#87: 12 Angry Men (1957)

Many films have been adapted from stage to screen. Off the top of my head, I can think of The Color Purple or Frost/Nixon. If you didn’t have that prior knowledge, you wouldn’t know those were plays. 12 Angry Men is the complete opposite of that. Like other stage adaptations, such as Death of a Salesman, 12 Angry Men feels like you are watching the story from Broadway seats, yet it totally stands up as a film to itself. Director Sydney Lumet takes the elements of the play that make it so good and enhances it two folds with his use of camera moves, editing and the acting. Although I had seen this once before, I was struck again by what a good film this is.

With a claustrophobic feel, the whole movies takes place in a jury room minus the opening and closing scenes. As the scenes play out in real time, Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) stirs the pot, so to speak, when he challenges the other eleven jurors to examine a murder case with a little bit more depth. An emotional journey takes place as each unique juror is forced to examine how they perceived the evidence, which pretty much turns the room into one big psychologist’s chair. The film quickly becomes a social experiment as each juror is forced to look within themselves to not just make a decision about a case, but many have to completely reevaluate how they look at life. The cinematic ride isn’t what the jurors will ultimately decide, but how they will make those decisions.

The superb acting really shines through in this film. All twelve performances are astounding and that's why I really like this film. Henry Fonda is clearly the lead, but I feel like this is more of an ensemble piece. Each character is able to have an unique character trait that allows you to clearly distinguish between everybody, which is hard to do with twelve different actors. This is both a credit to the acting and the screenplay.

Although it's a very dramatic film, it's not a too heavy-handed experience. The pace and editing are so well balanced that you know that pre-production was the key to obtain this success. All present-day filmmakers need to use this film as a study of how to achieve your point in a precise, yet entraining manner.

In my opinion, this is a movie that can appeal to all ages, sexes and races, and when a filmmaker can do that, I can't help but give it 5 out of 5 verdicts.

* On a side note, this whole film is based on the definition of 'beyond a reasonable doubt.' If you leave this movie agreeing with what the jurors decided, the O.J. Simpson jurors were correct in their verdict. I think Simpson's lawyers watched this film before the trial started. This was just something that hit me. What do you think?