It all hung on the actors' skill

Rating: 10/10 (17 June 2006)

12 men in a jury room: no women in 1957, of course. Fonda played it great, as did the screenwriter: no pressure, just let them come to their own conclusions. Put enough pressure on the bastards, so they show their asses and then the nice guys will see the light and change their verdict.
Loved that they showed the equivocator and the one who wanted to get to the ball game, so he voted not guilty .....but were also shown up for what they were. The prejudiced guy making his bigoted pitch, with all the folks standing up and turning their backs: obviously, this was not Birmingham jury. When you look at the lynchers who were acquitted by all-white juries, you know that Henry Fonda couldn't have made a damn with them.
When I was attacked on the Boston Red Line by a drunken thug who took my Peace sign and jammed me in the stomach with it, then ignored by the MBTA police on the platform, I knew how it must feel to be a black man in 1950s Alabama and try to get justice.
When we went to Quincy court, the cops all circled round the guy and read his girlfriend's testimony to the clerk. It wasn't even carried over to the D.A. When I objected that the testimony presented wasn't even mine, the clerk said, "It doesn't have to be. You may be the victim but you're only a witness as far as the state is concerned. And the cop could use anyone's testimony." But the impression was that it was MY testimony, not the thug's girlfriend's.
So this was an idealization of justice moving along toward the correct verdict. . The jury foreman was key: if he had been dictatorial, it would never have gotten to the point of free exchange. Because he was passive, Fonda was able to take over. I doubt that this was at all realistic. THat's why they choose jurors without college educations: so the ignorant can be swayed by the lawyers. These jurors were evenly divided, with the less well educated being the more ethical, interestingly enough. Lee J Cobb, as the father of the estranged son, and the last holdout, did a magnificent job as a bitter angry man, who would have liked to send the kid to the chair out of his own anger. Fonda was great as the Jesus figure. Too bad he couldn't have brought a little more of that to his daughter, Jane. The weather also starred in this movie: the heat added to the pressure. When Fonda helps the various jurors open or shut the windows, he also subconsciously makes them his allies in his fight for truth. The screenwriter did well to keep him neutral. He doesn't know if the kid did it: he just wants them to discuss the situation before they kill him. In the course of the discussion, the jurors actually create a trial that didn't exist.
Interesting legal question: can you judge a man by the inferences you draw from what may or may not have been said at the trial? In other words, is it 'legal' to use means other than what the defense did to acquit the defendant? A trick that wasn't used: no body died. I thought for sure the old guy or the angry guy would have a heart attack in the heat, and they would have to bring in one of the alternates, adding to the character study. Great movie. I"m sure when I see it again, I'll find even more in it. But I did love how the Casper Milquetoasts were empowered to find their own voices.
Easy to see why this is one of the greatest movies of all time. The writer was magnificent and i don't even remember his name.!!!!! Fonda without a good script would be Paris Hilton.