A tug-of-war battle between morality and rationalization

Rating: 9/10 (21 May 2013)

It's amazing how 12 Angry Men can make other movies seem gimmicky having to rely on props or set pieces to make the audience feel immersed only to feel let down in the end. And that is due largely in part to its acting performances. Never would I have thought I would ever feel tension just from the use of dialogue, but '12 Angry Men' proved me wrong showing that if you have a good plot and a good script, then you can make a quality film without the use of large sets, car chases, gun shots, and beautiful scenery shots.
There was never one moment in this film where I was not paying attention. One reason I can give for this is the distinctiveness of each and every character. What I love is how every juror is different from one another hailing from many different backgrounds. Just listening to these guys talk made me want to get to know everyone of them and what their motives were and how it would affect the outcome of the story. As the story progresses, you get more and more immersed as things start to get tense and personal in situation in which extreme rationalization is required in using reasonable doubt.
What also makes this film rewarding is that you feel like one of the jurors and it makes you want to think just as hard as they're thinking about the case. There are twists and turns here and this is not a simple case to analyze when everything is not pure black and white. When we're only presented with very few details, we can only look to the unseen details that could give us a strong reason to doubt a person(s)' accusations. This is a story that is universal and how reasonable doubt must be taken into all accounts when there is blurred line between who is right or wrong and who is good or bad.