ipl-logo

Standing Up In 12 Angry Men

743 Words3 Pages

The story of 12 Angry Men is a strong persuasive story, about todays biggest struggle between wrong and right. Its smart, creative and It shows the importance of standing up, and not being pressured into doing what others are. Jury 9 and 3, I feel made the most impact on the plot, and the theme of the story. Both characters where interesting through out the story.

Jury 3 was a major contributor to the plot of the story, and constantly added outrage. He regularly brought unnecessary remarks and accusations to the jury room. His remarks and comments usually didn 't pursued the other 11 jury’s, but the criticism sure made things more hectic and frustrating. Jury 3 was for sure the antagonist in the story, with out him there wouldn 't of been …show more content…

He brought themes like: hope and precaution to the story. He stood up, and gave jury 8 a chance, when no one else would listen to him. He wasn 't as important as jury 3 in themes of the story, but he did change the theme when he chose not guilty in the second ballet. I think he brought the theme of caring, to the story. Even though it was a little theme, he did care for what jury 8 had to say, and he also cared for the 19 year old boy with a death penalty aging above his chest. He had no judgement, and was willing to listen and save a life when no one else would. Although he wasn 't super important in the themes, he was important in the non-guilty plead they ended up with in the end of the story.

In conclusion, both Jury 3 and 9 where signifiant in the story 12 Angry Men. They both brought signifiant themes and plots to the story, some more important then others but each significant in its own way. Without jury 3, there wouldn 't of been a big enough conflict for the story to be interesting. Without jury 9, there may not of been hope for the boy to live, with out his non-guilty vote the boy might of died. Thanks to both characters, the story was very interesting and its a story people will read for years to come, and I can guarantee

Show More
Related
683 Words | 3 Pages

No matter the motives of any juror, each can be traced back to Juror Eight, and the fact that he was brave enough to stand against the crowd. In the end, every juror eventually reached the verdict of not guilty, but there was still a very long process to get there, and many people that produced the answers for the others. Juror Eight is the only reason anyone in this play made a single sound, and he may have eventually been brought down if Juror Nine hadn’t changed his vote to support him. They worked as a team, with Juror Five soon joining in, Juror Eight had an incredible impact on everyone in that room, and he is the reason a boy who was most likely innocent was set

Read More
502 Words | 3 Pages

His own son hasn’t seen him in years and he want to take out his anger on whoever he can, which just so happens to be the kid on trial. Juror Three’s feelings led him to be prejudice against the kid on trial. At the very end, he becomes visibly upset and give his final verdict, not

Read More
1964 Words | 8 Pages

What is worth our attention in this movie is how in the beginning they are trying to convince each other to vote guilty. 11 juror voted guilty and only one voted not guilty. Their judgments were based upon either their past personal experience which created their thoughts and behavior or upon facts. Juror 8 represents the conscience. He stood up for his inner feelings that the accused young boy is innocent.

Read More
980 Words | 4 Pages

Juror 3: He is an impulsive, humourless and extremely opinionated character whose own conflict with his own son caused him to take the case personally. Being a Controller (intuitor/judger temperament) with low emotional stability and high in competitiveness, he displayed his ‘bull’ tendency when other Jurors do not share the same opinions as him. This can be seen during the many times in the movie where he happens to have a conflict with Juror 8 over the difference in their view. This relationship of theirs is denoted by a zigzag line in the sociogram. His Type A personality clashes with majority of the Jurors as he uses

Read More
755 Words | 4 Pages

Though juror 3 has been adamant on the guilt of the young boy it is safe to say that this case meant more to him because the relationship with his son is similar to the relationship between the boy and the father. Since his personal vendetta causes him to forcefully accuse the boy of murder it leaves the jury 11-1 in favor of not guilty. Since carefully reviewing the movie it becomes very prevalent that there has not been enough substantial evidence to convict the boy of murder. Furthermore, with the usage of group think all of the men, accept juror 3 are able to put their pride aside and vote what they truly believe the verdict should be, which is not guilty. Though, one of the more pragmatic points in the film happens after juror 3 becomes infuriated after realizing that all of the men are voting not guilty.

Read More
1133 Words | 5 Pages

Although 3 does change his mind in the end, he is the last to change so he is the leader for the guilty side. In the end, the reader can look at figure 1. and take away the fact that juror 8 is the main character, and that jurors 3 and 8 causes the main conflict in the

Read More
718 Words | 3 Pages

Introduction: “Twelve Angry Men” a play in jury room in The United States in 50’s written by Reginald Rose is a story about an eighteen year boy from the ghetto who is on trial for the murder of his abusive father. A jury of twelve men is locked in the deliberation room to choose the fate of the young boy. If all facts are against the boy and he is considered guilty they will send him to die in the electric chair. This play turned into a movie in 1957 the producer was Henry Fonda he played the lead role. Stakeholders of the movie: The Judge and the 12 Jurors are the stakeholders of the movie these people are from same country having different backgrounds.

Read More
549 Words | 3 Pages

This man may be a bit timid in part due to his old age, but his quiet nature also makes him insightful, noticing very specific details about witnesses that many others on the jury missed. He seems to come off as the most respectable and well mannered man out of the twelve. He 's the first to change his vote to not guilty, mostly to give Juror 8 a chance to make his case and out of respect for his motives in gambling for support. In talking about the older man that gave testimony it 's almost as though he 's talking about himself, revealing that he wants to be useful and to do something valuable, even if it 's just this once as a juror. As you may have noticed out of all the twelve men in the movie, each and everyone of them has unique personalities, that all at one point throughout the trial, played a very effective role in deciding this boy 's fate.

Read More
1191 Words | 5 Pages

The play 12 Angry Men is about a jury of twelve men that are given the task of deciding the fate, guilty or not guilty, of a young boy accused of murdering his father. The theme of standing up against the majority is very prevalent in this story because of the decisions some of the jurors make throughout the play. Juror 8 makes the decision to vote not guilty, he is the one and only juror in this play that decides to vote not guilty for the boy in the beginning. The other eleven jurors decide to vote guilty because of the evidence that they have been presented with. The act of Juror 8 standing against the majority of the other jurors about the case, voting not guilty, allows the jurors to thoroughly dissect the case, understanding it fully and thoughtfully before making their decision of guilty or not guilty.

Read More
1052 Words | 5 Pages

A murderer!! He’s got to die! Stay with me!” Those sentences are said before the final vote, which is eleven vote not guilty, and one votes guilty after they test all evidence. Those sentences also show that Juror Three is very emotional because the boy makes him remember the bad relationship between his kid and him.

Read More
929 Words | 4 Pages

The jurors have to sort “facts from fancy” and come to an unanimous decision meaning they all have to vote guilty or not guilty. The juror I am going to discuss is the 8th juror, he was the only person to vote not guilty. I will discuss his character, how he effects the course of justice and how does he illustrate the theme of the play. I believe that the 8th juror is the most interesting juror of the twelve because in a way he is the perfect juror and represents the boy’s good luck. Number 8 plays a very important role in the play because he is the one juror that voted not guilty and stood up to the others, in his own words: “It’s not easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first”.

Read More
630 Words | 3 Pages

Juror #3 mixed his personal conflicts with his son running away from home to the young man accused of hurting his father. His assumption was that young men who don't get along with their fathers might go as far as to kill him. Which is a very informal practice in a small group setting. Another incident of a informal role is to not provide the evidence first hand how can a room full of jurors decide the fate of somebody when they don't have precise evidence to incriminate him. Other jurors based the fact that the accused lived in a slum and that slum residents are delinquents by nature.

Read More
911 Words | 4 Pages

Through the play, ‘Twelve Angry Men’ established in 1957, the playwright, Reginald Rose signifies the importance of both rational attitude and emotions when making crucial decisions. Gathering on the “hottest day of the year” in a “large, drab, bare” jury room is throbbing for most jurors’ present. They have gathered to reach a ‘fair’ verdict and follow the judge’s instruction to “deliberate honestly and thoughtfully” as prejudice and experiences cloud their judgements. Whilst every juror has a different approach to the case, Rose demonstrates that both emotion and reason are used in the process of decision making. Taking decision without the interference of personal life leads one taking a fair judgement.

Read More
633 Words | 3 Pages

Jurors for Justice? What if the justice system wasn’t as unbiased as you thought? Within the play Twelve Angry Men the justice system supposedly chose 12 men to give a fair verdict for a boy that supposedly murdered his own father but, instead some jurors have other plans, bias backgrounds, or predetermined decisions. One way Twelve Angry Men shows an unfair trial is the backgrounds of the jurors.

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

‘Twelve Angry Men’ written by Reginald Rose, is based on the story of a jury who have to come together to determine the fate of a young boy accused to have murdered his own father. Initially, eleven of the jurors vote not guilty with one of the juror being uncertain of the evidence put before them. As the men argue over the different pieces of evidence, the insanity begins to make sense and the decision becomes clearer as they vote several other times. Rose creates drama and tension in the jury room, clearly exploring through the many issues of prejudice, integrity and compassion, in gaining true justice towards the accused victim. These aspects have been revealed through three character who are Juror 10, Juror 8 and Juror 3.

Read More

More about Standing Up In 12 Angry Men

Related Topics

Open Document