ipl-logo

Character Analysis Of Juror 8 In 'The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street'

652 Words3 Pages

It is hard to stand against a group by yourself because in “12 Angry Men” Juror 8 is getting ganged up on, in “The Monsters are Due on Maple Street” Tommy is being called stupid by all the neighbors for having the opinion that he did, also in both of the stories the person who wasn’t going with the group was always the one to call out first. In “12 angry men” juror 8 is the only juror saying that the boy is innocent and everybody else is ganging up on him. Then they start to ask questions like why do you think he's innocent and he says I don’t know and they start to gang up and say “he sat in there for 6 days and he doesn't know” and “You sat right in court and heard the same things I did” (Rose 14). This evidence shows that just because he has his own opinion and doesn’t want to vote guilty because everyone else did, people aren’t respecting his opinion and are basically calling him stupid for his decision. And I feel like more people started to choose innocent because they took into consideration of his idea and realized they could stand up to the rest of the group since they had …show more content…

And then said “Except the people they sent down ahead of them. They looked just like humans. And it wasn’t until the ship landed that—” and then all of the parents say things like “Isn’t that just the craziest thing you ever heard.”(Serling 145) Also “Sally, you better get that boy of yours up to bed. He’s been reading too many comic books or seeing too many movies or something!” (Serling 146). This goes with my thesis statement that it’s hard to stand up to a group because it shows when Tommy wanted to give his idea everybody wanted to shoot him down and called a little boy who was just speaking his idea to the group and they called him crazy without thinking about his idea to see if he could maybe be

Show More
Related

Juror 3 Stubbornness Quotes

310 Words | 2 Pages

In the play "Twelve Angry Men" by Reginald Rose, Juror 3 displays stubbornness as a character trait and it significantly impacts the story. The play follows the jury in a murder case, if the defendant is convicted he will be given the death penalty so it is critical for jurors to be open-minded. Juror 3’s stubbornness is evident when he states, “I don’t care whether I’m alone or not. It’s my right” (71). This quote highlights Juror 3's stubbornness as he refuses to listen to the other jurors and consider their points of view.

Read More

Similarities Between The Crucible And 12 Angry Men

909 Words | 4 Pages

both The Crucible and Twelve Angry Men, there are characters that equally stand for and are motivated by truth and justice. In Twelve Angry Men Juror Eight embodies reason and attentiveness. He refuses to “send a boy off to die without talking about it first”, much to the initial dismay of his fellow jurors. He rejects the idea of agreeing with the eleven other jurors just to make the process more efficient, and in doing so he rejects conformity. He has reasonable doubt and asserts that “no jury can declare a man guilty unless it’s sure”.

Read More

Ethos, Pathos, Pathos And Logos In 12 Angry Men

1964 Words | 8 Pages

After watching 12 Angry Men, I was very inspired by juror 8 ' argument techniques. His eye contact, body language, tone, the persuasive techniques he used like induction, pathos, ethos and logos should be studied and analyzed in a very detailed, precise way. These factors were strong enough to change 11 angry men 's mind and to vote not guilty, even juror 3 who is the most stubborn. 12 Angry Men 's message toward individuals and the society as a whole is to think once and twice before judging, how to have a successful, convincing argument and most importantly, it encourage everyone to stand up for your opinion. One of the reasons why everyone should speak up is sometimes other people are thinking the same way, but they are not brave enough to express their opinion.

Read More

Group Roles: Following Group Process Observing

777 Words | 4 Pages

Juror number two is on the fence so we think that he'll be the next to change his mind but instead we see Juror number five. I think that the leadership was effective because by standing behind his point and proving the young man's innocence he's able to convince others of this as well. Juror number twelve plays out the nights events for everyone to see clearly. He provides little pieces of information that then start other conversations within the group. All this while we see that Juror number three is slowly unraveling.

Read More

Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

915 Words | 4 Pages

He says the defendant accused of murder was let off and “eight years later they found out that he’d actually done it, anyway” (12). Prejudice clouds a person’s judgement and does not allow the individual to see all the facts. It only allows them to

Read More

12 Angry Men Informational Influence

364 Words | 2 Pages

Groups are influenced by informationally and normatively processes and depending which one an individual is swayed by will affects if an public compliance and private acceptance of decisions made by the group. Those who use informational influence will use responses and information from other members to make decisions while, members using normative influence uses the norms set forth by the group to make decisions. Many jurors in the film, 12 Angry Men, displayed public compliance, especially in the beginning. As seen when the men take a public vote to see where each individual stood on a verdict, guilty or not guilty. There are few who immediately raise their hand for a guilty verdict vote, many hesitate and can be seen looking around before

Read More

Character Differences In 12 Angry Men

1133 Words | 5 Pages

While both end up voting the same way, their approaches throughout the majority of the film are vastly different. To start, the third juror is much more factual, stating in the film, “Okay let’s get the facts… and he ran to the door of his apartment and the boy!”(12 Angry Men) This immediately shows the viewer that Juror 3 will base the majority of his argument in fact. In contrast, Juror 8 feels that communicating with the other jurors and piecing together their views is a better way to solve the case. This is shown when Juror 8 says, “There were eleven votes guilty.

Read More

Examples Of Prejudice In 12 Angry Men

741 Words | 3 Pages

For example, when Juror 8 presents a new perspective on the case and casts doubt on the prosecution's evidence, the other jurors are initially resistant to accepting his point of view. This is because their prejudices have caused them to be so set in their ways that they are unwilling to consider alternative explanations. In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" exposes various forms of prejudice, including racism, class prejudice, and age prejudice, that affect the jurors' decision-making process. The prejudices of the jurors cause them to be more resistant to changing their minds and to view the evidence in a biased manner.

Read More

Examples Of Social Injustice In 12 Angry Men

803 Words | 4 Pages

In 12 Angry Men, the movie begins in a courtroom where the case is being discussed by the judge, who seems fairly uninterested. The jurors are then instructed to enter the jury room to begin their deliberations. They take a vote and all but juror 8 vote guilty. The jurors react violently to the dissenting vote but ultimately decide to go around the table in hope of convincing the 8th juror.

Read More

12 Angry Men Legal System Flaws

686 Words | 3 Pages

The play Twelve Angry Men show how our US Legal System has major flaws in the system. In the US Legal System, the jury system's main problem is being swayed by personal experience and emotions. Based on KerterFlim.com, jurors tend to be more emotional in the jury room. They normally base their votes onto

Read More

12 Angry Men Groupthink Analysis

842 Words | 4 Pages

Dr. Irving Janis’ symptoms of groupthink in the film such as “belief in the inherent morality of the group” which Janis states,” members believe in the rightness of their cause and therefore ignore the ethical or moral consequences of their decisions” (Psysr.org, 2018). They believe what they are saying is right and don’t think about what comes along with the decision made. Closed-mindedness is another obvious symptom seen in the jury. Juror 10 uses the phrase “one of them” and frequently divides society into the words “us” and “them” using the phrase to point out stereotypes. Individuals on the jury often justify their views to avoid challenges.

Read More

Leadership In 12 Angry Men

630 Words | 3 Pages

The results of these informal practices only proved that the accused wasn't guilty because the arguments were not valid enough to incriminate him. Leadership did emerge differently from a small group setting because a designated leader should not let a group member overtake his position. So Juror #8 as a initiator should have never tried to take the position of Juror #1. But it was needed for him to do that so that the group could reach into a correct decision. If Juror #8 wouldn't have voiced his opinion then maybe this innocent young men could have been acquitted.

Read More

Juror 8 Character Analysis

1254 Words | 6 Pages

A group of juror comprising of 12 men from diverse backgrounds began their early deliberations with 11 of ‘guilty’ and 1 of ‘not guilty’ verdicts. Juror 8 portrayed himself as a charismatic and high self-confident architect. Initially, Juror 1 who played the foreman positioned himself as self-appointed leader of the team in which has led his authority to be challenged as his leadership style lacked in drive and weak. In the contrary, Juror 8 is seen as the emergent leader considering his openness to probing conversations while remaining calm. Implying this openness to the present, it has become crucial that a good decision relies on knowledge, experience, thorough analysis and most importantly critical thinking.

Read More

12 Angry Men Analysis

814 Words | 4 Pages

With selfish attitudes like this, it was unlikely that Juror 10 would be interested in the truth behind the evidence and the case itself. Hence, his racial prejudice was important in determining his vote. He believes the boy is guilty, not because the facts point to it, but because of the boy’s ethnicity. It is clear that Rose has constructed Juror 10 as a means of identifying that prejudice,

Read More

Social Psychology In The Movie Twelve Angry Men

721 Words | 3 Pages

This theory is practicable inside of the juror’s decisional processes of the “Twelve Angry Men.” Conformity is described from the beginnings of the film. When the jurors cast their initial vote, doubt is clear in many of the jurors whom vote guilty. This inhibition might be commented as weak belief shaked by the guilty majority’s influence. Additionally, though the movie is not provide any references about the timelines of decision this is a relevant factor presumably affecting the “Twelve Angry Men,” and should be considered as a potential element in creating social

Read More

More about Character Analysis Of Juror 8 In 'The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street'

Related Topics

Open Document