Friday, November 04, 2005

154: 12 angry men

We apologise for the loss of service. I no longer have broadband at myfingertips and thats not gonna change for a little bit. Bear with me a little longer.

anyways back to business.

Can you imagine a movie being released today in which all the action takes place inone room with the only props being a table, a fan, a few pieces of paper and a knife.
I think not.

Back in 1957 they did exactly that, no cheating either, no flashbacks ordream sequences. Just 12 actors in a room to hold your attention for over an hour and a half. Genius.

We don't even get to know there names, but by the end of the movie we know exactlywho they are. Henry fonda does a good turn as the decent moral (and smart, at leastcompared to the others) guy who isn't willing to let the murder suspect go to the chair without at least being convinced by the others of his guilt.

As the movie progresses and the arguments of the others crumble or they are revealed to be racist or biased they turn one by one to vote 'not guilty' alongside.

There are no incredible surprises here or very unexpected twists, just good solid acting, well written characters and very effective camera work.

a must see.


Anonymous said...

Ah - hah! You have returned with a mighty film I must say! *grin*
"no incredible surprises here or very unexpected twists" hmm but there is the old head-job question of "Why"...
One of the most frequent questions asked about this movie is why Henry Fonda's character does it... Is it belief in the innocence of the young man (which is never really proven beyond a doubt)? Is it belief in the justice system and that "beyond reasonable doubt" is a concept that must be held sacrosanct? Is he just a good guy? Is he getting a kick from turning 11 other minds around to his way of thinking and manipulating them?(Watch him carefully throughout the film as he plays them - Fonda tosses in the casual smirk here and there when none of them are looking - is this to keep us guessing or to show us the true face of the man?) Does he have an agenda? Does he read those 11 people so perfectly while sequestered with them or has he studied them and their attitudes prior to starting the argument? How does he know so much? Who is he...? Aaagh! Millions of questions! Brilliant movie!

Anonymous said...

Oh - that's me again...