And the verdict is...

Rating: 10/10 (7 August 2004)

Sidney Lumet sits on my list of underrated directors alongside (among others) Joe Johnston and Brian DePalma. Their talents have either been abused or misunderstood, but this is not such a case.
Spoiler minefield ahead...
Courtroom dramas aren't interesting genres. Despite whatever plot twists are thrown there is always the 50/50 chance on verdict. In that case, this is probably the most advanced in its class.
So here we have Henry Fonda as the lowly juror disputing all the facts. Everyone is convinced. Court adjourned. This is your typical Grisham novel or TV drama.
What changes it is how we are presented this information. At this point in time, audiences were still trying to separate the "fourth wall" of stage from the fluidity of the cinema. 'Streetcar' was noble, this is professional.
Now just think. If DePalma had done this today we would've probably entered the heads of each man and had an examination of the evidence in their imagination ala 'Mission Impossible'. We would probably also have a detached camera from the proceedings (hence "impersonal").
Lumet obviously killed himself trying to make us latch onto the characters and think for ourselves. This is one of few examples where the method actually works: making faces cinematic without resorting to montage.
Reiner didn't learn this lesson, Parker went the other way. Spike Lee used the heat inciter for 'Right Thing'.
Final Analysis = = Learn from this.