Time to Face All the Angry Men Time to March Again

1957 American film by Sidney Lumet

12 Angry Men
Theatrical release affiche
Directed by	Sidney Lumet
Screenplay by	Reginald Rose
Based on	Twelve Angry Men by Reginald Rose
Produced by	Henry Fonda Reginald Rose
Starring	Henry Fonda Lee J. Cobb Ed Begley E.G. Marshall Jack Warden
Cinematography	Boris Kaufman
Edited past	Carl Lerner
Music by	Kenyon Hopkins
Production company	Orion-Nova Productions
Distributed by	United Artists
Release appointment	April 10, 1957 (1957-04-ten) (Fox Wilshire Theater)[1] [2]
Running time	96 minutes
Country	United States
Language	English language
Budget	$337,000[3] [four]
Box function	$two million (rentals)[5]

12 Aroused Men is a 1957 American courtroom drama film directed by Sidney Lumet, adapted from a 1954 teleplay of the aforementioned name past Reginald Rose.^{[six] [seven]} The film tells the story of a jury of 12 men equally they deliberate the conviction or acquittal of an xviii-yr old defendant^{[note ane]} on the footing of reasonable doubt, forcing the jurors to question their morals and values. It stars Henry Fonda (who also produced the movie with Reginald Rose), Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, E.G. Marshall, and Jack Warden.

12 Angry Men explores many techniques of consensus-building and the difficulties encountered in the procedure among this grouping of men whose range of personalities adds to the intensity and conflict. It as well explores the power 1 person has to elicit change.^{[ original research? ]} The jury members are identified only by number; no names are revealed until an exchange of dialogue at the very end. The flick forces the characters and audience to evaluate their ain self-image through observing the personality, experiences, and actions of the jurors. The film is also notable for its nearly exclusive utilize of one prepare, where all but iii minutes of the picture takes place.

The moving picture was selected every bit the second-best courtroom drama ever (later 1962'southward To Kill a Mockingbird) by the American Film Institute for their AFI'due south 10 Top ten listing.^[8] It is regarded by many as one of the greatest films ever made. In 2007, the picture show was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically pregnant".^[9]

Plot [edit]

In the overheated jury room of the New York County Courthouse, a jury prepares to deliberate the example of an xviii-year-erstwhile impoverished youth defendant of stabbing his begetter to death. The gauge instructs them that if at that place is whatever reasonable doubt, the jurors are to return a verdict of not guilty; if found guilty, the defendant will receive a mandatory death judgement via the electrical chair. The verdict must be unanimous.

At kickoff, the evidence seems disarming: a neighbor testified to witnessing the accused stab his begetter from her window and through the windows of a passing elevated train. Another neighbour testified that he heard the defendant threaten to kill his father and the father'southward body hitting the basis, then, as he opened his door, saw the accused running downwards the stairs. The boy has a violent past and had recently purchased a switchblade of the same type as was constitute at the murder scene, simply claimed he lost it. The pocketknife at the scene had been cleaned of fingerprints.

The jurors at showtime seem to take the conclusion lightly. Juror 7 in particular is broken-hearted to catch a baseball game for which he has tickets. In a preliminary vote conducted by Juror 1, all jurors vote guilty except Juror 8, who believes that there should exist some discussion before the verdict is made. He questions the reliability of the witnesses' testimonies and too throws doubt on the supposed uniqueness of the murder weapon past producing an identical switchblade from his pocket. He says he cannot vote guilty because reasonable dubiousness exists. With his arguments seemingly failing to convince any of the other jurors, Juror 8 suggests a secret ballot, from which he will abstain; if all the other jurors notwithstanding vote guilty, he will acquiesce. The election reveals one not guilty vote. Juror 3 immediately accuses Juror five (who previously said he grew up in the slums similar the defendant). As the two bicker, Juror nine reveals that he changed his vote, respecting Juror 8's motives and agreeing at that place should be more than discussion.

Juror viii argues that the noise of the passing train would have obscured the threat the 2d witness claimed to have overheard. Juror 5 changes his vote, as does Juror 11, who believes the accused, had he truly killed his father, would not have returned to the criminal offense scene several hours afterward to retrieve the murder weapon as it had already been cleaned of fingerprints. Juror 8 besides points out that people often say "I'm going to kill y'all" without literally significant it.

Jurors 5, 6, and viii farther question the 2nd witness'southward story by noting his claim that he reached his front door fifteen seconds after he heard the torso striking the floor is doubtful as he walked dragging a leg behind him due to a stroke. After looking at a diagram of the witness' flat and conducting an experiment, the jurors make up one's mind that there is no way the witness could take made it to his door in such a brusque space of time. Juror iii is infuriated, and subsequently a exact argument, tries to attack Juror 8, shouting "I'll impale him!", proving Juror 8'due south bespeak about the defendant'south words. Jurors two and 6 change their votes; the jury is at present evenly split up.

Juror 4 doubts the defendant's alibi of having been at the movies, based on the boy'south inability to recall certain details regarding his excuse. Juror 8 tests Juror 4's own memory. He is able to remember events from the previous week, with difficulty similar to the defendant. Jurors ii and 3 fence whether the defendant could have stabbed his much-taller father from a downwardly angle, with Juror 3 demonstrating on Juror eight that a downwardly stab was physically possible, though bad-mannered. Juror 5 then demonstrates the correct mode to hold and apply a switchblade, highlighting that someone who knew how to employ one would always stab underhand at an upward angle against a taller opponent.

Juror 7 one-half-heartedly changes his vote, leading to an inquisition by Juror xi. Under duress, Juror 7 sloppily says he thinks the male child is non guilty. After another vote, Jurors 12 and 1 also change their votes, leaving only three guilty votes. Juror x erupts in vitriol regarding the defendant's ethnicity. The rest of the jurors, except Jurors 4 and 7, stand upwardly and plow their backs to him. When he bemoans that nobody is listening to him, Juror 4 states that he has, and tells him to sit down and exist placidity. Juror 10 then walks over to a desk in the corner, now isolated. Juror eight makes a statement almost reasonable uncertainty before having the rest of the jurors return to the case. When Juror 4 is pressed equally to why he still maintains a guilty vote, he declares that the woman who saw the killing from across the street stands as solid evidence. Juror 12 reverts to a guilty vote.

After watching Juror 4 rub his nose, irritated by impressions from his eyeglasses, Juror nine realizes that the first witness had the same impressions on her nose also and was constantly rubbing them, indicating that she wore eyeglasses as well but did non wear them to court out of vanity. The other jurors brainstorm to chime in about this new breakthrough. Juror 8 reasons that the witness, who was trying to sleep when she saw the killing, was not wearing her eyeglasses when it happened and she would non have had time to put them on to become a clear view of the person who did the stabbing, making her story dubious. Jurors 12, 10 and iv all change their vote, leaving Juror three equally the sole dissenter.

Juror 3 gives an increasingly tortured cord of arguments, building on earlier remarks about his strained relationship with his own son, which is ultimately why he wants the male child to be found guilty. In a moment of rage, Juror 3 tears up a photograph of him and his son before breaking downwardly sobbing. He mutters "not guilty", making the vote unanimous. As the others exit, Juror 8 helps the remorseful Juror 3 with his coat. The defendant is found not guilty off-screen and the jurors leave the courthouse. In a brief epilogue, Jurors 8 (Davis) and 9 (McCardle) innovate each other for the start time past their names before parting.

Cast [edit]

• Martin Balsam as Juror 1, the jury foreman; a calm and methodical assistant high schoolhouse football coach.
• John Fiedler equally Juror ii, a meek and unpretentious bank teller who is initially dominated by others, merely every bit the climax builds, so does his courage.
• Lee J. Cobb as Juror 3, a hot-tempered owner of a courier business who is estranged from his son; the nigh passionate advocate of a guilty verdict.
• E.Thou. Marshall every bit Juror 4, an unflappable, conscientious, and analytical stock banker who is concerned with the facts of the case.
• Jack Klugman equally Juror 5, a man who grew up in a violent slum, and is sensitive to insults about his upbringing.
• Edward Binns as Juror six, a tough merely principled house painter who consistently speaks up when others are verbally disrespected, especially the elderly.
• Jack Warden as Juror 7, a wisecracking salesman and baseball fanatic who expresses indifference to the case.
• Henry Fonda as Davis, Juror 8, a humane, justice-seeking architect; initially the just i to vote "not guilty" and openly question the seemingly articulate evidence presented.
• Joseph Sweeney as McCardle, Juror 9, a wise, thoughtful, and intelligent pastor who is highly observant of the witnesses' behaviors and their possible motivations.
• Ed Begley equally Juror 10, a pushy, loud-mouthed, and xenophobic garage owner.
• George Voskovec as Juror xi, a polite European watchmaker and naturalized American citizen who demonstrates strong respect for autonomous values such every bit due process.
• Robert Webber as Juror 12, an indecisive and distractible advertizement executive.
• Rudy Bond as the Judge
• Tom Gorman as the Stenographer
• James Kelly as the Bailiff
• Baton Nelson as the Court clerk
• John Savoca as the Defendant
• Walter Stocker every bit Human waiting for elevator

Themes [edit]

Professor of Law Emeritus at UCLA School of Constabulary Michael Asimow referred to the film as a "tribute to a common man holding out against lynch mob mentality."^[10] Gavin Smith of Film Annotate called the pic "a definitive rebuttal to the lynch mob hysteria of the McCarthy era".^[11]

Business academic Phil Rosenzweig called the jury in 12 Angry Men being made up entirely of white men "specially of import", writing: "Many of the twelve would accept looked effectually the room, and, seeing other white men, causeless that they had much in common and should be able to accomplish a verdict without difficulty. As they deliberate, still, mistake lines begin to announced—by age, past educational activity, past national origin, by socioeconomic level, past values, and by temperament."^[12]

Production [edit]

Reginald Rose's screenplay for 12 Angry Men was initially produced for television (starring Robert Cummings equally Juror viii), and was broadcast live on the CBS programme Studio Ane in September 1954. A complete kinescope of that performance, which had been missing for years and was feared lost, was discovered in 2003. It was staged at Chelsea Studios in New York Metropolis.^[xiii]

The success of the idiot box production resulted in a film adaptation. Sidney Lumet, whose prior directorial credits included dramas for television productions such every bit The Alcoa Hour and Studio One, was recruited by Henry Fonda and Rose to direct. 12 Angry Men was Lumet's first feature film, and the only producing credit for Fonda and Rose (under the production company, Orion-Nova Productions).^[three] Fonda afterwards stated that he would never over again produce a picture.

The motion picture was shot in New York and completed after a brusque just rigorous rehearsal schedule, in less than three weeks, on a budget of $337,000 (equivalent to $3,251,000 in 2021). Rose and Fonda took bacon deferrals.^[3]

At the beginning of the film, the cameras are positioned in a higher place center level and mounted with wide-angle lenses, to give the advent of greater depth betwixt subjects, but as the film progresses the focal length of the lenses is gradually increased. By the stop of the film, about everyone is shown in closeup, using telephoto lenses from a lower angle, which decreases or "shortens" depth of field. Lumet stated that his intention in using these techniques with cinematographer Boris Kaufman was to create a near palpable claustrophobia.^[fourteen]

Reception [edit]

Initial response [edit]

On its outset release, 12 Aroused Men received critical acclamation. A. H. Weiler of The New York Times wrote, "Information technology makes for taut, absorbing, and compelling drama that reaches far beyond the close confines of its jury room setting." His observation of the twelve men was that "their dramas are powerful and provocative enough to go along a viewer spellbound."^[15] Diverseness chosen it an "absorbing drama" with interim that was "perhaps the best seen recently in whatsoever single film,"^[16] Philip K. Scheuer of the Los Angeles Times declared it a "tour de strength in movie making,"^[17] The Monthly Film Bulletin deemed it "a compelling and outstandingly well handled drama,"^[eighteen] and John McCarten of The New Yorker chosen it "a adequately substantial addition to the celluloid landscape."^[19]

The pic was a box office disappointment in the US^{[twenty] [21]} merely did better internationally.^[3] The appearance of color and widescreen productions may have contributed to its disappointing box role performance.^[20] It was non until its first airing on television that the moving-picture show finally found its audience.^[22]

Legacy [edit]

The film is viewed equally a classic, highly regarded from both a critical and popular viewpoint: Roger Ebert listed it as ane of his "Great Movies".^[23] The American Film Constitute named Juror viii, played past Henry Fonda, 28th in a list of the 50 greatest motion picture heroes of the 20th century. AFI likewise named 12 Aroused Men the 42nd most inspiring motion picture, the 88th most eye-pounding film and the 87th best film of the by hundred years. The film was also nominated for the 100 movies listing in 1998.^[24] In 2011, the flick was the second most screened film in secondary schools in the U.k..^[25] As of September 2021^[update], the film holds a 100% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 55 reviews, with a weighted average of 9.10/10. The site's consensus reads: "Sidney Lumet'south feature debut is a superbly written, dramatically effective courtroom thriller that rightfully stands as a modern classic".^[26]

American Film Institute lists:

• AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies – Nominated
• AFI's 100 Years...100 Thrills – No. 88
• AFI's 100 Years...100 Heroes & Villains: Juror No. viii – No. 28 Hero
• AFI'southward 100 Years...100 Cheers – No. 42
• AFI's 100 Years...100 Movies (tenth Anniversary Edition) – No. 87
• AFI's ten Top 10 – No. two Courtroom Drama

Awards [edit]

The film was selected equally the second-best courtroom drama ever by the American Movie Institute during their AFI's 10 Peak 10 list, simply afterward To Kill a Mockingbird,^[viii] and is the highest rated courtroom drama on Rotten Tomatoes' Top 100 Movies of All Time.^[27]

Legal analyses [edit]

Speaking at a screening of the film during the 2010 Fordham University Police force School Film festival, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that seeing 12 Angry Men while she was in college influenced her determination to pursue a career in police force. She was especially inspired by immigrant Juror eleven's monologue on his reverence for the American justice organisation. She too told the audience of law students that, as a lower-court judge, she would sometimes instruct juries to not follow the film'due south example, because most of the jurors' conclusions are based on speculation, non fact.^[36] Sotomayor noted that events such equally Juror 8 entering a similar knife into the proceeding; performing exterior research into the instance matter in the first identify; and ultimately the jury equally a whole making broad, wide-ranging assumptions far beyond the scope of reasonable doubt (such as the inferences regarding the woman wearing glasses) would not be immune in a existent-life jury situation, and would in fact accept yielded a mistrial^[37] (assuming, of course, that applicable constabulary permitted the content of jury deliberations to be revealed).

In 2007, Michael Asimow argued that the jury in 12 Angry Men reached an incorrect verdict, writing that the amount of circumstantial evidence against the defendant should have been enough to captive him, fifty-fifty if the testimony of the two eyewitnesses were overlooked.^[ten]

In 2012, Mike D'Angelo of The A.V. Club too questioned the verdict of the jury in the moving picture, writing: "What ensures The Kid's guilt for applied purposes, [...] is the sheer improbability that all the testify is erroneous. You'd have to be the jurisprudential inverse of a national lottery winner to face up and so many patently damning coincidences and misidentifications. Or yous'd accept to be framed, which is what Johnnie Cochran was ultimately forced to contend—not simply because of the DNA show, just because there's no other plausible explanation for why every single detail points to O.J. Simpson's guilt. Just there's no reason offered in 12 Angry Men for why, say, the police would be planting switchblades."^[38]

Adaptations and parodies [edit]

There take been a number of adaptations. A 1963 German TV production Die zwölf Geschworenen [de] was directed by Günter Gräwert, and a 1973 Castilian production, Doce hombres sin piedad, was made for Television receiver 22 years before Espana allowed juror trials, while a 1991 homage by Kōki Mitani, Juninin no Yasashii Nihonjin ("12 gentle Japanese"), posits a Japan with a jury arrangement and features a group of Japanese people grappling with their responsibility in the face of Japanese cultural norms. A 1986 episode of Murder, She Wrote entitled "Trial by Fault" pays tribute to 12 Aroused Men. The major twists are originally 10 jurors vote for "not guilty" due to self defence force, Jessica votes "unsure" and another juror votes "guilty". Jessica and other jurors recollect the testify, as more than and more than jurors switch from "not guilty due to cocky defense" and come to a realization equally to what actually occurred the dark of the murder. The 1987 Indian film in Hindi language Ek Ruka Hua Faisla ("a awaiting determination") and as well in Kannada as Dashamukha ("ten faces") are the remakes of the film, with an virtually identical storyline. Russian director Nikita Mikhalkov also made a 2007 adaptation, 12, featuring a Chechen teen on trial in Moscow. A 2015 Chinese accommodation, 12 Citizens, follows the plot of the original 1957 American film, while including characters reflecting contemporary Beijing society, including a cab driver, guard, businessman, policeman, a retiree persecuted in a 1950s political motility, and others.^[39] The detective drama tv bear witness Veronica Mars, which like the film includes the theme of course issues, featured an episode, "Ane Angry Veronica", in which the title character is selected for jury duty. The episode flips the film's format and depicts ane holdout convincing the jury to convict the privileged defendants of assault confronting a less well-off victim, despite their lawyers initially disarming 11 jury members of a not guilty verdict.

In 1997, a television remake of the film under the aforementioned title was directed by William Friedkin and produced by Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer. In the newer version, the guess is a adult female and four of the jurors are black, but the overall plot remains intact. Modernizations include not smoking in the jury room, changes in references to pop culture figures and income, references to execution by lethal injection every bit opposed to the electric chair, more race-related dialogue and profanity.

The pic has likewise been discipline to parody. In 2015, the Comedy Cardinal TV series Inside Amy Schumer aired a half-hr parody of the moving picture titled "12 Angry Men Within Amy Schumer".^{[40] [41]} The BBC Television comedy Hancock's Half 60 minutes, starring Tony Hancock and Sid James, and written past Ray Galton and Alan Simpson, was parodied in the episode broadcast on Oct 16, 1959. Family unit Guy paid tribute to the pic with its Flavor eleven episode titled "12 and a Half Aroused Men", and King of the Hill acknowledged the film with their parody "Nine Pretty Darn Angry Men" in season 3.

Run into also [edit]

• Twelve Aroused Men
• Listing of American films of 1957
• List of films considered the best

Notes [edit]

1. ^ In the United States, a verdict in criminal trials past jury must exist unanimous.

References [edit]

1. ^ "12 Aroused Men – Details". AFI Catalog of Feature Films . Retrieved July 8, 2018.
2. ^ "New Interim Trio Gains Prominence". Los Angeles Times. Apr 9, 1957. p. 23.
3. ^ ^{a b c d} Hy Hollinger (December 24, 1958). "Telecast and Theatre Film, Looks As If '12 Aroused Men' May Reap Most Dough Every bit Legit Play". Diversity. p. five. Retrieved May 21, 2019 – via Annal.org.
4. ^ Anita Ekberg Chosen for 'Mimi' Role Louella Parsons:. The Washington Post and Times Herald (1954–1959) Washington, D.C., April 8, 1957: A18.
5. ^ "Peak Grosses of 1957", Diversity, January 8, 1958: 30
6. ^ Hy Hollinger (February 27, 1957). "Film reviews: 12 Angry Men". Diverseness. p. 6. Retrieved June seven, 2019 – via archive.org.
7. ^ "12 Angry Men". Harrison's Reports. March 2, 1957. p. 35. Retrieved June 7, 2019 – via archive.org.
8. ^ ^{a b} "AFI'southward 10 Top 10 Courtroom Drama". American Motion-picture show Institute. June 17, 2008. Retrieved November 29, 2014.
9. ^ "Librarian of Congress Announces National Film Registry Selections for 2007". Library of Congress, Washington, D.C . Retrieved May 15, 2020.
10. ^ ^{a b} Asimow, Michael (Apr 2007). "12 Angry Men: A Revisionist View". Chicago-Kent College of Law Review. 82 (ii): 711–716. ISSN 0009-3599. Retrieved April 14, 2022.
11. ^ Rapf, Joanna E. (2005). Sidney Lumet: Interviews. University Press of Mississippi. p. 131. ISBN978-1578067244.
12. ^ Rosenzweig, Phil (2021). Reginald Rose and the Journeying of 12 Aroused Men. Empire Land Editions. ISBN978-0823297740.
13. ^ Alleman, Richard (February 1, 2005). New York: The Movie Lover'due south Guide: The Ultimate Insider Tour of Movie New York. Broadway Books. p. 231. ISBN978-0-7679-1634-9.
14. ^ "Evolution of Twelve Angry Men". Playhouse Square. Archived from the original on January 6, 2009. Retrieved September eleven, 2008.
15. ^ Weiler, A.H. (Apr 15, 1957). "Twelve Angry Men (1957) Picture Review". The New York Times . Retrieved August 28, 2011.
16. ^ "12 Angry Men". Diversity. February 27, 1957. p. 6.
17. ^ Scheuer, Philip Grand. (April 11, 1957). "Audience Sweats Information technology Out—Literally—With Jury". Los Angeles Times. Role 2, p. 13.
18. ^ "Twelve Angry Men". The Monthly Flick Bulletin. Vol. 24, no. 281. June 1957. p. 68.
19. ^ McCarten, John (April 27, 1957). "The Current Cinema". The New Yorker. p. 66.
20. ^ ^{a b} 12 Angry Men Filmsite Movie Review. AMC FilmSite. Retrieved April 14, 2012.
21. ^ 12 Angry Men at AllMovie. Rovi. Retrieved April 14, 2012.
22. ^ Beyond a Reasonable Doubt: Making 12 Angry Men Featurette on Collector'southward Edition DVD
23. ^ "12 Angry Men Movie Reviews, Pictures". Chicago Sun-Times. Archived from the original on September 13, 2010. Retrieved August 17, 2010.
24. ^ "America's Greatest Movies" (PDF). American Film Institute. 2002. Retrieved August 23, 2015.
25. ^ "Pinnacle movies for schools revealed". BBC News. December xiii, 2011. Retrieved January iv, 2012.
26. ^ "12 Angry Men Movie Reviews, Pictures". Rotten Tomatoes . Retrieved September twenty, 2021.
27. ^ "Summit 100 Movies of All Time". Rotten Tomatoes . Retrieved November 29, 2014.
28. ^ "The 30th Academy Awards | 1958". Oscars.org. Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Archived from the original on September 12, 2021. Retrieved September xvi, 2021.
29. ^ "Moving picture Awards in 1958 | BAFTA Awards". bafta.org. British Academy of Pic and Television Arts. Archived from the original on July four, 2021. Retrieved September 16, 2021.
30. ^ "Prize & Honours 1957". berlinale.de. Berlin International Film Festival. Archived from the original on August xx, 2021. Retrieved September sixteen, 2021.
31. ^ "中村錦之助を長門裕之が逆転 史上最年少で主演賞に" [Hiroyuki Nagato beats Kinnosuke Nakamura, he is the youngest person in history to win the Best Leading Player Award]. Movie theater Hochi (in Japanese). Archived from the original on February nineteen, 2012. Retrieved September 16, 2021.
32. ^ "All-time Move Picture Honour Winners". theedgars.com. Mystery Writers of America. Archived from the original on April 21, 2021. Retrieved September 16, 2021.
33. ^ "12 Angry Men". goldenglobes.com. Hollywood Foreign Press Association. Archived from the original on April 11, 2021. Retrieved September 16, 2021.
34. ^ "NBR Awards for 1957". nbrmp.org. National Lath of Review. Archived from the original on December 11, 2011. Retrieved September sixteen, 2021.
35. ^ "WGA Awards Winners 1949–95". wga.org. Writers Guild of America. Archived from the original on December 5, 2012. Retrieved September 16, 2021.
36. ^ Semple, Kirk (October 18, 2010), "The Movie That Made a Supreme Court Justice", The New York Times , retrieved October 18, 2010
37. ^ "Jury Admonitions In Preliminary Instructions (Revised May 5, 2009)1" (PDF) . Retrieved June 23, 2011.
38. ^ D'Angelo, Mike (Baronial 2, 2012). "Did 12 Angry Men get it wrong?". The A.V. Lodge . Retrieved Apr 24, 2022.
39. ^ Young, Deborah (June 23, 2015). "'12 Citizens' Shanghai Review". Hollywood Reporter . Retrieved August 23, 2015.
40. ^ Lyons, Margaret. "Behold Inside Amy Schumer'due south Dead-On 12 Angry Men". Vulture . Retrieved May 6, 2015.
41. ^ Homes, Linda. "Amy Schumer Puts Her Own Looks On Trial". NPR . Retrieved May vi, 2015.

Further reading [edit]

• Lumet, Sidney (1995). Making Movies. ISBN 978-0-679-75660-6
• Ellsworth, Phoebe C. (2003). "One Inspiring Jury [Review of 'Twelve Angry Men']". Michigan Law Review. 101 (6): 1387–1407. doi:10.2307/3595316. JSTOR 3595316. In depth analysis compared with inquiry on bodily jury behaviour.
• The New York Times, Apr 15, 1957, Screen: '12 Angry Men'; Jury Room Drama Has Debut at Capitol review by A. H. Weiler
• Munyan, Russ (2000). Readings on Twelve Angry Men. Greenhaven Press. ISBN978-0-7377-0313-9.
• Chandler, David (2005). "The Transmission model of communication" Communication as Perspective Theory. Sage publications. Ohio University
• Lanham, Richard (2003). Introduction: The Domain of Style analyzing prose. New York: Continuum

External links [edit]

• 12 Angry Men at IMDb
• 12 Angry Men at the TCM Pic Database
• 12 Angry Men at AllMovie
• 12 Angry Men at Rotten Tomatoes

everittsnate1938.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men_%281957_film%29

Share this post