Character summary

Rating: Null/10 (2 December 2009)

The movie Twelve Angry Man revolves around twelve jurors deciding the fate of the young boy who is accused of murdering his own father with a switchblade. In the beginning of the movie, we see the accused boy for a brief time and the judge telling the twelve jurors to make their decision. After the twelve jurors enter the jury room, they decide to take a preliminary vote to "see who's where." During the preliminary vote, jurors # 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, and 12 immediately puts their hands up while jurors # 2, 5, 6, 9, and 11puts their hand up due to peer pressure. Juror #8 is the only one who voted not guilty. After the preliminary vote, juror # 12 suggests to "convince" juror #8 by going around the table telling the reason for their vote. Juror # 2 says he voted guilty because he "just think he's guilty," while Juror # 3 says he has "no personal feelings" but the "fact" all says that the boy is guilty. Juror # 4 says boy's alibi was "flimsy" and couldn't even remember to movie he saw. Juror #5 asks for pass while Juror #6 says that the people's testimony was strong. Juror #7 believes his guilty because of his past criminal life. Lastly, Juror # 10 also believes in the testimony of an old woman who said she saw the killing. The other jurors did not tell us the reason for their voting. Although some of the reasons are logical and reasonable, the other reasons are not logical such as juror # 2 where he says he just "thinks" he's guilty and juror # 4 where he just believes his guilty because of weak alibi. Throughout the movie, there were many evidences pointed out by many of the jurors. Some of the things that motivated their consciences are their own experience with their sons and their prejudice. There were a few main pieces of evidence against the accused. First one was the switchblade used to kill the father where it is believed that the switchblade is one of its kind and store manager identified it, however, it is revealed that it could be easily bought for $6 at other stores. Second Evidence was the testimony of old man who lived down stairs. He said that he heard the killing and saw the boy run away after killing the father. Last main evidence was the testimony of an old woman. She said that she was trying to sleep when she saw the boy stabbing his father through the windows of the train passing by. The two antagonists of the movie are juror # 3 and 8. They were forced to pit their wills against each other because while juror # 3 believed the boy to be guilty, the juror # 8 continuously said the boy is not guilty. In the end juror # 8 won as the juror # 3 changed his vote to not guilty. The juror # 8 won because he firmly followed his conscience while juror # 3 let the emotion get better of him saying "I'm gonna kill you" and "we can throw away all the other evidences." By the end of the movie, the jurors started to realize that the evidences have faults in them. Throughout the debate, jurors gain many new insights to the evidences. The first evidence, unique switchblade is discovered to be not unique at all and can be bought for $6. The two testimonies by 2 people also is discovered to be unlikely. It is almost impossible for an old man who has a bad leg to walk across the long hallway just in time to see the boy run away. It is also highly unlikely that the old woman without glasses can see the murder happening clearly through the windows of the moving train. The hearing of the body falling down and words said by the boy can also be false as there was a very loud train passing by them at that time. Lastly, the phrase "I'm gonna kill you" are said everyday without actually meaning to kill someone. As the discussion went on, many jurors started to get more insight to the case and started to change their vote to not guilty. Two of the jurors who changed their votes are juror # 9 and juror # 7. Juror # 9 says he changed his vote because he respected the juror # 8 standing alone and trying to help the boy out. This swayed the juror # 9 to wanting to hear more and discuss about it more deeply. Juror # 7 however, changes his vote just because he is "sick of all the talking" while he really just wants to go to the ball game before it ends. I believe that the juror who had the most mature conscience is juror # 8. Despite being pressured by the 11 other jurors, he believed that you can't send a boy to the chair just with 5 minutes of discussion and voted not guilty following his principles of human life. He did his best to convince the others that the boy may not be guilty and succeeded in the end. The juror with the least conscience is the juror # 7. He was very impatient during the whole discussion and frequently joked about the case and the life of the boy like it was nothing important. He even changed his vote only because he wanted to go to the ball game before it started. He was acting only for his benefits and following the ego level of the conscience. The movie Twelve Angry Men explores wide range of conscience levels and the discussion involving human life. Throughout the movie, there were many changes occurring between how jurors saw the case and what they believed. I really enjoyed the movie and how the jurors changed as the many of the evidences started to prove inaccurate.