I don’t know if you’re a big Film-noir fan, but I’m surely not! Even so I completely loved this movie. You see, I’m that kind of guy who really likes a challenge and really enjoys movies that make you talk about them with friends. I mean, come one, I just can’t stand it when I’m watching a movie and after 10-20 minutes or so, I already figured out the ending: he ends up with the girl, the bad guys crash and burn and everyone is happy etc. Now here’s the twist: This movie doesn’t actually have any real mind-blowing twist that you could never think about, thus making me look silly. But wait, there’s more!
The story of 12 jurors that need to decide if a boy is guilty of murdering his father.
I can’t even compare the review I’m about to make with other editor powered reviewing site out there. These people get paid to review and really do a great job, but I think that with the soul purpose of sharing what you really think with others you could touch someone on a more deep, personal level (what I’m trying to accomplish here).
This movie touched me on a personal level and the feeling was so deep that I had to watch it again, and again, and again until I felt truly enlightened. What makes this movie special is its ability to deploy two parallel worlds (the murder story and the jurors personality) that finally merge in a way that makes you want to watch it again. Now what makes this movie even more special is the way its presenting itself: Instead of following the trial itself, the viewer has the unique chance of following the story inside the jury room, with all the facts coming from the juries and not the lawyers.
This movie is so interesting on a deep level that even if I stayed up all night writing this review, giving you all the details and spoilers, you would still want to watch it.
In the beginning the cameras are positioned above the eye level, using wide lens, giving a viewer the feeling of space and freedom, even tough the action is almost entirely based in one small room. As the story comes along and the juries tend to spark the scene, the camera angles are reduced and the position lowered, creating some kind of claustrophobia feeling. Everything tends to get tense as the vote number turns around and jurors start talking about the case on a more personal level.
The jurors acting is flawless and Henry Fonda (juror #8) truly did a great job both as an actor and co-producer.
The jurors are presented with their own personal story in witch some get more attention then others. This people come from almost all social categories and it really becomes a treat when you decide on your favorite one (mine being #8 of course) and you see him convince the others that the boy could be not-guilty. What actually attracted me in watching this movie several times are the lines and plots that juror #8 (and following him others) uses trying to convince others that there really is a reasonable doubt, and they should talk about it more.
Here’s a little story for you to compare:
Lets say for example you’re watching a movie, in witch the bad guy steals some money and tries to run away also holding hostage some love interest . Our good guy, the one we really like, saves the girl and puts the bad guy in prison. Now in most movies the good guy also ends up with the money, the producers really need to take care of the money, someone needs to receive it and my favorite part is when the good guy gets it. Now every time a movie like this is ending, I am always thinking of what happened with the money? Or what happened to that? You know that feeling? When you feel the movie is incomplete and some parts are missing.
Now in “12 Angry Men” almost everything happens in one room and even after they reach a verdict, you are not given the chance to see the reaction of the people in the court room or the boy accused for murder. The brilliant thing that really got me thinking was that I never got that feeling where I needed to know more, or that something was missing. It was just brilliant! I really felt happy with the action and how the story ended.
This is why you should watch this movie, I truly recommend it to you.
12 Angry Men (1957); Directed by Sidney Lumet; Nominated for 3 Oscars. Another 12 wins & 6 nominations; Starring Henry Fonda as juror #8 and also as co-producer.

6 responses so far ↓
1 Alex // Jun 6, 2007 at 6:26 am
Hmmm let’s see…this article realy seems me written by a girl. What can I say? It seems that this mouvie realy impressed you! Try to see again “12 Angry Men” and put yourself in the place of the father… or try to change something that didn’t realy like you!
2 davis // Jun 8, 2007 at 2:31 pm
I just wanted to point out that “12 Angry Men” is not in the film-noir genre. It’s just in black-and-white.
3 Random Persom // Feb 19, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Umm, I watched the movie. It was Ok, I guess…
But how do really know who killed the father?
If the boy is innocent then who’s the killer?
4 Random Person // Feb 19, 2008 at 4:54 pm
Umm, I watched the movie. It was Ok, I guess…
But how do really know who killed the father?
If the boy is innocent then who’s the killer?
5 Daniel H // Feb 20, 2008 at 5:57 am
That just isn’t the point of this movie. Anyone could of killed the father, hell even the boy, we do not know.
The whole story evolves around Fonda’s power of persuasion.
6 blinky // Jun 2, 2008 at 11:06 pm
You should possibly read The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand. Tale of a guy that lives by his own principles when selling out would be easy. Quite slow to the average reader, but powerful for someone keen on identity and parallel views.
I liked 12 also, but more on a “the system is not perfect” kind of way
Leave a Comment