top of the top

Rating: 10/10 (15 February 2010)

Simplicity can be complex if you work at it and 12 Angry Men is a perfect example of just that. The first time I saw it was in my civics class my freshman year of high school and unlike my other classmates who saw it boring and dull I was for lack of a better word riveted and here's why: The beginning of the film brings you into the tail end of a trial about a teenage boy who's accused of murdering his father. The evidence is a switchblade knife and the testimony of a old man and woman who heard and allegedly witnessed the crime. The Judge sets the tone for the film explaining that the "jury" (you included) have to decide whether the boy is guilty or not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The jurors descend into the confines of the jury room and are locked in until the verdict is made. Most of the men automatically deem the defendant guilty just because they want to leave and a few because of the evidence which consisted of the eye witness testimony. When the first vote is taken Henry Fonda (juror #8) is the only one who says not guilty but not because he thinks he not guilty or guilty but because he isn't sure. The film then progresses into Fonda breaking the case down to the others and slowly but surely guiding the others into a verdict of not guilty all except juror 10 and 7. After some heated prejudicial and racial words eventually all become convinced of the kid's innocence. The very end of the film concludes that men go their separate way revealing only 2 of the men's names and the picture ends.
The great thing about the 12.A.M is that you really need no information on the case, the trial, or the testimony you solely rely on the jurors showing that a little usually means a lot. I think it's a wonderful movie with a brilliant classic cast including the man behind the voice of Winnie the Pooh's Piglet (you'll know it when you hear him) and of course the incomparable Henry Fonda. Truly a film although simple was way ahead of it's time.