cinema_lasuperlativ2
12 ANGRY MEN
12 Angry Men is a play by Reginald Rose. It is about a jury member who persuades the other 11 members to change the verdict (guilty) they have given, on the basis of reasonable doubt.
The story begins after closing arguments have been presented in a homicide case, as the judge is giving his instructions to the jury. As in any American criminal case, the twelve men must unanimously decide on a verdict of 'guilty' or 'not guilty'. (In the American justice system, failure to reach a unanimous verdict, a so-called "hung jury", results in a mistrial.) The case at bar pertains to whether the young man murdered his own father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence (something that could not happen in the current American legal system). These twelve then move to the jury room, where they begin to become acquainted with the personalities of their peers. Throughout their deliberation, not a single juror calls another by his name because the names are unknown by the jurors.
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 at the time, any jury that will decide whether the death penalty is appropriate must be unanimous. The question they are deciding is whether the defendant, an 18-year-old man,[1] murdered his father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence - the electric chair (something that could not happen in the current American legal system). 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 due, in some cases, to the jurors' prejudices. Juror #8 dissents in the initial voting, 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 sole two witnesses to the murder, the fact that the knife used in the murder is not as unique as assumed (he produces an identical one from his pocket) and that the overall circumstances are rather shady.
His most fierce opponents - Jurors 3, 4 and 10 - claim that the boy's alibi is blotched, since he does not remember any detail from the movies he watched at the theatre the night of the murder and he has sufficient motivation to kill his father. His lack of memory, however, is excused by panic attack; also, one of the witnesses is accused of wanting attention whilst the other might have "witnessed" the murder without her glasses on. As the deliberation goes on, the jurors go on to vote not guilty - in order, Jurors 9, 5, 2, 11, 6, 7, 12, 1, 4, 10 and finally 3. Juror 9 makes up his mind at the very beginning, in a secret vote; after hearing his reasons and listening to the complaints of Jurors 7 and 10, Jurors 5 and 2 change their votes. After Jurors 11 and 6 also decide on "not guilty," 7 becomes tired and also votes "not guilty" just so that the deliberation may end. Juror 12 changes his mind after voting "not guilty," but switches back moments after; the jury 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 in turn is convinced that the witness who "saw" the murder may be inaccurate in her account owing to the fact that she may not have been wearing glasses at the time.
Last of all 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, whom he hasn't seen in two years (his angry rage suggesting a probable falling out with the boy). All jurors leave and clear the accused of all charges off-screen. In the epilogue, the friendly Jurors 8 and 9 exchange surnames (all jurors have remained nameless throughout the movie) and the movie ends.
12 Angry Men (titulado en castellano como Doce hombres sin piedad (España) Doce hombres en pugna (Argentina / Venezuela)) es una obra teatral escrita por Reginald Rose. En 1957 se realizó su versión cinematográfica.
La película fue dirigida por Sidney Lumet, obteniendo cuatro nominaciones a los premios Oscar de la Academia. La película trata sobre un juicio de un homicidio en el que doce hombres tienen que deliberar sobre el futuro de un muchacho, dictaminando si el chico es culpable o inocente del asesinato de su padre. Todas las pruebas apuntan a que el chico es el culpable, por ello once de los doce miembros del jurado opinan que es culpable pero el miembro número 8 del jurado tiene en cuenta diferentes argumentos que se han citado en el juicio y hace que surja la duda sobre la culpabilidad del chico. De este modo poco a poco el miembro número 8 hace que los demás vayan cambiando de opinión y de que éstos se den cuenta de otros factores que no habían sido analizados en el juicio.
12 ANGRY MEN
12 Angry Men is a play by Reginald Rose. It is about a jury member who persuades the other 11 members to change the verdict (guilty) they have given, on the basis of reasonable doubt.
The story begins after closing arguments have been presented in a homicide case, as the judge is giving his instructions to the jury. As in any American criminal case, the twelve men must unanimously decide on a verdict of 'guilty' or 'not guilty'. (In the American justice system, failure to reach a unanimous verdict, a so-called "hung jury", results in a mistrial.) The case at bar pertains to whether the young man murdered his own father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence (something that could not happen in the current American legal system). These twelve then move to the jury room, where they begin to become acquainted with the personalities of their peers. Throughout their deliberation, not a single juror calls another by his name because the names are unknown by the jurors.
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 at the time, any jury that will decide whether the death penalty is appropriate must be unanimous. The question they are deciding is whether the defendant, an 18-year-old man,[1] murdered his father. The jury is further instructed that a guilty verdict will be accompanied by a mandatory death sentence - the electric chair (something that could not happen in the current American legal system). 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 due, in some cases, to the jurors' prejudices. Juror #8 dissents in the initial voting, 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 sole two witnesses to the murder, the fact that the knife used in the murder is not as unique as assumed (he produces an identical one from his pocket) and that the overall circumstances are rather shady.
His most fierce opponents - Jurors 3, 4 and 10 - claim that the boy's alibi is blotched, since he does not remember any detail from the movies he watched at the theatre the night of the murder and he has sufficient motivation to kill his father. His lack of memory, however, is excused by panic attack; also, one of the witnesses is accused of wanting attention whilst the other might have "witnessed" the murder without her glasses on. As the deliberation goes on, the jurors go on to vote not guilty - in order, Jurors 9, 5, 2, 11, 6, 7, 12, 1, 4, 10 and finally 3. Juror 9 makes up his mind at the very beginning, in a secret vote; after hearing his reasons and listening to the complaints of Jurors 7 and 10, Jurors 5 and 2 change their votes. After Jurors 11 and 6 also decide on "not guilty," 7 becomes tired and also votes "not guilty" just so that the deliberation may end. Juror 12 changes his mind after voting "not guilty," but switches back moments after; the jury 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 in turn is convinced that the witness who "saw" the murder may be inaccurate in her account owing to the fact that she may not have been wearing glasses at the time.
Last of all 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, whom he hasn't seen in two years (his angry rage suggesting a probable falling out with the boy). All jurors leave and clear the accused of all charges off-screen. In the epilogue, the friendly Jurors 8 and 9 exchange surnames (all jurors have remained nameless throughout the movie) and the movie ends.
12 Angry Men (titulado en castellano como Doce hombres sin piedad (España) Doce hombres en pugna (Argentina / Venezuela)) es una obra teatral escrita por Reginald Rose. En 1957 se realizó su versión cinematográfica.
La película fue dirigida por Sidney Lumet, obteniendo cuatro nominaciones a los premios Oscar de la Academia. La película trata sobre un juicio de un homicidio en el que doce hombres tienen que deliberar sobre el futuro de un muchacho, dictaminando si el chico es culpable o inocente del asesinato de su padre. Todas las pruebas apuntan a que el chico es el culpable, por ello once de los doce miembros del jurado opinan que es culpable pero el miembro número 8 del jurado tiene en cuenta diferentes argumentos que se han citado en el juicio y hace que surja la duda sobre la culpabilidad del chico. De este modo poco a poco el miembro número 8 hace que los demás vayan cambiando de opinión y de que éstos se den cuenta de otros factores que no habían sido analizados en el juicio.