Twelve angry men
A twelve man jury is set to begin their decision on an 18-year old boy being accused of first-degree, where a guilty verdict means an automatic death sentence, the case appears to be pretty straight forward. The defend has not got a good alibi, he claims to have lost a knife which turns up at the scene of the crime and several witnesses either saw the murder happen or the boy running away, some others heard screaming, all but one of the jurors vote the boy guilty, juror number 8 votes not guilty, first of all his reason for voting not guilty is more for the sake of conversation as all the jurors must have reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty, as the story unfolds, it quickly becomes a study of the jurors different personalities, their preconceptions, backgrounds and interactions, which provides the backdrop to Mr. Davis’ convincing the other jurors
For a film made in the fifties its was quite enjoyable figuring out if the person was guilty or not suspecting one of the other characters of being guilty and one of the characters that kept saying he was guilty kept holding a picture of his son which makes me think that something happened to his son, this all gets my brain thinking and start discussing plot twists and theories about the other character which made hugely enjoyable, I like dramas that have alot of action but more about thinking if a certain person did it.