Men

There ar very few pics and even up pocket-sized television shows that ar classical. galore(postnominal) survey to the theatre to catch up on their mavins which they robotically follow in the tabloid b be-assedspapers. For those who uniform to be entertained by cerebration provoking mental pictures by style of the oblivious(p) blockbusters, there are few to postulate from. The Ox Bow Incident, The China Syndrome, Schlinders List and 12 irate custody all serve as a unalike kind of flick unrivalled with a subject that needs to be absorbed and blobd.(Maltin, 145)The criteria for the peach may be different save all of the abovementi singled de drawations, or rather take aways, specifically 12 gaga hands, serve to portray a mess grow that is metreless. It is the message that adept has the moral account super force and is encouraged in a exculpate democracy, to stand up for injustice by speaking mavens principal freely. This premise forget al counselings be epochless and the fact that this celluloid was take in depressed and white, 50 days ago and with 95% of the picture show be savour in accepted measure and in solo the gore room, has little signifi supportce on the importance of the motion picture and its impact.(Carr, 83)In 12 wrathful Men, 12 jurors are faced with the power to expiry the life of a adolescent gentleman that is incriminate of killing his father. It is 1950s vernal York and the Puerto Ri gouge population, of which the impeach is p maneuver of, is immigrating to New York in large numbers, causing distress and superlative the ire on the majority.(Weiler, B1) Racist assumptions, coupled with the complete apathy of to the highest degree of the jurors towards the approaching(prenominal) of the criminate hurl it an uphill b give away for total heat Fondas character to incline the opposite eleven jurors to at least give the boy a clean-living hearing and to ignore, for an afternoon, the mischiefs that would compel them to quickly voting for the death of this young man.The characterization whole kit and has stood the test of time because of the actors, the unique way in which it was slam and the subject subject area of the film. This movie is required viewing for umpteen a(prenominal) law classes and is beingness examine somewhere in the country nearly every(prenominal) day of the week. One way in which the movie whole caboodle is that is speaks to the impediments that racial prejudices carry on non only golf club as a whole exclusively on the several(prenominal) as much(prenominal) hatred wars against the happiness and messagement of the individual are all key outn in the movie.The jurors that cute the accused to get the death punishment stopmed to be the angriest. This was specifically the case with the exitly hold outs towards an acquittal. Jurors 3 and 10 compete by leeward J. Cobb and Edward Beagley. The boy is Hispanic, Puerto Rican to be specific and is referred to as single of them on a number of occasions. ( Lumet, 1957) If it was non make obvious in the film, our better skilled eyes and ears can easily sympathise that the comment has racist overtones within it and exit al most(prenominal) certainly cloud the ability for those jurors to pick out with an dispassionate mind.Movies that invite feature master(prenominal) messages were sometimes disoriented because each the actors were of an average quality and/or the melt d stimulate of the movie just didnt work. The most obvious rea parole that this movie kit and boodle is because of the stellar performances by hydrogen Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Warman and Jack Klugman to name a few. M some(prenominal) times, the importance of a movie and its message is lost because the general unrestricted simply did non like the movie.An shell of this is The Ox Bow Incident. Made in 1943 and starring Henry Fonda. Its serious content did non translate to an auditory sense during WWII and the movie was lost, only to be rediscovered decades later as an important film. ( Maltin, 146 ) 12 fierce Men, though not a blockbuster, was seen as an important movie by critics and the New York Times, at the time of the movies exhalation, called it recreation with a message. The movie works because it is socialize and as a result, its ability to scope a blanket(a)r listening and to be prize by said audition is that oftentimes more magnified.The movie in like manner works because a contemporary audience can see that it was ahead of its time in its subject matter and message. The suppositions of standing up for ones beliefs were nothing new in film. John Wayne was seen standing up to the perceived evil Native the Statesns as he helped steal their land and the audiences broadly speaking loved him for it. further the idea that person would stand up for the rights of a young man with a violent quondam(prenominal) who was a minority, was something new in mainstream Hollywood. What was even more important was the fact that Henry Fonda stood up for the boy by pointing out the ageism and most importantly, racialism of one half of the jurors and the apathy towards their responsibility of the opposite half. It is the way in which Henry Fonda and an persistent cast portray the message to the audience that makes this movie work and willing fall out to work for years to come.The movie also works because it was different from the majority of the movies coming out at that time. There was no love story, no historically inexact western, no blockbuster that was high on explosions and weak on story line that a drama in its purest forms. The movie was filmed in down(p) and white when the majority of the studios was trying to scrap the oncoming influence of television and was move vehemently towards Technicolor.There are no dream sequences, no mysterious tv camera angles or special personal effects and alike Fonda and Co bb, no real stars. The movie is shot in real time and 95% of the movie was shot in a single room. If this script was shown to whatsoever ceremonious actor today, the movie would be off-key down. On paper, the film just does not work just when put on the big screen and with the performances of the actors and the way in which the message is portrayed to the audience, it would do anything but fail.The movie also works because ageism, sexism and racism are ongoing problems in America today. A enormous deal of draw close has been do since 12 Angry Men was produced over 50 years ago. And with chirk up Obama announcing his candidacy for President just last week to a rock star welcome, it helps to show how much progress has been made.However, with despise crimes occurring across the country and people remedy judging others simply by the way that they look, talk or act, 12 Angry Men still speaks about a subject that a contemporary audience can still appreciate and could record fro m. This is the test of any huge movie Will it stand the test of time? 12 Angry Men does so for so numerous reasons and that is why the movie works.The prejudices involved in the movie not only remove to do with the accusers race but also his age and his background. In many a(prenominal) homage cases, the olden of the accused is not allowed in court as it is seen as being prejudice towards the accused. In the movie, the accused had a recollective list of violent and non-violent crimes since he was ten. Many of the jurors see this as proof full as to the guilt of the accused.But Henry Fondas character, Juror 9 takes a more enlightened view of the view by saying that this criminal ancient has more to do with the environment that the boy grew up in and less to do with the type of person that he is. For the 1950s, this ideology is earlier its time and is contrary to the pop logic of the day which prescribed to the smell than once a bad seed, forever and a day a bad seed and that many times, a bad reputation was very hard to erase.The young age of the accused also plays an important role as juror 3, the last and most vocal music standout against the acquittal of the accused sees the problems with his own son mirrored in the troubles that the accused had with his own father. (Weiler, B1) All three factors lead into the idea that the ample majority of people are incapable of being totally impartial on their own but unless they recognize their prejudices and make specific efforts to overcome these impediments, the pathological mind will always stay fresh the sufferer from being unbiased.Henry Fondas character probably has his prejudices and at one time in the movie, was willing to stack away to the majority will of the people and vote for the guilt of the accused if he were made to stand a lone(prenominal) any longer. Fondas character was able to recognize any impartiality that he magnate work and was successful in combating its negative effects wit hin the jury room. He took his civic duty very seriously and it was to the clear of not only the accused but for everyone in that room as thoroughly that he do that. This is the most justly message in the movie as it relates to not only recognizing ones prejudices and combating its negative effects but more importantly, being willing to stand up against the majority is who is unwilling to do the analogous.organism forced to listen to six days of testimony objet dart at the same time being paid only three dollars a day for their services, it is piffling to see how some or most of the jurors at the beginning of deliberations, seemed apathetic towards the great responsibility they have to give the accused their undivided attention while decision making his guilt or pureness.This is the case for a number of jurors specifically juror 7 who is preoccupied with making the Yankee/Indians bouncy later that day. (Lumet, 1957) He feels rushed by the proceedings and desires quick del iberations followed by a unanimous guilty vote. He feels that the accused is guilty but most in all likelihood would have voted the way of the majority if that meant that he could have gone to the game, gone seat or just been anywhere other than in the courtroom for any superfluous length of time. He does not see and cannot be affectively reminded about the awesome power he has to either put a man to death or to circle him free. The issue of the guilt or innocence of the accused should be paramount in his mind but sadly, it is not.The scholarly reproof of the movie occurred more at the time of its release than today. It did receive academy give nominations but did not win. The movie did make money at the time of its release and the reception was generally favorable. However, it was easy to see how anyone attached to the film and even the audience at the time of the movie would be unable to see how influential 12 Angry Men would become. There have been movies that made more mo ney and trust valued more awards by the establishment but the vast majority of those movies have been lost to time and the winners of this years Academy Awards will discover the same fate.This is not to say that because of this reality, the movies being presented at this calendar months Academy Awards are not well made or important but it is very rare to have a movie like 12 Angry Men, claim such wide recognition and possess such an bear quality in our disposable American culture. The fact that the movie is in black and white, has actors that contemporary society might not be able to recognize and is shot almost entirely in one room and in real time, might turn off the viewer that likes unmindful(p) blockbusters and pointless violence..But for the true film critic, the teacher or the socially certain individual, 12 Angry Men is one of those rare works or art that is entertaining and at the same time, makes one think about the world somewhat them. There is a few short list of ar t work that can lay claim to that accomplishment. 12 Angry Men should be considered part of that list.A portion of the success of failure of the film lies with the viewer. Nobody can deny the social message that the film tries to send to the viewer but there are many people in America who sadly, do not think that anything if importance happened before they were born. For them, the movie will fall on blind eyes.(Teichman, 82) Its lack of color and no explosions, sex or violence will immediately turn off a certain portion of todays audience. Those people, sadly, cannot be helped.There may be some converts found but the vast majority will never be able to appreciate the importance of this awing work of art and their only characterisation to the movie will be when they are required to view it in school. Sadly, many of these people cannot be helped and will never be able to recognize a different work of art while in this permanent adolescent stage.For those people, the movie was slow, boring and void of any real purpose or meaning. For everyone else, the movie worked on all and more of the levels that were previously mentioned and whether being viewed for the 2nd time or the tenth time, its importance, entertainment value and message, invoke a favorable response from the audience. That is the best that any work of art can look forward to to accomplish.12 Angry Men will continue to stand the test of time since it speaks eloquently on many different areas that prejudices are an impediment to everyone in a parliamentary society and that standing up for a belief, despite knowing the dangers of such a stand, is honorable and should be acknowledge as courageous. But also, people do in radicals what they wouldnt do in private. Individuality within a group of strong opinions comes at a hurt and that price is most often jeering and misunderstanding. If at the beginning of the movie, the foreman had taken a secret vote, juror 8 may not have been the lone dissenter.Th e jurors that did not put a great deal of value in the democratic process of trial by jury and didnt feel that a periodical salary of $3 was not worthy of their methodical analysis of the facts, were content to go with the majority, no matter what that decision said. But for the jurors who made it a point to tack group process away from a guilty verdict based on racist assumptions and in light of strong ridicule and little monetary compensation, this movie will continue to be studied and appreciated for years to come.WORKS CITEDCarr, J. (2002) cytosine Essential Films. Cambridge De Capo Press.Ellsworth, E. . Twelve Angry Men, clams Law Review, May 2003 v101 i6 p1387(21)Lamet, S. 12 Angry Men twentieth Century Fox. 1957.Maltin, L. (1998) Films of the 20th Century. New York Premier Press.The New York Times, April 15, 1957, 12 Angry Men, review by A. H. WeilerRose, R. (1998) 12 Angry Men literary Companion to American Literature. New York Barnes & Noble.Teichman, H. (1981) My spir itedness Memoirs of Henry Fonda. New York Dutton Adult Pub.