Google Ads
Login | Sign Up

12 Angry Men Overview:

12 Angry Men (1957) was a Drama - Black-and-white Film directed by Sidney Lumet and produced by Henry Fonda, Reginald Rose and George Justin.

SYNOPSIS

This is perhaps the most famous classic-movie courtroom drama. The jurors get their instructions in a murder case and enter a hot, close jury room to begin deliberating. The first count shows only Fonda holding out for acquittal. Then the fireworks begin, fueled by fatigue, heat, and the different personalities and experiences of the jurors. In Lumet's debut, he breaks every rule of cinema action, setting his story in one claustrophobic room and using multiple takes from different angles to provide movement. Originally a teleplay, this was Fonda's only experiment with producing. Remade for cable TV with Jack Lemmon.

(Source: available at Amazon AMC Classic Movie Companion).

12 Angry Men was inducted into the National Film Registry in 2007.

Academy Awards 1957 --- Ceremony Number 30 (source: AMPAS)

AwardRecipientResult
Best DirectorSidney LumetNominated
Best PictureHenry Fonda and Reginald Rose, ProducersNominated
Best WritingReginald RoseNominated
See More Oscar Winners

12 Angry Men BlogHub Articles:

12 Angry Men – Take 2 – Henry Fonda

By Virginie Pronovost on Feb 2, 2019 From The Wonderful World of Cinema

I had already written about 12 Angry Men (Sidney Lumet, 1957) on this blog when I wrote about Lee J. Cobb’s paternal roles in this film and in Golden Boy (Rouben Mamoulian, 1939). But there’s another 12 Angry Men’s actor that obviously deserves to be discussed: Henry Fonda, juror #... Read full article

DOUBLE BILL #13: Witness for the Prosecution (1957) and 12 Angry Men (1957)

By Carol Martinheira on Apr 12, 2018 From The Old Hollywood Garden

DOUBLE BILL #13: Witness for the Prosecution (1957) and 12 Angry Men (1957) On April 12, 2018 By CarolIn Uncategorized Courtroom dramas never disappoint. They’re tense, gripping, dramatic and emotional and, more often than not, they grab you by the throat and they do... Read full article

What I Learned from 12 Angry Men

By 4 Star Film Fan on Oct 16, 2016 From 4 Star Films

Recently I got the chance to sit down with a group of friends and watch 12 Angry Men together. Many of them had never seen it and hearing their reactions was immense fun for me. But as we talked for a few minutes afterward, I began to realize that really each of these characters represents something... Read full article

What I Learned from 12 Angry Men

By 4 Star Film Fan on Oct 16, 2016 From 4 Star Films

Recently I got the chance to sit down with a group of friends and watch 12 Angry Men together. Many of them had never seen it and hearing their reactions was immense fun for me. But as we talked for a few minutes afterward, I began to realize that really each of these characters represents something... Read full article

12 Angry Men (1957)

By Beatrice on Jun 1, 2016 From Flickers in Time

12 Angry Men Directed by Sidney Lumet Written by Reginald Rose 1957/USA Orion-Nova Pictures Repeat viewing/Netflix rental #333 of 1001 Movies You Must See Before You Die Lumet gathered all the great character actors of the 50’s into one room with Henry Fonda and made a stage play work com... Read full article

See More 12 Angry Men Articles

12 Angry Men Quotes:

[Juror #9 has pointed out that the woman witness across the street had marks on her nose indicating she normally wore glasses]
Juror #8: [to Juror #4] Do you wear glasses when you go to bed?
Juror #4: No. I don't. No one wears eyeglasses to bed.
Juror #8: It's logical to assume that she wasn't wearing them when she was in bed. Tossing and turning, trying to fall asleep.
Juror #3: How do you know?
Juror #8: I don't know - I'm guessing! I'm also guessing that she probably didn't put her glasses on when she turned to look casually out of the window. And she, herself, testified the killing took place just as she looked out. The lights went off a split second later - she couldn't have had time to put them on then. Here's another guess: maybe she honestly thought she saw the boy kill his father - I say she only saw a blur.
Juror #3: How do you know WHAT she saw? How does he know all that? How do you know what kind of glasses she wore? Maybe they were sunglasses. Maybe she was far-sighted. What do you know about it?
Juror #8: I only know the woman's eyesight is in question now.
Juror #11: She had to be able to identify a person sixty feet away - at night - without glasses.
Juror #2: You can't send someone off to die on evidence like that!
Juror #3: Oh, don't give me that.
Juror #8: Don't you think the woman might have made a mistake?
Juror #3: No.
Juror #8: It's not POSSIBLE?
Juror #3: No, it's not possible!
Juror #3: [Juror #8 goes to Juror #12] Is it possible?
Juror #12: [nods] Not guilty.
Juror #8: [#8 goes to #10] Do you think he's guilty?
[#10 shakes his head 'no']
Juror #3: I think he's guilty!
Juror #8: [#8 goes to #4] Do you?
Juror #4: No. I'm convinced. Not guilty.
Juror #3: What's the matter with you?
Juror #4: I have a reasonable doubt, now.
Juror #9: Eleven to one!
Juror #10: Bright? He's a common ignorant slob. He don't even speak good English.
Juror #11: *Doesn't* even speak good English.
[after Juror #10 explains that he believes the boy is guilty because of the testimony of the woman across the street]
Juror #8: I'd like to ask you something: you don't believe the boy's story; how come you believe the woman's? She's one of 'them', too, isn't she?
Juror #10: You're a pretty smart fella, aren't you?
[after another vote is taken, the count is six to six]
Juror #10: Six to six... I'm telling you, some of you people in here must be out of your minds. A kid like that...
Juror #9: I don't think the kind of boy he is has anything to do with it. The facts are supposed to determine the case.
Juror #10: Don't give me that. I'm sick and tired of facts! You can twist 'em anyway you like, you know what I mean?
Juror #9: That's exactly the point this gentleman has been making.
[indicates Juror #8]
Juror #8: I'd like to find out if an old man who drags one foot when he walks, cause he had a stroke last year, could get from his bedroom to his front door in fifteen seconds.
Juror #3: He said twenty seconds.
Juror #8: He said fifteen!
Juror #3: He said twenty seconds! What are you tryin' to distort...
Juror #9: He said fifteen.
Juror #3: How does he know how long fifteen seconds is? You can't judge a thing like that.
Juror #9: He said fifteen seconds. He was very positive about it.
Juror #3: He was an old man. Half the time he was confused. How could he be positive about anything!
[realizes what he's just admitted]
See More Quotes from 12 Angry Men
12 Angry Men Facts
For many years, only the first half of the kinescope of the TV version of "Twelve Angry Men" broadcast live on Sept. 20, 1954 (Twelve Angry Men) was thought to survive, and had been in the possession of the Museum of Television and Radio since 1976. In 2003 a complete 16mm kinescope was discovered in the collection of Samuel Leibowitz (former defense attorney and judge) and was also acquired by the museum.
Despite numerous critical accolades, the film was not a box office success on first release.
June 2008 Ranked #2 on the American Film Institute's list of the 10 greatest films in the genre "Courtroom Drama".
As shooting of the film went on, director Sidney Lumet gradually changed to lenses of longer focal lengths, so that the backgrounds seemed to close in on the characters, creating a greater feeling of claustrophobia.
In the jury room, the characters are identified by their numbers as they are seated around the table. Only two have their surnames revealed. In an epilogue, Henry Fonda (Juror #8) and Joseph Sweeney (Juror #9) meet briefly on the courthouse steps. Fonda introduces himself as "Davis", Sweeney as "McCardle".
See More Facts about 12 Angry Men >>