Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

In:

Submitted By martin1106
Words 1791
Pages 8
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 by secrete ballot.

Once the directors had been chosen it was audition time. We decided to let people audition for as many parts as they wanted so that they could be flexible.

We firstly decided who the foreman was going to be played by, what were we looking for hen we were auditioning, well the foreman I think is the kind of guy that wants to be like the 7th juror but he cant because he has been given the burden of being foreman, he shows this when he gets angry with the tenth juror, the tenth juror starts to argue with the foreman about how he is doing his job. He is not a good foreman because he doesn't have natural leadership like 8th. The foreman soon gets very angry and starts to say how he doesn't even want the job "listen you want to do it" and then again "unimportant you want to try it". He is trying to shift the burden onto some one else. For the foreman we needed someone that had a friendly American accent, but also could get angry but still fall back to calm again. We practised this in a class where we went to high levels of anger to almost calm levels being lethargic. I was chosen as the foreman. I think I got into character well I think I put white socks on so that it would show that I was sporty but held back by the suit and the foreman appointment.

For juror number 2 we needed someone with an inquiring accent I think nick played this really he had a very good accent which gave me the impression that he was a good juror but he was an inexperienced one and therefore was very timid, "I never knew they locked the door" this shows how insecure he is and how inquiring the character is. 2nd is a person that goes along with the majority which means has no courage to stick up for what he believes in.

Juror number 3:

This juror is very relaxed at first knowing that a kid like his son is going to be locked up, he sees all young people like as his son. He is extremely prejudiced towards teenagers. He gets very angry when he realises that he wont be able to fry someone like his son. The third needs to be someone that can sustain anger through out the whole play, the 3rd juror is angry for 90% of the play. Humphrey was extremely good at playing this character because he could be angry but not need to shout. Most people when they get angry on stage get turned into shouting mode and then cant get out of it. Humphrey was great at telling his lines he went up and down in anger depending on what the juror was saying.

Juror number 4

This man is a Well-educated, smug and conceited, well-dressed stockbroker. The 4th juror is a man that is exceedingly clever and very rational compared to the others trying to vote guilty, he shows no prejudice to the defendant and is very willing to listen to the other side of the argument unlike 3 and 10. 4th is played very well by ed Armstrong he really gets into character, he sits in the same position for over an hour just as the actor in the movie. Ed played his character to the movie which is a disappointment because I would rather have seen his version of 4 not the actors.

Juror 5

The 5th juror is a very insecure person, he is from a slum dwelling and therefore the case only brings back bad memories, this is why the juror says very little because it just reminds him of what he has tried to leave behind. The 5th gets offended very easily especially when people remind him about his slum background like the 10th juror.
Charlie played this character quite well but I think he wasn't really feeling the character he didn't put any emotion into his lines he just recited them to the audience. "I have lived in a slum all my life" this line is especially said badly he pushes all the words together instead of putting emphasis on slum and life. He didn't really have much characterisation so his character wasn't really appreciated.

Juror number 6

Number 6 is a manual labourer he is a painter, he provides the backup to 8's evidence. He is a sad character that doesn't really know whether the kid is guilty or not. He shows respect for his elders and is ready to fight over the old man in the courtroom. He 6th was played well by Chris Buley, he spoke his line quickly but he put emphasis on the parts that needed it, but he also was very good at getting angry and he then was good at turning round to the old man and calmly says " go ahead you say anything you want to."

7th juror

this juror is an obsessed baseball fan who has no respect for anyone not even the defendant and shows no respect for the immigrant worker.
He exceptionally arrogant "buddy for your 3 dollars a day you should listen to everything" he is talking to the 6th juror when 6 tries to shut him up.

8th juror

The 8th juror is a man that is driven by justice and he could be named as a do-gooder. He shows great courage when he stands alone against the other eleven jurors. He is very confident on his speech and is also extremely logical. He uses logic to defend himself against 3, 7 and 10. For example he uses logic when the 3rd juror says he is going to kill him he says "you don't really mean you'll kill me do you." The
8th juror doesn't really have many friends in the jury room, he gained support form the old man early on but I couldn't class him as a friend. Chris played this character very well he really got into character. He stood up straight and he walk confidently, also when he talks he talks slowly and methodically I would give Chris and nine out of ten for characterisation it was a shame that he didn't learn his lines. 9th juror

this man is the oldest in the group, I think he relies on other peoples respect but unfortunately doesn't find any apart from 6. Luke played this character and I think he did a good job he had a good old mans voice. His characterisation was good he remained in his seat for the majority of the play which is what the old man did.

10th juror

A garage owner, who simmers with anger, bitterness, racist bigotry; nasty, repellent, intolerant, reactionary and accusative; segregates the world into 'us' and 'them'; needs the support of others to reinforce his manic rants. This character is very hostile he has a prejudice against slum kids although his reasons are unclear, maybe he was robbed or something but I think the main reason is that he voted guilty and hates to be proved wrong and that is why he is so stubborn with his opinions.

11th juror

A watchmaker, speaks with a heavy accent, of German-European descent, a recent refugee and immigrant; expresses reverence and respect for
American democracy, its system of justice, and the infallibility of the Law. This juror lives on morals he gets angry with the 7th juror when he suddenly changes his vote because he changes his vote because he wants to get home. The 11th juror is also very quite and still he always has his jacket on and is always smart even when he is hot and bothered he shows no signs of getting hot or bothered throughout the whole play. Seb played this character I think his accent was good but his characterisation was not as good I could see him getting fed up and he should have shown his character as always paying attention and always alert to the situation.

12th juror

Well-dressed, smooth-talking business ad man with thick black glasses; doodles cereal box slogan and packaging ideas for "Rice Pops"; superficial, easily-swayed, and easy-going; vacillating, lacks deep convictions or belief system; uses advertising talk at one point: "run this idea up the flagpole and see if anybody salutes it." This character is very indecisive he has no personal feelings about the kid but just doesn't know what he wants because when it comes to the late stages in the play he changes his vote many times and shows how little he thinks before he acts. Ricardo played this character well but I wasn't completely satisfied with how he dressed and how he sat he was meant to be a business man and therefore used to sitting in an office and should therefore be happy to be in a chair but Ricardo kept moving
around.

Similar Documents

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...Twelve Angry Men has lots of different characters in the story. Each character has a very unique costume that goes along with their personality. The style and color go along with their mood and character. The character costumes that I will give in depth details are the the 3rd juror, the 4th juror, and the 10th juror. The 3rd juror is the antagonist of the story. He believes that the boy is guilty no matter what and is not even willing to listen to both sides of the argument as well. In the story he is a businessman. He proudly states in the story that he started his business from nothing and ended up employing 34 people to his business. It is also revealed that he has a very bad relationship with his son. He thinks that the boy is guilty only because his son supposedly tried to kill him. He was also the last juror to change his mind to innocent, which in the end it shows he redeemed himself and started to become a better person. All of these details were shown to show the character of the 3rd character and why this character should get a black suit. Black is associated with evil, which this man in the story is probably the closest to evil. The man would also have very slick hair, giving him a very sharp and corrupt look. If big...

Words: 663 - Pages: 3

Premium Essay

Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

The Juror System In Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...‘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

Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...‘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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...‘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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Premium Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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

Free Essay

Twelve Angry Men

...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