...Twelve Angry Men 12 angry men is a production about a murder trial. A boy that could be looked on as guilty from the word go, is put up to the jury to decide his fait. The boy has a background of violence and crime and has been brought up in a slum. The jury is almost certain of the boys guilt. Every member of the jury votes guilty but ONE and so the jury is forced to sit it out and make a decision. We started off the production by choosing who the director would be. In the director we looked for someone that was a good actor himself so that he could speak from personal experience. Also we wanted someone that people could respect and would give thought to his ideas. The people we chose to be or directors were Craig and Bill we chose Craig because of his talent as an actor. Craig has been a good director so far, we decided that Craig would be the director for act I. act I is full of key scenes that need to be presented to the audience in a understanding way. Bill was also chosen for the director of act II, bill was chosen because of his potential. I think because in the class work we have done he has shown really good initiative. For example in a piece of improvisation work he had the idea that if they turned all the lights off their words would have more of an impact and it did it worked like charm. He also has a good imagination I could see this when he was telling me what he would do as director. We decided to choose the directors...
Words: 1791 - Pages: 8
...The main theme of the play Twelve Angry Men is given to the readers directly from Juror number 9 and Juror number 2, "It takes a great deal of courage to stand alone". Reginald Rose focuses his central message on the importance of standing up for what is right, even if tt means standing alone. For instance, Rose does not provide many details about the night that the crime was commited in. He only gives his readers limited facts on the crime, such as the knife that was used by the murder, the time of day that the crime was commited and some background of the suspect. This allows the readers to focus their attention on Juror numbe 8, as he stands alone, convincing the the others on doing whats right. In addition, Rose does not end Act...
Words: 282 - Pages: 2
...If you were on death row, would you want a fair trial? Obviously, yes, I wouldn’t want anyone to die if there was reasonable doubt that they weren’t guilty. Reginald Rose’s purpose of writing twelve angry men was to show the pros and cons to the juror system and how effective it is. For example, in act three juror number five changed his vote to not guilty not because he believed that, but to have the trial finish quicker so he could get to his baseball game that he cared more about than a man’s life. Reading this part in the story, you can tell the ignorance of the character. The perfect example of how back then the jury system was ineffective. And to strike a question if it is still ineffective today. Within the last scene juror number...
Words: 272 - Pages: 2
...Twelve Angry Men – Text Response “Somebody saw the kid stab his father. What more do we need?” Twelve Angry Men explores the value of facts and the fallibility of human memory.” Discuss. Set in the summer of 1957, Reginald Rose’s play, “Twelve Angry Men,” centers around twelve men summoned with the task of deciding a young man’s fate. During the course of the play, Rose expounds the notion that human memory is errable and the malleable nature of facts. He emphasis, through the jurors, the need to question what constitutes as a ‘fact’ when examining the evidence presented and that it is only human to “make mistakes.” In a case where most of the evidence is comprised of witness’ testimonies, a key factor in the jury’s decision will be the perceived reliability of the witness. 8th juror repeatedly questions the reliability of the case witnesses. With no signs of malevolence or judgment, he urged others to consider the premise that “witnesses can make mistakes,” and to remember that in this case, such mistakes could cost the accused, his life. Rose utilized the 8th juror to point out that witnesses are “the entire case for the prosecution,” so every perspective must be considered before the jury unanimously decides to “send a boy off t die.” The fact that absolute accuracy of human memory is difficult, if not, impossible to establish, forms the basis for 8th juror’s argument for reasonable doubt. The 9th juror suggests its is possible that in order to “be recognized, to...
Words: 818 - Pages: 4
...‘In Twelve Angry Men compassion and conscience win out over the forces of blind prejudice.’ To what extent is this true? Reginald Rose’s play ‘Twelve Angry Men’ sets in 1957, New York, explores the jury discussions of whether to convict the accused which is unanimous ‘certainty’ of a young boy’s guilt to ‘reasonable doubt’. Initially, the blind prejudice obscures the pathway to the truth. Some Jurors are influenced by the defendant’s social background, race and age which crease the Jurors to deliberate the case focused on facts. However, it leads to verdict of ‘not guilty’ due to the 8th Juror who has a reasonable doubt about the boy’s guilty and doesn’t condemn a man to death without discussing the case first. Some jurors also has sympathy for the boy meanwhile the 8th Juror has the conscience to consider the case honestly and thoughtfully. The prejudice attitudes with the less sympathetic of some jurors exceed the compassion and conscience at first. When they- WHO? YOU MUST USE PRONOUNS CORRECTLY- first enter the jury room, many jurors are ready to convict the defendant, not just on the evidence presented by the prosecution but just because the boy was born in slums. As the 4th juror says ‘Slums are breeding grounds for criminals.’ The boy can’t receive any respect and no doubt to have criminal behaviours. The hatred is apparently represent by the jurors ‘these people are born to lie, they are different.’ The inflexible idea in the jurors mind is that the person who...
Words: 762 - Pages: 4
...Twelve Angry Men Eric Schoon Concordia University-Saint Paul Twelve Angry Men I. Introduction Twelve Angry Men is set in a New York City court of law jury room in 1957. The movie opens to the empty jury room, and the judge’s voice is heard giving a set of final instructions to the jurors (Reginald Rose, Twelve Angry Men Study Guide).Twelve men with diverse backgrounds are confined in a room and are unable to leave until they can reach a unanimous decision, one which will either condemn a young man to death or set him free. The twelve strangers are bound to each other until the goal is achieved. The scene is composed of two rather small rooms, one with windows that overlook the downtown area and the second room is a restroom. It seems that the deliberation takes place in the summer; humidity and the room’s stuffiness, due to the lack of air conditioning and a sporadically working fan, add to the undue stress of their task. This paper will discuss the different elements of group dynamics and how they relate to group cohesion and their effectiveness. II. Relational characteristics of group dynamics Group formation Levi, (2011) states to become more effective, teams should address several issues when first formed. First the team should socialize new members into the group. This socialization process assimilates new members while accommodating their individual...
Words: 2527 - Pages: 11
...The cry for justice has long been heralded in the United States, not only today but also in the past. In Twelve Angry Men, a play and movie written and directed by Reginald Rose, justice is by far the most significant idea presented. Through Juror Four, Reginald Rose displays perfectly the importance of the presence of justice in not only the society of today but also that of the 1950s. Juror Four demonstrates the theme of justice in Twelve Angry Men because he possesses many qualities a juror who must administer justice should have and then acts in accordance. First and foremost, Juror Four is a paragon of what a good juror should be like. He is coolheaded, detached, eloquent and logical. These character traits give him the best advantage to serve on a jury and administer justice because he is neither easily riled nor prejudiced. For example, Juror Four easily calmed down the other jurors when tempers begin to rise in Act 1 by saying, “Shall we all admit right now that it is hot and humid and our tempers are short? … I agree with you… but I think we should try to avoid emotionally colored arguments (1.11, 1.15)”. Here, Four easily calms down the more belligerent jurors (Three, Seven, Ten) down and also shows how he is emotionally detached from the case and encourages the other jurors to be so as well. His eloquence is also presents itself on several occasions and causes other jurors, like Three, to ride on his coattails while arguing the guilt of the boy (Juror Three often...
Words: 767 - Pages: 4
...Memorandum This memorandum will elicit the implied lesson regarding effective leadership as portrayed in the film “12 Angry Men” through a dissection of the film’s characters and storyline. The following topics will be considered in our analysis: * Descriptions of characters * Analysis of informal leaders’ tactics * Assessment of the formally assigned leader * Factors for effective persuasion * Integral traits of a leader Descriptions of characters The twelve jurors come into the trial from different backgrounds and inevitably view the trial through different colored lenses. To analyze such deviation in perspective, it is necessary to briefly understand the psychological architecture and identifying any potential personaly biases of the following jurors: * Foreman * Vacillating and humble juror * Loud-mouthed and bigoted juror * Factually analytical juror * Empathetic shanty-town-raised juror * Honest and slow-thinking craftsman * Distracting baseball fan * The opposing architect * Late old man * Antagonistic old man * Impressionable justice-driven immigrant * Indecisive marketing executive Foreman This fair-minded individual is easily frustrated, sensitive about how others perceive his ability to lead, and really motivated to ensure that the process of jury deliberation is conducted properly. His desire to be perceived as worthy of the leadership role he has assumed leads him to side with the majority...
Words: 2119 - Pages: 9
...‘Twelve angry men’ shows that personal experience is the strongest factor influencing human decision-making processes.’ Discuss Twelve angry men by Reginald Rose is an intriguing play that explores the idea of personal experience affecting ones decision. Indeed Rose shows that decision-making is based on personal experiences. This is evident in the play when the 3rd Juror’s personal experience with his own son influences his decision and as a result he votes for guilty, the 9th Jurors old age becomes one of the greatest factors which influences his judgement of the boy ; when the 5th Jurors personal experience in a slum causes further doubts to form in his mind It is clear throughout the play that personal experience is a means of making the right decision. The 3rd Juror’s painful memory of his own son inspires his decision and as a result he votes for guilty. His son who left him when he had an argument similar to the one the defendant has with his father which causes him to assume that all teenagers are the same. His generalisation of teenagers as a whole and empathy dismisses the possibility that the boy may not be guilty. This is apparent when the 3rd juror says:” jeez, I can feel that knife goin’ in.”(Act 2 page 59) His anger for the boy grows as the play progresses and several times he makes reference to his own son. This is proven when he says:” when he was sixteen we had a battle…”(Act 1 page 12)Perhaps it is for this very reason that the 3rd Juror is so determined to...
Words: 363 - Pages: 2
...Democracy and the right to serve as a juror are a great privilege and responsibility which is not to be taken lightly, as seen in Twelve Angry Men. How does Rose use the play to reflect these themes? In Reginald Rose Twelve Angry Men, Rose uses the play to reflect the duty and responsibility of a juror. Rose uses the characters to reflect different themes of the play. As a democratic country, jurors have a great privilege and responsibility and it shouldn’t be taken lightly as some juror’s demonstrated. Rose represents different personalities and beliefs with each juror. A young man’s life is at stake, most of the juror’s assume he is guilty on the first vote. But luck for the boy is that the 8th juror who wants it to be a fair trial and wants to “talk this thing out”. A fair trial that everyone is entitled to. Juror 8th is in contrast with the other jury members who allow personal bias to make up their verdict and decisions. Rose starts of the play with the judge stating the duty of the jurors, and that they have to come up with a unanimous verdict. The play progresses with the changing of individual juror’s minds. Rose represents juror 8 as the protagonist and the hero of the case. Juror 8 represents the strengths of the jury systems. Juror 8 insists on looking at the facts in the case even though everyone else has already got their mind made up. In the play juror 8 is used to represent a juror who is doing his duty the right way. He is patient , tolerant and thinks about...
Words: 1229 - Pages: 5
...In the film Twelve Angry Men, I believe justice was served. Without juror number eight, however, the outcome most assuredly would have been different. The subtle force and confidence that he displayed allowed the narrow minds of the other eleven jurors to be broadened. From the beginning of the film, juror number eight displayed his interest in the case, not his personal engagements. His opening part by the window foreshadowed his deep concern for the defendant, an eighteen year-old Hispanic gentleman accused of stabbing his father in a fit of rage. While most of the jurors were ready to leave so as not to further interrupt their schedules, Henry Fonda was willing to give as much time as it would take to analyze this seemingly simple decision. The jurors took a vote and saw the ratio at eleven for guilty and only one for not guilty. When they repeatedly attacked his point of view, his starting defense was that the boy was innocent until proven guilty, not the opposite as the others had seen it. After Henry Fonda instilled doubt in the mind of another juror, the two worked together to weaken the barriers of hatred and prejudice that prevented them from seeing the truth. The jurors changed their minds one at a time until the ratio stood again at eleven to one, this time in favor of acquittal. At this point, the jurors who believed the defendant was not guilty worked together to prove to the one opposing man that justice would only be found if they returned a verdict of not guilty...
Words: 618 - Pages: 3
...‘Twelve Angry Men’ shows that personal experience is the strongest factor influencing human decision – making processes. Discuss Roses play Twelve Angry Men is about a dissenting juror in a murder trial who slowly manages to convince the other jurors that the case they are examining is not as obviously clear as it seemed in court. The defence and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filling into the jury room to decide if a young sixteen year old boy of a minority race is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. It begins as an ‘open and shut’ case of murder, but soon becomes a mini drama of each of the jurors’ prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other, which every jury room tries to avoid. Prejudices’ and misconceptions are formed through personal experiences which influence human decision making, which is shown throughout the play from all jurors but is distinctively shown through Juror 3. The 3rd juror is the most outspoken about the 'guilt' of the teenager. As the play goes along it is revealed he has a personal connection with what has happened, he feels anger towards his own son, an anger which he has transferred onto the accused. A key moment for the third juror is when he finally changes his vote to ‘not guilty’ which is when he is reminded by the 8th juror “It’s not your boy. He’s somebody else’”, followed by the 4th juror stating “let him live”. Right up to this point, the third juror was committed to his ‘guilty’ vote...
Words: 328 - Pages: 2
...MBUS 957 Executive Leadership Julian Barling 12 Angry Men – Writing Assignment September 21, 2012, 11:59pm Calgary A – Team Redemption Order of files: Filename | Pages | Comments and/or Instructions | 12 Angry Men-Writing | 5 | | Assignment | | | | | | | | | | | | Additional Comments: Executive Leadership MBUS 957 Twelve Angry Men 12 Angry Men (1957) An examination of transformational leadership as portrayed by Henry Fonda “12 Angry Men” is a movie that captures various facets of leadership displayed by people with different social backgrounds and individual values. The movie demonstrates how an “Unstructured Group”, prominently displaying Laissez-faire transactional leadership, transforms into a “High Performing Team”. Davis (Juror #8), the character played by Henry Fonda, is instrumental in influencing this transformation. Davis demonstrates how one man can motivate and inspire a group, align them towards exploring the possibility that other explanations of the events exist and allow them to feel confident in performing the job they are entrusted with. A transformational leader is often charismatic, inspirational, and has the courage to challenge the status quo. Davis displays many transformational leadership qualities ultimately leading the rest of the jury to question their original assumptions, to consider that another life is at stake. In this highly emotional situation, Davis uses his ability to influence the...
Words: 1631 - Pages: 7
...The story of 12 Angry Men is simple but none the less relevant even today. An 18 year old disadvantaged boy is charged with the stabbing murder of his father after a heated argument. The case against him seems overwhelming, and the twelve jurors assigned to his trial are to decide his fate. All the jurors are convinced of his guilt - all, that is, except juror #8. He is not sure if the accused is guilty or not and wants to discuss the case a little bit further before they convict him. There was some resistance with the discussion, especially from jurors like #3, a spiteful man who has a personal reason to see the kid locked up, #7, who just wants to record a quick verdict so he can see the baseball game that he has tickets for, and #10, who is convinced that everyone in the defendants socio-economic group is a criminal, he starts to argue some of the prosecution's points. Juror #8 points out some inconsistencies and slowly some of the jurors start to understand his point of view. Each juror has real world preconceptions and prejudices that threaten to turn their deliberations. When the verdict is finally reached, everyone goes their separate ways, back to their daily lives. Unfortunately, personal prejudices are weeded into the criminal justice system. Some prejudices found on a jury are in fact personal and affect how a person is charged and convicted of a crime. Prejudices affect how the defendant is perceived in terms of what, if any, charges are brought up. A jury, because...
Words: 1032 - Pages: 5
...The movie “12 Angry Men” is about 12 men’s deciding whether a teenager is innocent or guilty of killing his father. The conflict of this film comes from personality conflicts and prejudice. In the movie you hear either the prosecutor or defense attorney. You only learn of evidence through second hand as the juror’s debate it. The defendant was of a different race while the entire juror’s was white. The juror’s only saw the defendant once and that one time their decision was base on their own emotions and prejudice. Juror No. 10 stated” you know how these people lie”. This juror continued to be prejudice in his reason why the defendant should be found guilty. During some of juror ten prejudice outburst some of the other jurors get up and walked away. As the movie continued you see some of the other jurors to follow behind juror number 10 and it was due to them getting tired and just wanting to leave. Another juror spoke out and it was juror No. 10 who was an immigrant. He stated that they should just look at evidence and stop playing around because someone’s life was in their hands. Soon after juror No. 10 spoke another juror spoke out also. It was juror No.4 he didn’t take side but was more like the peace marker. He also stated let the evidence speak for itself. Juror No.4 he didn’t want his emotion to get involved because he know that could effected his decisions. The jurors couldn’t really come up with a decision because they couldn’t agree on...
Words: 268 - Pages: 2
