Rating: 
Summary: Drama just doesn't get any better than this!
Review: 'Nuff said! If you haven't seen it, see it now.
Rating:
Summary: A Numerological Review - mp3.com/numerology
Review: This is my favorite movie, and it's numerological accuracy astounds me! Here's why:The #1 represents "The Leader"
Juror #1, Martin Balsam and Juror #10 (1+0=1), Ed Begley argue over who's going to be in charge ... The #2 represents "The Supporter" (+attention to details)
Juror #2, John Fiedler (the most passive one there) uses his watch to time Fonda's walk and Juror #11 (1+1=2), George Voskovec is a watch-maker; very supportive also. The #3 represents "Children" and "Words"
Juror #3, Lee J. Cobb runs a messenger service; is the loud-mouth of the bunch; has a problem with his own son and Juror #12 (1+2=3), Robert Weber "wrote that line - the breakfast with the built-in bounce" for an ad agency -- and *these* two (like children) are busted by Fonda for playing tic-tac-toe! "This isn't a game!" The #4 represents "Rules & Regulations"
Juror #4, E.G. Marshall points out all the rules -- "I believe it's appropriate to have a preliminary vote" ... "jurors have the right to examine evidence" ... etc. The #5 represents "Lack of Home-Life"
Juror #5, Jack Klugman grew up in the slums. The #6 represents "Homes & Mothers"
Juror #6, Edward Binns is a house painter and literally mothers Juror #9 -- "You talk to him like that again and I'm gonna lay you out." The #7 represents "Specialization" and appears "Cold"
Juror #7, Jack Warden "made 27-grand last year selling marmalade." and cares about nothing but baseball. The #8 represents "Making Decisions, effecting lives of others"
Juror #8, Henry Fonda winds up changing everyone's lives ... The #9 represents "Compassion & Finalization"
Juror #9, Joseph Sweeney shows compassion for Juror #8 and announces the *final* point of evidence that ends the debate. For more, visit www.mp3.com/numerology or www.alanhorvath.com/katona
Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece
Review: Twelve Angry Men is a masterpiece of the basics in filmmaking - script, direction and acting. Set almost entirely in a sweltering courtroom, Reginald Rose's script is perfect in its execution. The twelve jurors are developed as fully rounded individuals. Some are developed further than others but each one of the talented actors gets a chance to shine. Henry Fonda as juror no.8 is astonishing. His belief in the American Justice system is what sets him apart from his peers. He doesn't know that the accused is innocent, but he has a "reasonable doubt" and this is enough for him to vote not guilty. We never learn whether or not the accused was innocent. It is possible, he actually was a murderer, but such a theory destroys the high morale of the film. The outcome of the film is never in doubt so it is remarkable how the director, Sidney Lumet, manages to still create so much tension. When Fonda agrees to a guilty verdict if the other eleven agree on guilty, there is a frightening suspense. Also the approaching heatwave is valuable in creating the claustrophobic atmosphere. This ranks alongside Dog Day Afternoon as Lumet's best work and both films share similarites. To say they're as good as each other is to pay both the highest compliments.
Rating:
Summary: Timeless. A classic. Will never be bogged down by age.
Review: This movie shows you a simple truth. Take a fantastic script, twelve fine actors lead by Henry Fonda and Lee J. Cobb, no special effects, a very sparse setting that will not distract from the characters and the story and you have a great film. Being filmed in Black and White rather than color also added to to the greatness of this film. What 11 jurors believe to be an open and shut case of homicide turns out not be be so simple when one juror (Fonda) votes not guilty. He is not sure whether the boy is guilty or innocent but he has a reasonable doubt and believes that a capital crime with someone's life on the line deserves more than 5 minutes of the other juror's time. This movie is like an onion; it strips the characters bare and slowly as they talk and listen in the hot and stuffy jury room statements they thought were conclusive begin to become hazy. It's like a mystery being untangled. Even at the end, you really don't know the truth but you do know that the lives of the 12 men have been irrecovably changed. Rose pulls no punches in his dialogue. This movie will still be a classic in 100 years.
Rating:
Summary: courtroom drama elite
Review: this film is absolutely the best courtroom drama ever produced. i promise you, if you have any intellect at all, you will enjoy this film immensely. the story is told almost entirely, (with the exception of the first few minutes), within the confines of one room, the jury deliberation room. almost immediately the film captures and demands your attention and holds it. it is very engrossing. the basic premise is the jurors' deliberation whether to have a young boy convicted and executed for the murder of his father. to divulge anymore of the plot would be ludicrous. watch it for yourself. as for the DVD, it's an excellent transfer. it offers no special features however, except for the theatrical trailer. this seems to be the standard for films released under the "VINTAGE CLASSICS" distribution. it is still worth the price. a very worthy addition to your DVD library.
Rating:
Summary: A Reasonable Doubt
Review: I can only add to the superlatives expressed by the other contributing reviewers for 12 Angry Men. There is a lot of inherent drama in a group of diverse people being holed up in a room deciding the future of another man, a future which may include capital punishment. This film capitalizes on all the possibilities. In these circumstances, twelve distinctly different personalities and points of view come into play, as tempers flare, egos clash, and personal motives emerge. These jurors decide the fate of a young boy from a slum accused of murdering his father. Each character gets to reveal aspects of himself, all of which contribute to his own decision. Of course, the acting is excellent. Fonda gives his usual excellent performance, while Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, Jack Klugman, and Jack Warden standout as other jurors. This movie stresses that they cannot vote guilty if they have a reasonable doubt, and if they aren't sure, that means they cannot convict. It's a window into the process, but add the performances and the sweltering heat inside the jury room, and you have high drama as well. It's a sensational film.
Rating:
Summary: Timeless and Perfect
Review: The genious of "12 Angry Men" can be ascribed to its director, stars and most importantly the simplicity of its staging. Modern Hollywood would certainly fumble the passionate elegance of this picture. It really *is* true: less is more. In "12 Angry Men" we are not showed "flashbacks" of the trial, nor are we showed the witnesses or allowed to hear from them ourselves as the audience. In short, we are not allowed to form our own opinions independently, and thus we are forced to see everything from the point of view of the jurors. This is crucial since at the beginning of the film we are at a point of innocence and must, as the characters, reevaluate the nature and 'truth' of the facts as they become revealed. There is much to admire in a movie that begs its audience to *think*. Too often, we are simply baited by Hollywood to pay attention with rapid-fire editing, multi-million dollar special effects, or formulatic plots beating down the same-old tired cliches to placate the modern American attention span. Yet, here is a movie consisting of 12 talented actors in a small room. No car chases, no bloody body of the victim to shock us, no gee-whiz visuals. Just an amazing cast, a wonderful script, and a young director completing his first motion picture. It is compelling. It is relevant. It puts us in a potion to question our own judgements and prejudices, and asks us how we would behave if we were in that small, sweltering room, wondering if we had missed anything, trying to convice a brick wall that there is something on the other side of its stubborn facade, knowing the life and death of another man is at stake. ...(and I'd give it more if I could. The best "court room drama" I've seen, even if it's not *inside* the court room :c) )
Rating:
Summary: One of the most important movies ever made
Review: I was made to watch this movie in my sophomore year of high school by my history professor and after sitting through what I thought would be "just another early, black & white movie," I was stunned to find that there was a gem sparkling underneath. I believe that this is probably one of the best movies ever made, wholly in story. I couldn't care less about who acted in it or how it was filmed or whether or not it is in color. Simply put, the story for "12 Angry Men" is one of the most important stories written recently. (I use the word recently in a loose sense.) Here we have 12 "average Joes," pulled into jury duty from various walks of life to watch a murder trial and decide whether or not the defendent is guilty. It's a story you might hear a friend talk about. The defendent, in this case, will be put to death if found guilty; probably one of the toughest choices any conscious human will ever have to make. The 12 jurors argue the case, its sometimes shaky evidence and their morals, just as jurors would do in real life in such a case. And that's where the gem lies - it exposes the flaws in our judicial system. "12 Angry Men" might as well be a true story, as something like this has to have happened before. The film shows how easily some people accept the word of people like them and how easily they condemn people different from them - how easily they let their views get in the way of rational thinking. Our justice system is supposed to provide every defendent with a fair trial, in hopes that the truth be exposed and the proper sentence be judged. "12 Angry Men" illustrates the fact that sometimes, defendents aren't always given fair trials. And, in the case of the Puerto Rican boy charged with the murder of his father in the movie, sometimes innocent people are put to death based on simple prejudices. If not for Henry Fonda's character, the boy would have been put to death; even though there *was* reasonable doubt that he was guilty of the crime he was charged with. If not to discourage people from favoring the death penalty, I believe that "12 Angry Men" should be seen to open some people's eyes and help them think rationally. This movie was way ahead of its time in story, in the vein of "Gentleman's Agreement." I recommend it to anyone of any age because there are no swears, nudity, or guns in any of the scenes. The only "violence" it has is created by the tensions between the 12 jurors and there are no fights of any kind. A masterpiece and a timeless classic.
Rating:
Summary: A stellar cast in the courtroom drama of the century!
Review: There was a TV movie remake of this film a few years ago, but I can't see how it could possibly live up to this film. What makes it great is the possibility that the accused person acually could be guilty. All Fonda is trying to do is prove the evidence isn't as clear as it seemed in court. I've never heard of the actor that played juror 4, but he was nothing short of spectacular as a man who wants the kid to die no matter what. Also notable is that the film includes the balding high voiced man from The Odd Couple, and Jack Klugman, who played Oscar Madison in the show. The camera work is remarkable. I especiall like the way it starts out on the edges of the room, but then subtlely closes in until the end, when it's right in everyone's face. One of the great ones, to be sure.
Rating:
Summary: A memorable classic
Review: While dated in some of it peripheral items, the story and its lessons in prejudice, justice, and certainty are timeless. And even if that weren't true, the assemblage of talent -- some at their prime, some just starting out -- makes this a classic, all the moreso for being a single set piece with no car chases, no explosions, no gunfire, no sex. Hollywood should take notes.
| 
