12 Angry Men Exposes Prejudice, Bias Of Jurors

12 Angry MenPart of the appeal of the American Way, is the fact that when accused of a crime, Americans are judged by a group of their peers — and presumed innocent until proven guilty.

Anyone who has ever served on a jury, knows that one or both of those facts are suspect.

In the 1997 remake of the 1950s-era movie, 12 Angry Men, veteran actor Jack Lemmon puts those beliefs to the test, rising up initially as the lone ‘not guilty’ vote in a ‘open and shut case’ of murder.

Except for a small clip at the beginning and end of the film, the entire movie is filmed inside the deliberation room. The 12 men are a varied group with all of them being considerably older than the 18-year-old Hispanic man on trial — accused of murder — in the stabbing death of his father.

Lemmon has some questions — and openly admits he is not sure if the boy is innocent or guilty — so he wants to discuss the case. It is the ongoing discussing of the case that forces the men to face their own selfish desires and hypocrisies. As the state’s case unravels, the 12 men are forced to look at what they are and what they believe.

Although I’m sure when some watch the film, they will find holes in the logic that dismantles the state’s case against the accused teen, but that isn’t the point of the movie.

It’s about finding the truth in oneself.

The movie contains an all-star cast. Some of the more well-known actors include: Tony Danza, Ossie Davis, Edward James Olmos,  James Gandolfini and for those from the Miami Valley — Dayton, Ohio native Dorian Harewood (Full Metal Jacket) plays juror #5.

Rated 4 out of 5. Acting is superb, but since all the action is driven by dialogue, there are a few moments throughout the film where the point feels belabored.

Advertisements
Categories: movies

Post navigation

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: