his arguments. He asserts that ratiocination is the best and only way to decide - for a man's life hangs in the balance. As the movie proceeds, you see him demolishing proofs one after the other, till they all collapse like a stack of cards. The others too play their part, however, there isn't a real standout among the remaining eleven; a shortcoming that the movie faces. The rest of the characters have been poorly portrayed and lack depth; there is nothing that stands out or is memorable about them. While the film had several chances to introduce more dimensions to its actors, it simply fails to do so, despite the fact that is it primarily a character-centric movie. Fonda is staunch in the lead role, but the faceless others serve no purpose than contradict him, sticking to him like leeches, without creating an identity of their own.
The tension has been skilfully built up - right from the weather (it is the hottest day of the year) to the claustrophobic environment where the entire episode takes place. The idiosyncrasies of men have been highlighted wonderfully; their feeble mindedness, their anxiety, dogmatism, their indecisiveness and their fury at being constantly opposed by men who change their votes like the flip of a coin. They reason out, fight, talk dirty and negotiate. Their faces glisten with sweat. They smoke. A weapon is brandished and a man resorts to violence. Men are prejudiced, for the accused comes from a poor society with a history of violence. Some even cite personal reasons for convicting the boy. There is racism, bigotry and impatience; but juror number eight refuses to budge, for he believes that the life of a man is worth more than that.
The director Sidney Lumet (Network, Dog Day Afternoon) knows that the movie isn't about the suspense and doesn't try to make it into one. It is about how the characters have been drawn out, each representing a dimension of human personality. Though, like many great movies, 12 Angry Men was a commercial failure, it is considered as a benchmark in American cinema. It is touching, mesmerising and provocative, and it does so much in a mere ninety six minutes, which indisputably makes it one of the greatest cult classics of all times.