Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
97 bytes added ,  21:37, July 9, 2008
no edit summary
Line 1: Line 1: −
Originally a play by Reginald Rose, two movies have been made based on the script, about a jury in a murder trial. Initially, eleven jurors are ready to convict the defendant but one man wants to talk about it first. The movie follows the conversation of the jurors, as one lone man continues to insist that each juror explain and defend their reasoning.  
+
Originally a play by Reginald Rose, two movies have been made based on the script, about a jury in a murder trial. Initially, eleven jurors are ready to convict the defendant but one man wants to talk about it first. The movie follows the process whereby the (initially) lone man persuades his fellow jurors to vote his way by wearing them down through seemingly endless, well-schooled argument: a classic tactic of [[Communist]]s and [[Trotskyist]]s.  
    
Interestingly enough, the audience never finds out whether the defendant is guilty; this further stresses "innocence until proven guilty".<ref>'Most courtroom movies feel it necessary to end with a clear-cut verdict. But "12 Angry Men" never states whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt.' [http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20020929/REVIEWS08/209290301/1023 (Roger Ebert)] </ref>
 
Interestingly enough, the audience never finds out whether the defendant is guilty; this further stresses "innocence until proven guilty".<ref>'Most courtroom movies feel it necessary to end with a clear-cut verdict. But "12 Angry Men" never states whether the defendant is innocent or guilty. It is about whether the jury has a reasonable doubt about his guilt.' [http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20020929/REVIEWS08/209290301/1023 (Roger Ebert)] </ref>
3,303

edits

Navigation menu