Aggravation In 12 Angry Men

The life of a person should be valued, no matter what the cost. Despite the mistakes we conquer, deciding the punishment of death shouldn't be decided as fast as it should be. Within the film "12 Angry Men," the aggravation in the decision to execute a man assumed guilty is presented from the perspectives of each character. This film depicts the extremes of patience and violence within each character, as well as the importance of not toying with the victim's life.

Henry, better known as the protagonist of the film, begins the conflict by stating that the victim was not guilty of the murder of his father. Within the eleven men in the room, he stands firm in his vote, despite being overthrown by eleven in favour of one. The eleven men in the

I thought it was obvious. I mean, nobody proved otherwise." Through this statement, he presents his perspective in that he isn't willing to go into depth on how the trial was handled and, more realistically, wants to go home. As Henry attempts to prove his point drastically through questions and conversations, half of the jury objects because it seems like a waste of time amid hostility and arguments. Henry's techniques through conversations tend to change some of the jury's votes bit by bit, as the victim's case was not as finalized as it seems. By showing an identical knife to the victim's weapon, the atmosphere of the setting shifts, and within the first vote, a man joins in his vote: not guilty. The evidence Henry provides through questions and visual examples allows a change of mind for the remaining men. Henry's intelligence and detective work personality give the conflict of the film more excitement and suspense, as we see the characters personalities in depth depending on what vote they have chosen. As the men in the room get tested on their patience, some of their issues get taken into account in deciding the victim's

He stands strongly by his decision and expects nothing in his power to get in his way. He's well known for his harassment of other men who change their vote after they listen to number four and his constant yelling with his short temper. His reasoning for his statements is based on facts from the case itself, shortly contradicting himself when his relationship with his son gets involved. At the beginning of the film, he explains that the violence he puts upon his son is to "make the man out of him", but he remains angry about how the consequence of his actions is his son blocking any sort of communication with him as an adult. His past demonstrates how strongly he rejects the victim's innocence, and the more individuals who hold opposing views, the more aggressive and hostile he gets. As he is confronted with logic and reason, he responds with rage, particularly towards juror number eight. As he gradually slides into defeat, he breaks down and changes his vote to not guilty, due to the emotional heartbreak he has within his son's relationship. This shows his true view of the value of life; throughout the film, he firmly stated that the victim should be brutally punished for his crime, but his emotions got the best of him and he refused any terms of