So Simple, So Brilliant

Rating: 9/10 (28 September 2006)

So simple yet so brilliant, 12 ANGRY MEN is not to be missed. It's the tale of the meticulous Mr. Davis, a juror not quite convinced of a murder suspect's guilt despite what appears to be overwhelming evidence. His questions gradually persuade his fellow jurors that things aren't always as open-and-shut as they might seem.
One of the great all-time ensemble casts highlights 12 ANGRY MEN. Henry Fonda is superb as the hardcore skeptic... but then again, everyone is superb, from Joseph Sweeney as the eldest juror to E.G. Marshall as the no-nonsense Juror #4. Anytime a film set almost exclusively at a single cramped table in a single cramped room can spellbound the viewer, you know you've got first-rate actors. The clever, colorful dialog is a treat as well.
Yet the strongest asset of 12 ANGRY MEN is the demands it makes of the viewer to think critically. Initially we are like most of the jurors, curious as to how Fonda can be so naive to think the young suspect may be innocent. But he gradually pulls us into his line of reasoning, challenging our assumptions and finding fault with the supposed facts. By the film's end, we're left wondering how we could have been so narrow-minded just 90 minutes earlier.
As sharp as what's on screen is, 12 ANGRY MEN is equally smart for what it does not show. Many of today's filmgoers would demand flashback sequences to depict what the characters describe. They would want to get to know the accused killer so they could judge him for themselves. They would want more action, more pizazz, and changes of scenery. Yet it's precisely the film's refusal to do any of this that makes it work so well. The viewer is effectively the 13th juror with nothing but recollections of testimony to go on. Our imaginations are free to create a picture of the alleged murder, just as we would have to as part of the jury.
12 ANGRY MEN is often cited as one of the greatest films ever. It's a verdict that is well deserved.