ipl-logo

Twelve Angry Men Character Analysis

925 Words4 Pages

Imagine watching twelve jurors walk into the jury room. They don’t know you, you don’t know them and now your life is in their hands. The people that looked friendly to you are now voting guilty, you hear shouting and you hear whispers. Their tempers are getting short. There is more tension in the air than oxygen. Suddenly one man votes not guilty. Rose develops character and tension by engaging the reader in the case through intense actions and dialogs.
In Twelve Angry Men, Rose develops each character through intense actions and long dialogs. For example in Act Two, Juror Three certainly states his mind about the kid on trial “This kid is guilty! He’s got to burn! We’re letting him slip through our fingers” (42). This intense remark indicates that he is clearly involved in the case but not because of the facts, but through personal reasons. Seconds later, Juror Three is …show more content…

In Act One Juror Nine is telling the audience what he thinks about the kid on trial, he is being very uncivil and also not fair to the boy: “I don’t mind telling you this, mister. We don’t owe the kid a thing. He got a fair trial, didn’t he? … You’re not going to tell us that we’re supposed to believe him, knowing what he is. I’ve lived among them all my life. You can’t believe a word they say. You know that” (16). This shows that Juror Nine is a disrespectful racist who does not even know “them” that well because he seems to have believed one of the eyewitnesses who is one of “them”. Juror Nine replies in a conscientious way “I don’t know that. What a terrible thing for a man to believe! Since when is dishonesty a group characteristic? You have no monopoly on the truth!” (16). Juror Nine’s defense indicates that he is a very honest and open person who is still reposeful after being provoked by Juror Ten. He does not like the way Juror Ten is treating the kid and the other jurors that have a different opinion than

Show More
Related
726 Words | 3 Pages

When asked why he voted not guilty, juror eight stated “Look, this boy has been kicked around all his life. You know---living in a slum, his mother dead since he was nine. He spent a year in and a half in an orphanage while his father served a jail term for forgery. That’s not a very good head start. He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years.

Read More
997 Words | 4 Pages

In his play Twelve Angry Men, Reginald Rose brings us back in time to 1957, to a jury room of a New York Court of Law where one man, Juror #8, confronts the rest of the jury to look at a homicide case without prejudice, and ultimately convinces Juror #2, a very soft-spoken man who at first had little say in the deliberation. Throughout the play, many of the jurors give convincing arguments that make one think about whether the boy is “guilty” or “not guilty.” Ultimately, one is convinced by ethos, logos, and pathos. We can see ethos, logos, and pathos having an effect on Juror #2 as he begins as a humble man and changes into someone brave at the end. Although all three modes play a part in convincing Juror #2, pathos was the most influential

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
1133 Words | 5 Pages

He is often seen asking other jurors to elaborate on their opinion, not just tell them they are wrong. The cool blue, soft circle shows his willingness to listen, and not have a

Read More
1186 Words | 5 Pages

8th juror appeals to their sense of pathos and pity by saying “this boy’s been kicked around all his life… He’s had a pretty terrible sixteen years. I think maybe we owe him a few words. That’s all.” While this has nothing to do with the case, he hopes to appeal to their humanity in order to get them to give him a chance in these deliberations.

Read More
1203 Words | 5 Pages

Juror 10 is a closed minded older man. He uses a lot of stereotypes to make his decisions on whether or not the accused is really guilty or innocent. Juror 10 yells, “You said it there. I don't want any part of them, believe me” (12 Angry Men). At this point in the play he was using where the accused lived and grew up to influence his choice, he then quickly denied the fact that he is like that with everyone when one

Read More
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
1864 Words | 8 Pages

The purpose of my essay is to explore how different social backgrounds and the social norms that follow affect the personality of two fictive characters and encourage them to break out of their station to find an identity. The protagonists Holden Caulfield in J.D. Salinger’s novel The Catcher in the Rye and Tambudzai in Tsitsi Dangarembga’s novel Nervous Conditions are both victims of social norms. Therefore, the foundation of this essay was to analyze the character’s social background, which has influenced their personalities, behavior and aspirations, and consequently their opposing actions against society. Holden Caulfield is an American adolescent during the period after the Second World War.

Read More
624 Words | 3 Pages

The ninth juror also said, “Do you know anyone, who

Read More
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
1324 Words | 6 Pages

Juror 9 in flip affects the selections of several different jurors. Juror three tries to claim that the young guy turned ugly. before the vote is taken he tries to influence the choices of the opposite judges by pointing out, “of the path he's guilty” (Rose, 1957). some other juror states, “there’s usually needs to be one” about there being unruly men among minorities in the slums. those two men try and use the strength of normative social impact to persuade the others to bypass a “responsible”

Read More
814 Words | 4 Pages

Juror Ten announces his intentions very early in the play. He speaks loudly and forcefully from the beginning, clearly showing his racism and prejudice towards the boy. Juror 10 quickly votes guilty and asserts that the defendant cannot be believed because “they’re born liars”. Additionally, he claims that the “kids who crawl outa those places are real trash.”

Read More
513 Words | 3 Pages

Juror eight is a highly intelligent and logical person. In the start of the play, Juror eight is the only Juror to vote “not guilty” towards to trial. With his caring attitude towards the young boy in trial, he states that “I’m not

Read More
721 Words | 3 Pages

Eventually, the votes of the eleven jurors are converted by convincing speech and peer pressure. Therefore, they made a not-guilty decision. Twelve Angry Men emphasize social psychology theories in the fields of conformity, eye-witness testimony, schemas and heuristics, attitude change (persuation and social influence) and group process (polarization).

Read More
858 Words | 4 Pages

In a New York City, an 18-year-old male from a slum is on a trial claiming that he is responsible for his father death by stabbing him After both sides has finished their closing argument in the trial, the judge asks the jury to decide whether the boy is guilty or not The judge informs the jury decided the boy is guilty, he will face a death sentence as a result of this trial The jurors went into the private room to discuss about this case. At the first vote, all jurors vote guilty apart from Juror 8 (Henry Fonda), he was the only one who voted “Note Guilty” Juror 8 told other jurors that they should discuss about this case before they put a boy into a death sentence

Read More

More about Twelve Angry Men Character Analysis

Related Topics

Open Document