Independent Films, Film Profiles

12 Angry Men
by Sidney Lumet

12 Angry Men is a 1957 American drama film adapted from a play. Directed by Sidney Lumet, the film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or innocence of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt. The film is notable for its almost exclusive use of one set: with the exception of two short scenes at the beginning and the end of the film set on the steps of the court building and two short scenes in an adjoining washroom, the entire movie takes place in the jury room.Apart from two of the jurors swapping names while leaving the courthouse, no names are used in the film: the defendant is referred to as "the boy" and the witnesses as the "old man" and "the lady across the street".In 2007, 12 Angry Men was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant".The story begins after closing arguments have been presented in a murder case, as the judge is giving his instructions to the jury. According to American law (both then and now), the verdict (whether guilty or not guilty) must be unanimous. A non-unanimous verdict results in a hung jury, which in turn forces a retrial. The question they are deciding is whether the defendant, a young teenage boy from a city slum, murdered his father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence — the electric chair. The jury of twelve move to the jury room, where they begin to become acquainted with each others' personalities and discuss the case.The plot of the film revolves around their difficulty in reaching a unanimous verdict, mainly due to the jurors' personal prejudices. An initial vote is taken and eleven of the jurors vote "guilty". Juror #8 is the lone dissenter, stating that the evidence presented is circumstantial and the boy deserves a fair deliberation, upon which he starts questioning the accuracy and reliability of the only two witnesses to the murder, the fact that the knife used in the murder is not as unusual as assumed (he produces an identical one from his pocket), and the overall shady circumstances. In a secret ballot, Juror 9 is the first to support Juror 8, not necessarily believing the accused is not guilty but feeling that Juror 8's points deserve further discussion. After listening to the complaints of Jurors 7 and 10, Jurors 5 and 11 change their votes. After Jurors 2 and 6 also decide on "not guilty," 7 becomes tired and also votes "not guilty" just so that the deliberation may end. When pressed by Juror 11, however, 7 says that he believes the defendant is not guilty. Juror 12 changes his mind after voting "not guilty," but switches back moments after; the foreman, #1, also votes "not guilty". Juror 10 loses all favor or respect after indulging in a bigoted rant, after which he is told to shut up by Juror 4, who soon becomes convinced by Juror 9 that the witness' testimony may be inaccurate because she may not have been wearing her glasses at the time of the alleged murder.Last of all to agree is the adamant Juror 3, who, after a long confrontation with Juror 8, breaks down after glancing at and furiously tearing up a picture of him and his son. It is revealed that Juror 3 hasn't seen his son in two years, and his rage may be the result of a falling out with the boy. When his son was young, the father tried to teach the son to "be a man" after seeing him lose a fight. The son ended up punching his father in the mouth. The final vote is unanimous for acquittal. All jurors leave and the defendant is found not-guilty off-screen, while juror number 8 helps the angry juror number 3 with his coat in a show of compassion. In an epilogue, the friendly Jurors 8 (Davis) and 9 (McArdle) exchange surnames (all jurors having remained nameless throughout the movie) and the movie ends.