12 Angry Men!

When I first heard that this movie was in black & white, I must admit, my heart sank a little. I don't know why, but I've just got the impression that black & white movies are boring. This goes to show that interpretative perception really affects us. But anyway, this movie has proven that my perception of black & white movies should be thrown out the window. It's hard to imagine a movie being shot in only one set for 90 minutes of the movie, and yet still be so interesting. Therefore, I rate this movie 4 stars, taking into account that it was black & white, and only had one main set.

-

The movie revolves around the tale of 12 men, as they deliberate the guilt or innocence of a defendant, an 18 year old Latino charged of first-degree murder of his father, on the basis of reasonable doubt. At first, when a first vote was held, to see where the jurors stood, it was 11 guilty against 1 not guilty. Juror #8 pleaded that the boy was not guilty, but only for the sake of argument, to extend the discussion, not because he himself thought that the boy was innocent. But as all the other jurors gave their reasons for casting the guilty vote, Juror #8 saw an opening and tries to convince the other jurors to vote "not guilty". In a second ballot, Juror #9 changed his vote from "guilty" to "not guilty", to support Juror #8's cause, not to send a boy to die just like that. 

As the story enfolds, personality and characters of the jurors were revealed, skeptical jurors such as juror #3, to indifferent jurors such as juror #12. Some were pressured into changing their votes, while others truly believed in the boy not being guilty. "Reasonable doubt" it appears, was one that managed to win many jurors to vote "not guilty". It means that if the jurors really believed the boy was guilty then they should vote "guilty", however, if there is one small detail from the evidence that doesn't seem right, or one mistake on the witnesses' part, the jurors should vote "not guilty". But the a few jurors did not seem to get that, and when they realised it, changed their vote to "not guilty". 

Juror #7 did not seem to have opinion on the case, and could not wait to get over with the discussion so he could get out of the place.  He voted at first "guilty" because he figured that most people would vote that and if he voted it as well, the discussion could be quickly dealt with. But as majority started shifting their votes to "not guilty", Juror #7 got impatient and changed his votes too, in order to speed up the process. "I don't know about the rest of 'em but I'm gettin' a little tired of this yakity-yack and back-and-forth, it's gettin' us nowhere. So I guess *I'll* have to break it up; I change my vote to "not guilty." Juror #7 is one who is in my opinion, the true "mean" one, because of his unwillingness to take part in the conversation, he is not inputing any ideas of to the boy's position. Thus, he is leaving the boy's fate to the hands of others, which is worse than those condemning him to death or fighting for him to live, at least they have a reason.

Juror #4 represented the jurors who voted because they thought it was the right thing to do in their opinion, unlike Juror #7. Juror #4 was sceptical about the arguments disproving the evidences and witnesses' statements, but when he himself and his glasses were used as an example to support the disproving theory, he finally believed them and changed his vote. He changed his vote because he was convinced that there was "reasonable doubt", not just because he wanted the discussion to be over with.

-

Best bit? When the jurors manage to find something suspicious about the evidence and the witnesses' testimonies, and through reenacting the scene (the old man hobbling in time to see the boy running out of the house), using the jurors' own personal experience (juror #7 and his spectacle marks), reevaluating the testimonies (woman who saw the scene through the train windows), which made the other jurors doubt their own perception and change their votes.

Favourite juror? Juror #8! For his belief that a human's life should not be taken lightly, for his persistence in persuading the other jurors, and for his keen eye in spotting the truth among the lies.

Wen Wen (: