Twelve Angry Men. Visual & Performing Arts. Movie Review

Twelve Angry Men
Name:
Institutional Affiliation:
Course:
Instructor:
Date
Twelve Angry Men
The movie, Twelve Angry Men, is based on deliberations in a jury of 12 men, concerning a young man charged for killing his father by a knife. It follows that the jury explores many techniques to build consensus on whether the accused is guilty or not. This takes several turns and twists because the men have a range of personalities that cause intensity and conflict in the decision-making process. Mostly, the court officials are known by specific code numbers, until a dialogue ensues at the end where their names are revealed. The court-room drama causes the characters as well as the audience to observe their self-image based on the experiences and actions of the jurors.
Several legal issues are notable in the movie Twelve Angry Men, and the most significant one is the subject of reasonable doubt. Accordingly, Juror #8 observes that shallow perusal of evidence presented makes it easier to conclude that the accused boy is guilty. On the contrary, thorough and detailed scrutiny of the evidence reveals that it does not hold up, bringing up another legal issue – the credibility of witnesses. To begin with, the older man who claims to have witnessed the murder may not have seen or heard anything. This is because the train that passes nearby regularly while producing a loud noise would have made it difficult for him to hear anything. Moreover, a female witness claims to have seen someone wearing glasses right when she got out of bed. However, this may not be credible as it is unlikely that people wear glasses as early as the time she wakes up.
Another legal issue in the film is the bias of the jurors who lean more on the evidence being presented and conclude earlier on in the court proceedings that the accused boy is guilty. The jurors seem to be swayed more by the submissions of the witnesses, rather than a careful examination of all facts in the case. It takes Juror #8 to bring the jury back to its senses through his dissenting opinion wh...