All the films from all the editions, including those subsequently removed, presently totalling 1167. An easy way of seeing how…
12 Angry Men
Life is in their hands. Death is on their minds.
The defense and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filing into the jury room to decide if a young Spanish-American is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. What begins as an open and shut case soon becomes a mini-drama of each of the jurors' prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other.
12 reasons why 12 Angry Men is the best film of the 1950s:
1. It’s a high concept film that delivers beyond the unique hook to create compelling and flawed human characters.
2. The performances are sensational from Henry Fonda (empathetic and unwavering) attempting to change the minds of the other jurors, to the rest of the cast led by Lee J. Cobb. Considering it has such a sizeable main cast it is amazing how well developed each and everyone of them is with the lean script giving each of the perfectly cast actors a moment to shine.
3. It uses the claustrophobic single location to great effect, accentuating the sweltering heat and tense atmosphere amongst the conflicted men.
How do you ever begin to top a directorial debut such as this? Well Sidney Lumet certainly gave it is best shot over the years that followed creating an enviable filmography packed with cinematic gems. That he can turn a simplistic set-up of twelve men stuck together in a steaming hot room, into such a in-depth social, intellectual and thrilling 90 minutes speaks volumes for the man.
What does remain a mystery is how the creator of the screenplay Reginald Rose never even came close to this sort of standard again. His next project was 1957's Dino and then it was mostly back to the food and drink of TV scripts for the rest of his career. Whilst Lumet deserves…
12 Angry Men was one of those films that I had never seen, but for which I knew almost the entire plot and ending. I think this will be the case for most people who watch the film since it's one of those essential classics which has spawned an endless supply of parodies and homages. To me its most genius quality is the simplicity. About 99 percent of the story takes place on one set as 12 jurors deliberate the guilt of an eighteen year-old murder suspect in the slaying of his father.
With brilliant presentations of the characters and an engaging follow up on each one, 12 Angry Men is a film where dialogue is at the center. The…
Wow. Simply wow. There is no other way to articulate the feeling you get after watching 12 Angry Men, perhaps the zenith of Sidney Lumet's remarkably talented directorial career, even more amazing considering this was his debut feature. It's just one of those rare golden gems of a film that gets everything, literally everything, absolutely right. Script, direction, performances, tone, setting, story, the lot. It's perfect. It's exciting. It's gripping. It's meaningful. It's moving. And it may be close to sixty years old, but all of the many things it's trying to say remain relevant to our society, and sadly perhaps always will. This truly is a cinematic masterpiece that deals with not only the rule of law and it's…
There is a certain predictable inevitability when watching a classic when you're a bit older than the first time you watched it. You up the rating to reflect its classic status. I'm glad to say that this is also the case for 12 Angry Men.
The always underwatched Sidney Lumet's first feature film proves to be the first promise he made for all the marvellous films he has made after it. 12 Angry Men is a dialogue driven cross section of male America in the fifties and it is unflinching in how it dares portray the pettiness and weaker sides of us humans. Weaknesses that are still present some 50 years after this was…
That was the best 1.5 hours of middle aged white dudes yelling at each other that I've ever seen.
12 Angry Men is a film that starts strong and ends strong. A true tour de force in every sense of the word. There is nothing that will change my opinion about this movie. You could talk for a hundred years and you wouldn't change a thing.
Its a great movie, aside that the it is predictable but it still tickle me in a strange way. Basically the entire story is a situation I'll try to avoid, like seriously you'll be deciding a man life based on your conclusion. I couldn't bare to do that!
This is one of the few films that has kept my attention since the first frame. One courtroom, one day, one objective - to determine the future of a young man accused of murder. Henry Fonda's Juror #8 brilliantly leads a battle of wills and prejudices towards a climactic confrontation with Juror #3, played by a fiery Lee J. Cobb. A must-watch, classic character-study.
Great academic exercise piece on character, constraints, and dialogue in linear narrative. It's an A-game affair, but go further down the Lumet chain if you looking to tickle your cinematic fancy.
From the almost 1000 movies I've watched to date, there are only two able to keep my eyes glued to the screen no mather what from beggining to end: one of them is "12 Angry Men" (the other one is "The Social Network").
"12 Angry Men" is a movie about a jury of 12 people discussing about a case and trying to reach a veredict in a room for 90 minutes. That's it. Nothing else happens. But the script of "12 Angry Men" is so good that it's unevitable to be part of the discussion, to question every single idea or opinion that comes out of the mouth of any of its characters, to admire and be surprised by its…
A classic that works on every level. The acting is superb, the screenplay is tense, and it's a touching learning experience throughout.
Ah! Como queria que todos brasileiros assistissem a este filme.
- O momento raivoso que passamos na política, com argumentos pobres e julgamentos "certos" sem uma evidência concreta;
- A Necessidade de se manter no pesdestal de sua ideia, mesmo que essa não tenha fundamentos que a embase;
- A insistência em se discutir a fim de vencer uma discussão, aparentemente de conclusão óbvia, em vez de chegar ao resultado mais justo; Estes e outros pontos, permeiam todo o filme.
12 homens - de diferentes ideais e profissão - precisam decidir se um garoto de 18 anos é culpado ou não do assassinato do próprio pai, após realização do juri, com testemunhas e fatos aparentemente irrefutáveis para 11 deles. Mas…
Very good performances in a well contained story, making you question every single idea that forms itself into the plot. Showing it's age, but even in today it has heart of reality, stereotyping, and darkness.
Sidney Lumet is legendary in the world of cinema. This film alone would cement his place there, without other stalwarts such as Dog Day Afternoon, Network, or Serpico – all of which I love. But this film was Lumet's first, and one that he may never have topped, with a cast that gave him performances that ranged on the sublime. A calm and collected Henry Fonda, a raging Lee J. Cobb, with ten other jurors mixed in between. Set in one room on a hot New York day, reasonable doubt was never brought about any more clearly.