"You can't send someone off to die with evidence like that".

Rating: 9/10 (30 July 2011)

When I was a store manager for a regional supermarket chain, about thirty years or so ago, our team was presented a developmental seminar featuring "12 Angry Men". Breaking into work groups, our task was to watch the film, and at strategically paused moments, predict which of the jurors would be the next to change their verdict from guilty to not guilty. It was an exercise in analytical thinking and observation of human behavior, characteristics that a good manager needs in order to develop a work force toward a common goal. There was actually a group that got all the positions right from one through twelve, which astounded me. Watching today, I got stuck again right at the outset, figuring Jack Klugman's Juror #5 would be the first to be influenced by Henry Fonda's argument.
The film is an extraordinary piece of ensemble acting, and if the players weren't that well known back in the day, they have certainly made themselves a name since. Almost all have passed on, but to see actors like Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, E.G. Marshall, Martin Balsam, Ed Begley and Klugman all in one film is a veritable treat, even apart from the story. But it's the story itself that rivets one's attention to the screen, and the slow, methodical plodding Fonda brings to the table with convincing arguments even in the face of his own uncertainty about the case. With a surety that "The facts are supposed to determine the case", Fonda's character struggles to assure his fellow jurors that the life of an accused killer is worth the effort to consider reasonable doubt.
Aside from Fonda, the two most galvanizing characters are portrayed by Lee J. Cobb and Ed Begley. Begley, Juror #10, who exhibits the most extreme traits of racism and bigotry, forces each of the jurors to confront their own prejudices in an uncomfortable scene where almost every other juror stands up and turns their back on him. Cobb, Juror #3, has a much more personal investment in the trial, harboring a failed relationship with his own son that colors his view of the world. The really interesting point regarding Fonda's character is that he accomplished his mission without ever raising his voice. I don't think I could have done that considering the stakes involved.
It's a rare film that can anchor the viewer in one spot for an hour and a half and make time fly by with an intriguing story and realistic dialog. Rarer still is the ability to poke a finger at one's own pre-conceived notions of guilt or innocence, forcing the serious viewer to take a seat at the jury table and examine the facts from all sides before voting guilty or not guilty.