Rating: 
Summary: Very good film
Review: 12 Angry Men is a great movie in my opinion. It is NOT for everyone. 12 Angry Men is about 12 jury men who decide the fate of an 18 year old boy accused of killing his father.
Rating: 
Summary: One of my favorites
Review: The idea of human institution judging its subjects (humans) has always been and always will be rife with flaws because the judgement itself is rendered through the human agency. This film looks at that human agency, its apathetic, accusational, and dismissive approach to human justice when it comes into conflict with their worldly desires. I saw this film when I was thirteen years old and it struck me with its profound message regarding the role humans play in judging each other.
Rating:
Summary: Cardboard cutout liberal manifesto, but great acting
Review: Some stage plays translate well to the big screen; the sweaty, claustrophic atmosphere of the jury room works even better on TV. The vagaries of eye-witness testimony have been handled in better depth elsewhere; the Father Flanagan take on juvenile delinquency is especially dated. It's an astonishing conceit to probe 12 different personalities in a movie's span. That said, Henry Fonda's unwavering exploration is most compelling. E.G. Marshall's conversion is pivotal and perfect. Please suspend belief for a little while; you will be gratified.
Rating:
Summary: Not a Mere Cinematic Relic
Review: Many times we see a black and white film or read a production date and think, "That's a picture from a by-gone era", but "12 Angry Men" is as revelant, or moreso, than when it was relased in 1957. It is also a very educational piece, and in fact I was introduced to it in high school (also a by-gone era). Children and adults will be educated as they see our system ideally work, as well as unlearn ugly myths about people based upon location, economic status, or age. It is the kind of film, like a good book, that should be enjoyed as a group or family, and then discussed. And I thought I'd only like Henry Fonda in "Yours, Mine, and Ours".
Rating:
Summary: Great movie with some room for thought
Review: It wasn't until the last time I watched this movie that I realized the issues of rationality, reason v. emotion, and persuasion that it raises. For instance, to what extent does Fonda's personal charisma, social skill, and rhetorical abilities affect people's shifts in opinion? It is really interesting to watch as each juror succumbs to his side--the intellectual argument is usually preceded by some event in which Fonda gains their admiration/friendship, they are alienated by the "guilty" voters, or both.
Well worth watching.
Rating:
Summary: True anger or false ?
Review: ? it dose make you wonder if all the truth is ever really brought out in real court. Do the court appointed atterney's really try to help a defendent.I'm sure there are those that do but there are those who don't ?.this is one of those movie's that makes you think.
Rating:
Summary: Most clever!
Review: I think I lost parts of this movie because it's very hard to stop our VCR at exactly the right place...but I enjoyed it none the less! What appealed to me was the intricacy and cleverness of the way each piece of 'evidence' was dissected and proved false. There was an interesting range of characters and I loved the claustrophobic setting - so simple yet so effective! I would recommend this film to anyone who is interested in courtroom procedures or social psychology, anyone who enjoys mysteries/detective novels, and anyone who likes movies set in the 50s (that is when this is set, right? ^_^)
Rating:
Summary: A Phenomenal Classic
Review: Wow, this movie is a true classic. It is simple, yet sophisticated. It is without any action or violence, yet suspenseful and thrilling.
This is the story of how one juror entertaining reasonable doubt about what the other eleven thought was a clear-cut case of "guilty as charged" was able to change the minds of the other eleven to vote "not guilty" instead. I will not reveal whether or not the accused was guilty indeed, for it will take away the suspense.
You will certainly enjoy the 90 minutes of this classic movie as you yourself become a participant in the jury's deliberations and can weigh the evidence and consider the case for yourself: did he do it or didn't he? Is there enough evidence to send him to be executed, or is there reasonable doubt? See the agony and apparent evidence and counter-evidence these jurors went through--in the classic black-and-white format. This is real entertainment, folks!
Rating:
Summary: A case study in influence
Review: A jury of twelve men must decide whether a young man is guilty of patricide. The drama centers around the actions of one juror (Henry Fonda) as he marshalls all his skills to influence the other jurors to reconsider the case despite overwhelming evidence against the accused. It is absolutely fascinating to watch Henry Fonda's character as he employs various influence techniques to get each juror to change his vote to not guilty. These techniques include: reciprocity, liking, time limits, public committment, social proof.
Rating:
Summary: Pure Acting!
Review: One of the best movies in the 20th century. A real study in group dynamics. Examines many personalities and their interaction in a "team-like" setting. I am sure we all know people represented in the jury.
| 
