Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

12 Angry Men (1957)
YouTube ^ | 1957 | Sidney Lument

Posted on 04/01/2012 8:48:32 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer

"The plot of 12 Angry Men revolves around the murder trail of a Latino boy who is accused of killing his father. The conviction of the boy would mean a death sentence and the destiny of the boy's life is in the hands of twelve male jurors of ranging personalities. The case seems open and shut with a murder weapon and several witnesses to place the boy at the scene of the crime. For eleven of the jurors the decision is apparent that the boy is guilty but for one juror, Mr. Davis (Henry Fonda), the boy's life should entail some discussion to eliminate any reasonable doubt the jurors may have. As the film progresses the personalities of the jurors become apparent and many underlying issues influence the guilty decision chosen by the majority of the jurors. "

- IMDb


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:

I thought this would be a good entertainment break if anyone wants one, from the media spin of the Fluke/Martin/??? election year media circus.

While the movie is about a criminal trial, it can also apply to the media. The movie is a good reminder that while the media does not care at all about who it destroys, there are real lives at stake in who it chooses to put on trial, and the rest of us should care.

I find it fortunate that we live in a time where bloggers and the internet can pick apart an offical pre-packaged story and get closer to the truth, like these jurors.

The whole film is available at the link.

1 posted on 04/01/2012 8:48:33 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

It seemed to me, watching 12 angry men, that Fonda raised the level of proof from beyond a reasonable doubt to beyond a possibility. I thought the kid was guilty using the reasonable doubt standard.


2 posted on 04/01/2012 8:56:45 PM PDT by HerrBlucher
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HerrBlucher

Yes, indeed. I count 12 Angry Men as an early politically correct propaganda piece.

I thought it would be a good idea to update it using direct quotes from the Martin-Zimmerman threads here.


3 posted on 04/01/2012 9:01:40 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Let us prey!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Yes, it was propaganda. Fonda was always typecast as the enlightened voice of liberal reason. Where would we have been without him to teach us correct thought?


4 posted on 04/01/2012 9:12:49 PM PDT by Romulus (The Traditional Latin Mass is the real Youth Mass)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Romulus

that’s why it was so amazing when he played the bad guy in Once Upon a Time in the West. That first shot when the camera reveals him.

i can’t think of any atcor today who’s so known as the good guy like Fonda was.


5 posted on 04/01/2012 9:19:56 PM PDT by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

A terrible movie. So many stereotypes and caricatures; it is enough to make you sick or make you laugh, depending on your mood. Its not propaganda, it is Hollywood ultra left bias.


6 posted on 04/01/2012 9:23:01 PM PDT by Captain Jack Aubrey (There's not a moment to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

“i can’t think of any atcor today who’s so known as the good guy like Fonda was.”

How about James Stewart?


7 posted on 04/01/2012 9:24:20 PM PDT by Captain Jack Aubrey (There's not a moment to lose.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Captain Jack Aubrey

Yep. A man who could be looked up to. A gem of a man.


8 posted on 04/01/2012 9:27:56 PM PDT by rlmorel (A knife in the chest from a unapologetic liberal is preferable to a knife in the back from a RINO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

For wrestling with issues of justice, I have always preferred “Judgment at Nuremburg”.


9 posted on 04/01/2012 9:31:19 PM PDT by rlmorel (A knife in the chest from a unapologetic liberal is preferable to a knife in the back from a RINO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Jack Aubrey

i said someone today. Stewart was even more of a good guy than Fonda. But he was 50-70 years ago.

I meant someone today who was so well known as a good guy that if you saw them as the bad guy everyone would flip out.

Maybe a George Clooney. Or a Tom Hanks. Hanks playing a bad buy would probably come closest.


10 posted on 04/01/2012 9:43:45 PM PDT by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

I am all for jury nullification when appropriate - either way.

Protect the public and sound western ethics will guide any American-American jurist. Our elitists (those making too many laws and unconstitutional laws, at that) are corrupt and insane. I trust me more than them and I can talk and try to persuade a jury of my peers. I’ve done it.


11 posted on 04/01/2012 9:44:18 PM PDT by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Some here don’t like it, but I think that it is really a good film. True it is liberal propaganda, but still it shows how one man can make a difference by persuasion.

The ending is fantastic. The jurors don’t know each others names. In the last scene the Fonda character and another introduce themselves.

Then, the Fonda character walks out into the crowded side walk and become one with the people again.

This shows that we all have a civic duty.

I am pretty sure that the image of Fonda walking out into the street after fulfilling his duty was alluded to by Reagan in the Farewell speech:

“And how stands the city on this winter night? More prosperous, more secure, and happier than it was 8 years ago. But more than that: After 200 years, two centuries, she still stands strong and true on the granite ridge, and her glow has held steady no matter what storm. And she’s still a beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.

We’ve done our part. And as I walk off into the city streets, a final word to the men and women of the Reagan revolution, the men and women across America who for 8 years did the work that brought America back. My friends: We did it. We weren’t just marking time. We made a difference. We made the city stronger, we made the city freer, and we left her in good hands. All in all, not bad, not bad at all.

And so, goodbye, God bless you, and God bless the United States of America.”


12 posted on 04/01/2012 9:50:07 PM PDT by garjog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25
How about Tom Selleck?

Love him in Blue Bloods!

13 posted on 04/01/2012 9:52:45 PM PDT by mckenzie7 (Democrats = Trough Sloppers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Captain Jack Aubrey

During the 50’s, in those Anthony Mann westerns, Stewart came pretty close to playing a bad guy. He was a guy who did something bad in his past, but wasn’t quite reformed yet.


14 posted on 04/01/2012 10:10:53 PM PDT by Krankor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

There’s a pretty good Russian remake of the movie a few years back, simply titled “12”. In that case the innocent teen was “Caucasian” (i.e. Muslim from the Caucasus region).


15 posted on 04/01/2012 10:26:43 PM PDT by eclecticEel (Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: 7/4/1776 - 3/21/2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

One of the great things about this movie, that I don’t think is so common nowadays is the class of actors involved. There was an excellent remake done in 1997, with Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott, and the rest of the cast also top quality. In some ways it is better than the 1957 version. Apparently there was an even earlier version done for television, although I don’t know if this was preserved.


16 posted on 04/01/2012 11:41:23 PM PDT by wideminded
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: garjog

I think it’s a GREAT film. Even though it takes place in one room, the interplay of the characters is fascinating. From the racist Lee J. Cobb, who’s REAL issue is his relationship with his son, to the lonely old man who just wants his voice heard, to the guy who just wants “the truth” (Henry Fonda), to the poor guy (Jack Klugman) who’s seen anti-poor prejudice.
Still watchable 55 years later.
And only ONE actor in the movie is still alive. Klugman.


17 posted on 04/01/2012 11:49:24 PM PDT by boop (I hate hippies and dopeheads. Just hate them. ...Ernest Borgnine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: boop

The saddest character is Jack Warden. He’s “squishy” and will vote which ever way will get him to the ballgame faster. Sad commentary on jurors.


18 posted on 04/01/2012 11:54:34 PM PDT by boop (I hate hippies and dopeheads. Just hate them. ...Ernest Borgnine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

Typical liberal movie (Henry Fonda) where all the white men (except Fonda) are racists.


19 posted on 04/02/2012 1:58:30 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!-Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Jack Aubrey

Don’t forget John Wayne!


20 posted on 04/02/2012 1:59:29 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!-Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Excellent movie.


21 posted on 04/02/2012 2:00:07 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!-Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: garjog

Liberals make great films, no one questions that.


22 posted on 04/02/2012 2:01:52 AM PDT by fortheDeclaration (How strangely will the Tools of a Tyrant pervert the plain Meaning of Words!-Sam Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: boop
12 Angry Men is probably the best court room drama ever. It's a wonderful screenplay.

I saw it produced once at a summer theater in upstate New York. My wife and I were in the front row of an old church converted into a theater.

About a half hour into the play I started counting, "One, two, three...eleven." I counted again, "One, two, three...eleven."

I could only count eleven actors on stage. The cheesy theater company had produced 12 Angry Men with only eleven actors one of whom had a hair lip. At that point I started to loose my s**t and shake uncontrollably. My wife dug her fingernails into my leg to make me stop.

23 posted on 04/02/2012 3:59:04 AM PDT by billorites (freepo ergo sum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: fortheDeclaration

I thought about Clint Eastwood, I can’t remember a film where he played the bad guy. He was mostly tough and gritty, often presumed to the bad guy, but ultimately he was good.


24 posted on 04/02/2012 5:44:03 AM PDT by PoloSec ( Believe the Gospel: how that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: garjog

I like the movie, too.
Having served twice on juries that would seriously affect the lives of the defendants— our decisions affected child custody, employment, jail time, and more— we analyzed the evidence for quite a while. We looked beyond the obvious because we wanted to be sure that we came to the just decision.


25 posted on 04/02/2012 6:11:07 AM PDT by Clara Lou (ABO! Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
. We looked beyond the obvious because we wanted to be sure that we came to the just decision.

Your job was to objectively apply the law to the existing facts. Nothing more. You sound like you did more than your job, maybe too much emotion involved.

26 posted on 04/02/2012 6:16:02 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Clara Lou
. We looked beyond the obvious because we wanted to be sure that we came to the just decision.

Your job was to objectively apply the law to the existing facts. Nothing more. You sound like you did more than your job, maybe too much emotion involved.

27 posted on 04/02/2012 6:16:18 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: central_va

You weren’t there, so you don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t know the charges, the evidence we heard, or anything else. You don’t know the commentary we got from the prosecuting attorney or the judge after we rendered our decision and the trial was over. [Both the judge and the assistant distract attorney agreed that we came to what they considered the fairest conclusion.]
So, I’ll discard your idle comment for the trash it is.


28 posted on 04/02/2012 6:27:04 AM PDT by Clara Lou (ABO! Go Newt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: central_va
Your job was to objectively apply the law to the existing facts. Nothing more.

Actually, there is more. Your job as a juror is also to judge the law itself. An unjust law that would make you convict against your conscience is no law at all. The jury is the last refuge of freedom. If we are to be mindless automatons to bend to the dictate of whatever the state will have as law, there is really no point in having juries at all.

29 posted on 04/02/2012 7:14:59 AM PDT by zeugma (Those of us who work for a living are outnumbered by those who vote for a living.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: zeugma
Actually, there is more. Your job as a juror is also to judge the law itself. An unjust law that would make you convict against your conscience is no law at all. The jury is the last refuge of freedom.

BS. The juries job isn't to judge the law. Totally wrongheaded, liberal thinking. If the law is bad then get the law changed. Is Freeper quality slipping?

30 posted on 04/02/2012 7:24:17 AM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Revolting cat!

To me Twelve Angry Men was a cousin to To Kill A Mockingbird

as politically correct sap

but I know many eat it up here.

I remember watching TKAMB as a kid when it came out and getting all teary eyed as a 6 year old and enjoyed it a few more times thru my liberal college daze

But then...I tried to watch it a few years ago and turned it off.

Seeing it for what it really is.

A pox of Harper Lee and her many southern apologist spawn like Kathryn Stockett

but many freepers go:

” but wardaddy how could you...I mean these books and movies are like so true and uplifting in the end and seem so documentary like...same as Deliverance”

let me tell folks...black folks are not the only ones screwed by the justice system


31 posted on 04/02/2012 7:32:22 AM PDT by wardaddy (I am a social conservative. My political party left me(again). They can go to hell in a bucket.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: central_va
central_va said: "The juries job isn't to judge the law."

You would send me to prison here in Kalifornia for having a three-ounce plastic pistol grip on my rifle?

The anti-gun majority in Kalifornia would do so. The anti-gun legislature passed the law. Up until recently the anti-gun Ninth Circuit denied any standing under the Second Amendment to citizens of Kalifornia.

I'm 63. How much longer must I wait for your support?

32 posted on 04/02/2012 11:47:04 AM PDT by William Tell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: William Tell
You would send me to prison here in Kalifornia for having a three-ounce plastic pistol grip on my rifle?

Leave Kalifornia. It is your choice to live in that fetid communist hell-hole. I don't know how JimRob can stand living there anyway. It is a piece of crap garbage state.

And yes if I were on the jury and you had a 3 oz whatever and that is the law then I would find you guilty if the evidence showed that. But then again I DON'T LIVE THERE.

33 posted on 04/02/2012 1:51:31 PM PDT by central_va ( I won't be reconstructed and I do not give a damn.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson