12 ANGRY MEN (1957) | FIRST TIME WATCHING | MOVIE REACTION
VloĆŸit
- Äas pĆidĂĄn 11. 07. 2024
- Enjoy my reaction as I watch "12 Angry Men" for the first time!
Watch the full reaction here: go.popcorninbed.com/12-angry-men
//đ P A T R E O N
For all 400+ uncut, full-length movie reactions, early access and behind-the-scenes goodies check out my Patreon: / popcorninbed
//đź M A I L
PO BOX 547, Provo UT 84603
I open your packages LIVE every few weeks!
// đ S U B S C R I B E
czcams.com/users/popcorninbe...
~3 new videos every week!
//đ F O L L O W
Cassie's Instagram: bit.ly/3OOTSJc
Twitter: bit.ly/3KNVxO8
Facebook: bit.ly/3QLvcUP
Reddit: bit.ly/3P6H42p
TikTok: bit.ly/3smDxnE
//đ M E R C H
www.popcorninbed.com
//đ C H A P T E R S
0:00 - Intro
0:37 - Reaction
28:51 - Review - ZĂĄbava
It's great that a 65 year old black and white movie can still get such a strong reaction even now.
Many aspects of this film feel so topical today. The discussion of immigration 'They come here and take our jobs, they don't even speak good English'
@@andreraymond6860 Mass immigration is a problem in the West especially when you have Biden proudly saying how he considers White people becoming a minority in the US, a "strength" and not a peep from the mainstream media. Say that about any other race and it's headline news.
@de nier Floyd died from overdose just after Chauvin kneeled on his neck for over 8 minutes? That sure is convenient for Chauvin.
@@AdamtheGrey02 As long as people are immigrating legally, it's not a problem. It doesn't matter if the white people are no longer the majority. No one is committing white genocide. It's weird to be obsessed with preserving your race.
@@pranavnnair5 I already responded with a rebuttal but commie tube deleted my post I notice as I'm replying to another poster. I would never have noticed otherwise. Can't win in these debates when I'm on a far-left social media platform.
I love that last scene in the room, when he gives him his jacket. It's like he's giving him his dignity back. Just because he got angry and irrational, doesn't make him any less of a human being.
I know this is a fictional story, but I like to think the guy contacted his son.
@@SwingDancer61 I never thought of that until I saw her reaction... I hope so, but the way we walks down the courthouse steps you can see his whole world is upside down
It actually makes him more of a human being.
@@PodreyJenkin138 All racists must be removed. It's not just an opinion, it's hate that leads to harm.
We could all take a cue of kindness from that scene.
Lee J Cobb' s final monologue and breakdown is one of the finest acting performances I've ever witnessed.
I've always felt that his "not guilty" was vicariously meant for his son, as well as for the verdict.
The sad thing is that when he says âI donât care if Iâm alone.â, heâs lying to himself. Because he knows that because heâs all alone (figuratively and literally), heâll have no one to blame but himself.
He was also great with Clint Eastwood in coogans bluff
always moves me to tears
His end performance saying not guilty did bring me to tears as well, such a powerful scene. However when juror number four (glasses) says Iâm convinced was the pinnacle where I knew it was going to be decided Not Guilty.
This movie has one of the BEST casts ever assembled for a film.
EVER!
No debate. They all hit it out of the park
The remake is no slouch either.
The dialogue is so crisp and to the point. The actors are firing on all cylinders!
Most of these actors went on have amazing careers.
Popcorn being all shocked people would talk that way
And my grandmother talked that way. Half my family, at least, did. Some people I went to school with did.
It is a play ...
This movie is a masterpiece, and has been studied in not just film classes, but psychology as well as speech and English classes as well! Amazing performances by the entire cast. There was a more modern version of this done, but the original is so much better that the later "clone."
yeah, the remake certainly has its ups and downs.... although the dialog is pretty much identical, the performances aren't.. i mean jack lemmon is great, but tony danza sure isn't đ
@@stefanforrer2573 I'd like to see her do a reaction to the remake actually - Some of the performances are really good and I don't think any are bad - It's worth the watch just to see the contrast :)
@@franohmsford7548 Well, Tony Danza is one of the reasons I'm not keen on the idea. But I did download it recently, because I do like some of the others in the cast. So I want to give it a chance. I just have trouble getting myself to watch it when I know _this_ version exist. đ Perhaps now that I've watched this reaction, I can give the remake a shot.
Yeah it was a Law & Order style from what I remember. Itâs a good remake but I prefer the original.
There are a few performances in the Remake I would consider superior. Not all of them, but some. Overall, I think the two versions are about equal, and I could watch either one.
For me this is one of the best films ever made. No special effects, no breathtaking locations, only the story and the acting skills of those involved make this film what it is. If you can create an atmosphere in such a small setting that captivates an audience until the end, then you know that you have mastered your craft.
Yeah, the same with Margin Call. If you have a great script and great actors, you don't need any special effects.
Like Hitchcock and his film "Lifeboat"
You might want to watch Conspiracy starring Kenneth Branagh. Like this it all takes place around a table just talking. Not a happy ending film though. It was based on the record of the Wansee Conference organizing the WW2 holocaust.
Obviously it's very disturbing but a good film about how seemingly civilized people calmly committed one of the worst crimes in all history.
ROPE by Hitchcock, GARDE A VUE by Claude Miller, UN CONDAMNE A MORT S'EST ECHAPPE by Robert Bresson - all superlative classics standing proudly with 12 ANGRY MEN. I would even add DOG DAY AFTERNOON, again by Lumet, as a fantastic film with only a few tight locations and hardly any bling at all . . .
@@abeartheycallFozzy The 1984 German version by Heinz Schirk is also excellent, with one of those gut-punch endings you're not likely to forget. I saw it about a year after it was released and remember it better than most movies I was subjected to this year . . .
Juror #7: "You a Yankee fan?"
Juror #5: "No, Baltimore."
Juror #7: "Baltimore? That's like being hit in the head with a crowbar once a day."
(As an Orioles fan, I sadly have to agree with this exchange.)
Well, if it's any consolation the Yankees got in the head by the Sawx last night.
Orioles will rise again, one day.
@@jgatsby9596 BoSox fans for years complained that Yankee fans were super obnoxious. Then Boston won the WS, and their fans morphed into something even worse. They became the very thing they claim to hate: super obnoxious.
As someone who lives here in Baltimore, the crowbar might very well be literal. We are hardly the safest of cities.
@@remo27 I was in Baltimore to see the O's play the Yanks back in '15. Two weeks later, the riots shut down the city for a week. Glad I was gone before that happened. Of course, the Orioles lost. I've been to 3 games (one in Baltimore, one in NY, and one in Tampa)... All losses.
@@stillaboveground2470 : I appreciate your fandom. I mostly lost interest in the Orioles when it became apparent for whatever reason over the longest time that the ownership had no concern about winning. They kept the same coaches and kept overpaying for one or two 'draws' a year (usually aging former stars) while underspending pretty much everywhere else. They did this for over a decade, I think around a decade and a half and after five or so years of the abuse I found myself starting to follow the Orioles simply to see how bad they could be. Another five years of sadness and perverted glee later, I finally lost interest. I know they had some good teams a few years ago, even nearly made it to the series once. But I know the most recent teams are back to sucking eggs again. At least they haven't went 'woke' like the Ravens have.
FYI: the foreman is played by the actor Martin Balsam. He was the detective in Psycho who got stabbed on the stairs.
One of the jurors was John Fiedler who was the original voice of Piglet in the Winnie the Pooh cartoons.
and?
@@rustybarrel516 Funny that you mentioned The Odd Couple, because Jack Klugman, one of the jurors, played Oscar Madison in the 1970s tv version, with Tony Randall as Felix Unger.
Uhh ... Juror #8, Davis is Henry Fonda was one of the most prolific actors of his time. One of his last films with Katherin Hepburn, and his daughter Jane was "On Golden Pond". The juror who had tickets to the ballgame is Jack Warden who starred in the long-running TV show "Crazy Like a Fox".
Carlos Jack Klugman was also the star of Quincy ME, where he played a coroner who always found that the accident or suicide was really MURRRRDER!
I love the silent role of the weather in this film. In the beginning it is hot, nearly everyone is sweating, while the majority says guilty. When the vote stands six to six suddenly the rain comes down as if a resistance has broken. Thereupon the majority is on the non-guilty-side and no one ever mentions the heat again as if it's cooling down. Such a wonderful metaphorical film language.
it lends to how oppressive the atmosphere is already
Pathetic fallacy.
Also the cameras or cinematography.. It's a classic
@@darkshadow31415 who hurt you
Fascinating observation. Never thought of that before!
Flawless.
Flawless script. Flawless direction (Lumet). Flawless camera work.
And MOST IMPORTANTLY, flawless performances by ALL 12 jurors.
No questions asked, this film is an absolute masterpiece
All of Sydney lumets movies are masterpieces... serpico is one of pachino and the directors finest
"He can't hear you. He never will." Great line.
I always had trouble with that line. Itâs the one time I feel Fondaâs characterâs intentions were a little self righteous and impure. I could be convinced otherwise, maybe, but it always struck me that way
I remember watching this in freshman year of high school not expecting to like it at all. It's now one of my favorite films of all time and really is incredible how well it's held up. What's even more impressive is how many long takes there are in the film with the actors bouncing off each other perfectly. It's like a stage play in film form.
It was originally a stage play.
@@joannwoodworth8920 Yep. If I'm not mistaken, the original play was broadcast as a teleplay, and when Henry Fonda watched it, he made it his personal mission to produce and star in an actual film version.
Likewise, my social studies class watched it, along with To Kill a Mockingbird, to see how the justice system is portrayed on screen, and we were pleasantly surprised.
@@joannwoodworth8920 No, it was NOT a stage play originally. It was never performed on stage before the film. The original iteration was performed on a set just like a play (but with no audience) BUT it was filmed and then broadcast on television as an episode of the anthology series "Studio One". So, it was originally like a half play/half TV movie hybrid. After the success of the film of course, it became a popular play-- even high schools perform it. So, no, it was NOT a traditional stage play originally. Get your facts straight and correct your comment and stop contributing to the spread of misinformation.
@@rustincohle2135 1) Thank you for this information. I stand corrected.
2) Calm down. I made a mistake.
3) Youâre a jerk.
You can be a teenager, an young adult, an old man or woman. It doesn't matter: You can watch at any time. The jury discussion and his interaction is above periods, decades, years. This is a timeless film; a perfect film.
Every potential juror should have to see this movie to understand their job. Totally. I have seen this movie many many times and it still hits me.
Bits of this film turn up in _Law & Order_ and _The Fugitive._ Stuff about words-in-anger and the "el train."
Not quite.
What the main guy did is _very illegal._
Juries can't go find facts.
@@JoshSweetvale The film is allegorical; not factual. Also, if a jury cannot find or use facts, what's the point?
@@RideAcrossTheRiver *The point of a jury is that they cannot find facts.*
You're not understanding the absurdity of the American court system.
@@JoshSweetvale "The point of a jury is that they cannot find facts."
That statement is meaningless. You still miss the point of the film. It's not realism or documentary. It's allegory.
Henry Fonda considered this film one of the three favorite of his films. The other two were Grapes of Wrath and the Oxbow Incident. All three films are idealistic films in which Fonda's character is fighting for the Democratic values of due process . I like the fact that with the exception of Henry Fonda all of the actors in this drama ,none of the actors are leading men, all are character actors. I served on one jury in a murder case. Serving on a jury with 12 ordinary citizens is educational. People are smarter than one would think.
Thank you for saying this.
Yep, the other actors were all great character actors, and had notable movie and TV careers. EG Marshall, the stiff and proper man wearing eyeglasses, went on to star as an attorney in The Defenders, one of the best TV legal dramas ever made. Even though he was the "star" of the film, Henry Fonda downplayed his performance, and let the other actors have the big, emotional moments.
Another Henry Fonda film,it's a cold war cautionary tale "Fail Safe"..a darker and grittier version of Dr.Strangelove.
@@wolfmanjack3451 Thank you! One of the best movies ever!!!
I don't think the Grapes of Wrath is related to "democratic values", it's much more than that... In fact, this movie is also much more than a mere apology about rights and the guarantee of law processes, which by the way it's not only a "democracy" issue.
I think the Grapes of Wrath is a movie about moral dignity, class struggle and injustice
and 12 angry men is about the Truth and how embracing it is an act of bravery and also a struggle.
That's why these movies are relevant still today, no matter the country, ideology or political regime
Did you notice that the man who said he never sweats was wiping sweat from his forehead after being interrogated about the movies he saw? So many great little moments in this film.
Or the fact that Juror #10 doesnât say another word after heâs told not to speak again after heâs called out for his racist tirade.
One of the greatest films, and greatest casts of all time.
Jack Klugman and Henry Fonda are longtime favorites.
Jack Klugman was Oscar Madison in the TV show Odd Couple as well as some of the best episodes of the Twilight Zone - In Praise of Pip, A Passage for Trumpet (you'll love that one), Death Ship, A Game of Pool.
Several of these actors in this film also appeared in various Twilight Zone episodes as well as other TV shows of the 60s
I always think of Quincy when I see Jack Klugman. One of my favorite shows as a kid.
@@gerardcote8391 E.G. Marshall (Juror #4) was a regular on the CBS legal drama, "The Defenders", which was created by Reginald Rose, who wrote this film.
@@Madbandit77 I know E G Marshall from the various war movies that he was in.
đ
This version has always been the best version. Brilliant cast and just keeps you sucked in even though you never leave the room.
This movie was filmed so that the camera slowly closes up more and more on the characters as time goes on. From the early scenes, where they have more shots of the group, to the later scenes where there are closeups on individual faces. The actors in this film went on to be a "who's who" of amazing actors.
The director kept on switching to longer and longer lenses as the film went on to increase the claustrophobia and tension. He also started the movie with the camera above their heads and by the end of the movie, it was below.
I also read that they shrank the size of the set slowly through the film to enhance the sense of claustrophobia. Maybe that was done with the camera lens but the idea is interesting.
Some already were, like Henry Fonda, and Lee J. Cobb.
@@sarahfullerton6894 I'm not familiar with Mr. Fondation. What else was he in?
@@attorneyrobertHahahaha ha!! Oops, I meant Henry Fonda!
This film is a showcase of great writing, performance, and direction. Anyone ever interested in storytelling; should study this film.
I could watch this amazing movie everyday. The acting is unparalleled.
Pretty much an all-star cast, as well.
The most fascinating thing about this movie is that you dont actually know that the boy actually did it. The evaluation with the jury and their Conflicts are top performances
There's a real genius to this movie that a lot of people overlook (we talked about it when we were doing this play in high school): Henry Fonda never says he thinks he's innocent. He only doesn't think he's guilty "beyond a reasonable doubt"
However when you weigh up all the evidence, and despite the inconclusive ending, it says to me that the kid probably was not guilty. Though I still think leaving the ending ambiguous was the perfect send off.
Great observation-the core of the American justice system (and others).
@@StCerberusEngel I am impressed by your thoughts and your clear description of them. I think the director _wanted_ the audience to go in with the instinct that the defendant was innocent. That way, they'd root for the 1-11 underdog and cheer when the movie ended at 12-0.
@@NWAWskeptic Why do you think that? Was there something procedurally unacceptable that they did? Or do you just not believe some of the "Guilty" holdouts would have changed their votes?
@@NWAWskeptic What independent research??? They never left the room!
It doesn't take a big budget to make a masterpiece. What we have here is excellent acting, scripting, directing, dialog, setting, camera angles, lighting, cinematography, however you want to phrase it. This movie clicks on all cylinders.
Set design too, they sneakily reduced the entire room size over the run time of the film to make it all appear more intimate/claustrophobic.
A good story, well told and acted, is worth more than all the CGI and explosions that have ever been used. Though, at times, I do enjoy some mindless entertainment. Kinda like going into my nothing box. The kind of movie that makes you actually think and feel are becoming rare.
This movie is a masterpiece overall, but also in two specific ways: 1. best example ever, of a movie with *12 characters* yet every single one of them feels real, distinct, and well-developed. That is amazing writing. 2. best example of a story that takes place entirely in one room, requiring all the amazing blocking and cinematography and characters moving around into new configurations and clusters to keep it from ever feeling leaden or stale. Also, as you said, it's an excellent courtroom drama that we never see any of the courtroom trail for. And the use of the hottest day of the year - the sweat, the windows, the fan - making us "feel" the stifling, oppressive heat in our imaginations. Very glad you've seen this one, and I appreciate your engagement with it.
The Scene where he is talking about "Kids Today" that was filmed in 1956, that means he's talking about your parents and grandparents being disrespectful little jerks. It's a good scene to share when older people are whining about "kids today".
Interesting how the same prejudices seem to emerge generation after generation. The prejudice against the younger generation, the racial prejudice âthose people always lieâ
I really chuckled on the âsome of them are good people I guess â I couldnât help wondering where I heard something like that in the last few years.
Itâs no secret that kids then in general had more respect for older people, unlike the semi literate, moronic cretins today that think the world owes them everything on a plate. Hope you remember it when youâre old and whining.
â@@tommyhemlock7915 The kids haven't changed, the kids grew up and now hate the new kids just like the kids today will grow up and hate the kids in 60 years. The entire argument is "I'm old and am jealous of the kids today and their advantages and opportunities" I searched the newspaper archives back to the 1860's and even then there were articles about "these kids today". It's not their fault you got old. Are there disrespectful lazy entitled kids out there? Yes, there is in EVERY GENERATION! Those few jackwagons are not the representatives of an entire generation.
@@tommyhemlock7915 "Itâs no secret that kids then in general had more respect for older people, unlike the semi literate, moronic cretins today..."
---
You are aware that kids are learning by watching what's going on around them, yes?
So, if kids of today really have less respect for old people, than that's because their parents exemplify that kind of behavior.
*"The youth of today love luxury, have bad manners and despise authority. They contradict their parents, cross their legs and bully their teachers."* _(Socrates, 470-399 B.C.)_
@@TheFuriousfunk True.
My school had a list of quotes like this. "These kids with ball point pens, they don't know how to mix ink and use a dip pen anymore." "These kids with their pencils, they don't know how to use chalk and a slate properly."
It went all the way back to someone talking about kids being disrespectful to their elders that was written several hundred years BC.
Henry Fondaâs character makes me want to be a better human being.
Henry Fonda always seemed to come across as a kind, good nature d person, who treated others with respect. He seldom raised his voice, but when he spoke people listened. That's called character, something we could use a lot more of today.
Just like Atticus
him and atticus finch
Yes.
@@davidmarquardt2445 Well, that's absolutely not who he was.
I can't believe I've never seen this masterpiece. Seems totally worth all the praise it gets.
It is. I've seen it for the first time only several years ago and i could not believe what i missed. Few movies ever pierce the barrier of time as this one does. It works now as well as it did 3/4 of a century ago.
There are others, but they aren't always easy to find unless you've heard something about them and go looking.
You should really watch it, it's a fantastic movie.
Thereâs also a remake with Tony Danza and George C. Scott, among others. I prefer this original though.
64 yrs later and this movie is still a must watch. Shame that American movies with this quality writing are so few and far between these days.
Hey, they were pretty few and far between back then too! 12 Angry Men is just that good.
Anyone who aspires to act needs to study Lee J. Cobbâs performance. To be able to make the viewer dislike his character for almost 90 minutes and then make you feel great compassion for him within 10 seconds is simply superb acting. Special.
If it's not unanimous, it's called a "hung jury," and they have to retry the case with a new jury. Although if the case was weak, the prosecution may choose not to retry and the accused goes free.
Hung jury, or a mistrial.
@@DavidB-2268 The terns aren't synonymous. A mistrial can result from any number of things, usually having to do with misconduct on the part of one of the parties. For example, a jurors following news accounts during the trial when they've been ordered not to. Or, some insane outburst by the defendant during the trial. Again, the prosecution can elect to retry.
@@johnortmann3098 true, but it may just be a terminology difference. I'm in Canada, and my father was a trial lawyer. I don't recall him ever using the term.
As far as I understand the Judge has to agree before declaring a hung jury. Judges can force the jury to keep deliberating, especially if it has only been hours since they began, like in this case.
@@johnortmann3098 IANAL But from what I recall if a jury reports that they can't make a decision they are a hung jury, but the judge calls a mistrial due to a hung jury. As opposed to a mistrial due to a juror doing his own investigation - which is what #8 (Henry Fonda) does in this film, or a mistrial due to some other reason.
This version is SO MUCH better than the remake. Some movies just cannot be remade effectively.
So true
Oh the remake was awful.
I would say, simply, that the quality of Actors in the 1957 film was top notch. These men were all visible on the large and small screens for years to come.
I expected the remake to be awful but it was pretty good. Getting Lemon in the Henry Fonda roll was a great move.
Funny tie together - Jack Klugman and Jack Lemon, odd couple in different productions...
You should watch Russian remake of this from 2007 by Nikita Mikhalkov (best foreign movie Oscar winner in1994) called "12". It have 7.6 stars on IMDb.
This started out as a teleplay, performed in New York, LIVE on September 20, 1954, for Westinghouse Studio One, which was a dramatic anthology show. There was no videotape at the time, but a kinescope film was recorded of it for broadcast on the west coast. It won 3 Emmys (director, writer, lead actor). I canât imagine. That mustâve been an event.
This was Sidney Lumetâs first movie as director. Heâd directed live tv (not 12 Angry Men) before this.
The CBS-TV STUDIO ONE live-from-NYC telecast took place on Monday 20 September 1954 at 2200 ET. Unlike all too much of early US TV, it IS available online in a restored version. czcams.com/video/HlaXebUi72A/video.html
On the surface this is a very well put together courtroom drama.But under the surface it's an in depth character study.Hats off to all the actors,and Lee J.Cobb played out of his skin.
Every actor in this movie are all classics. One of the best movies of all time.
I watched this in my Critical Thinking class. We compared the different fallacies and biases the members of the jury represented. It was one of the very few times I couldn't wait for another class. Great movie! A real classic. :)
Did you discuss the possibility/probability of the kid being guilty? If not, that ain't critical thinking, it's emotional manipulation.
@@stevend.bennett427 Except they proved to themselves through their analysis that the kid was innocent. Did you even watch the film?
â@@KlassicKolt5612 i think that wasn't really proven. The whole point of the movie is Henry Fonda's responses when asked if he thinks he is innocent. He isn't sure. What was proven in the movie was there is a reasonable doubt. The kid did it or he didn't but that didn't matter, what matters is that there's reasonable doubt when they picked apart the evidence
@@stevend.bennett427 The kid actually being guilty or innocent is not very important to the analysis of the film. It's all about the evidence and testimony. To paraphrase Tom Cruise in A Few Good Men: "It doesn't matter what's true, it only matters what you can prove."
My understanding is that women were permitted on juries, but they were voluntary, whereas jury duty for men was compulsory. It didn't become compulsory for both men and women until much later.
It varied from state to state. In New York, where this is set, women were permitted on juries in 1937 but guaranteed an exemption upon request. This was confirmed legal by the US Supreme Court in Fay v. New York, 332 U.S. 261 (1947) and a Florida law that made even registering for jury duty opt-in for women in Hoyt v. Florida, 368 U.S. 57 (1961). The Supreme Court reversed the Florida decision in Taylor v. Louisiana, 419 U.S. 522 (1975), and New York dropped the guaranteed exemption for women that same year.
âGrapes of Wrathâ is another great Henry Fonda movie. And if you want to see him as a bad guy, âOnce Upon a Time in the Westâ is incredible.
Grapes Of Wrath is a must see for everybody !
I have "Once Upon a Time in the West" on DVD. A MAGNIFICENT movie!!!!!
Once Upon a Time was the only Henry Fonda movie I knew for years and years. It was weird seeing him as good guy at first! But along with Jimmy Stewart, he's now one of my favorite classic Hollywood stars.
And "The Oxbow Incident"- another Fonda masterpiece about a vigilante hanging.
We watched this movie in school when we were around 14, 15 years old. Every kid sat there and payed attention! The acting is captivating! L train is an elevated train. It rides on an elevated track above the streets, instead of in the subway.
I always thought it was "El" train until I looked it up. :) I'm sure that's where it originally came from though.
@@Trifler500 It is called the âElâ train in the Bronx!
@@MikeB12800 Cool! That makes a lot of sense to me. :)
@@Trifler500 I was joking about the Bronx
@@MikeB12800 Oh... I don't see the humor.
Fun trivia: little nerdy guy was the voice of Piglet. đ
John Fiedler
He was also Hengist, aka Jack the Ripper, in Star Trek episode "Wolf in the Fold"
@@Wolfinger1935 You beat me to that Star Trek fact. One of my favorite Star Trek episodes.
I could hear it in his voice, so I looked it up and sure enough, his name is John Fielder. His Winnie the Pooh compatriot, who voiced Tigger (Paul Winchell) passed away the day before Fiedler. Fiedler also voiced the old man that gets thrown out the window for ruining Kuzco's groove in the movie "The Emperor's New Groove."
@@Wolfinger1935 He was in so many shows in the 60's and 70's. He practically invented that character type I think.
Wasnât he Les Nessman on WKRP in Cincinnati?
When this stage-play written by Reginald Rose she said that she made each character embody one adjective
- Juror #1 - Leadership Juror (Leader who tries to control the group in a mannered way without being overbearing, he is organised and systematic taking his role very seriously)
- Juror #2 - Curious Juror (Understands and is curious about other possibilities and outcomes, naĂŻve and lacks confidence, easy to convince. Although he does grow as a person because at the start he is told to âshut upâ by Juror #3 however by the end he tells Juror #7 to âknock it offâ when he is ignoring the others and whistling loudly)
- Juror #3 - Dissimulate Juror (Hides his real emotions, is a lost soul who is unable to show sympathy leading to his blunt manner. He is angry throughout and doesnât want anyone to boss him because he puts on a hard exterior which he doesnât want broken. This anger he has, is why everyone is worried when he demonstrates the knife wound on Juror #8 22:53)
- Juror #4 - Logical Juror (A man of wealth and position, and a practiced speaker who presents himself well at all times, intelligent and logical, follows and believes in facts and when finally all facts are disproved he changes even though he seems to think of himself a little bit better than the rest of the jurors)
- Juror #5 - Sympathetic Juror (Feels strong sympathy for other characters and especially the accused, due to his childhood, in fact in the court room he is the only one who looks back at the accused. He despises prejudice and this causes him to take the trial proceedings very seriously and to avoid stereotyping the defendant)
- Juror #6 - Honest Juror (Honest, respectful and dull-witted finds it difficult to create positive opinions, but who must listen to, digest, and accept those opinions offered. He respects and stands up for the elderly, Juror #9, 13:19 and even gets him a chair a the start when he leaves the a bathroom)
- Juror #7 - Arrogant Juror (Impatient and often sarcastic, looks at his watch frequently is arrogant and doesnât listen to others. Only cares about a baseball game he is missing and constantly checks his watch. Even when persuaded he hides it saying he âjust wants it to be overâ highlighting his arrogance and pride)
- Juror #8 - Thoughtful Juror (He believes that everyone should be equal and listened to. He is thoughtful and witty. He reminds the jurors of their legal obligation under the constitution. He is very thoughtful he even gives Juror #3 his suit at the end even though he was his main antagonist throughout the jury)
- Juror #9 - Fair Juror (A highly fair person which is highlighted throughout the movie because he's a strong believer in justice and sympathy. The first thing we notice about him, though, is that he's much older than the other jurors but he surprises us when he stands up to Juror #10's racist. This act shows us that he has progressive ideas and he's not afraid to stand up to bullies highlighting his fairness once again)
- Juror #10 - Angry Juror (He is represented as angry, besides the filmâs name being 12 angry men, he embodies it, he also emotionally the ignorance of racism and how racist beliefs can hamper and corrupt the American legal system, he makes a speech where he is highly prejudice and talks about people in the slums as trash)
- Juror #11 - Revere Juror (Coming from a country without political freedom, he is very appreciative of the American legal system and wants everyone to respect it and himself, and feels a responsibility to uphold democracy and his civic duty. This is why he is revere and demands respect which is also highlighted when he confronts Juror #7 when he changes his vote to not guilty)
- Juror #12 - Careless Juror (He can serve as peacemaker who makes jokes throughout but seems to just not care about the life that they could be setting free or sentencing to death. He goes along with the flow in order to get done with the deliberations as quickly as possible. When the vote goes 6-6 Juror #12 says guilty as if there was no alternate possibility 19:37 also highlighting he is stubborn but furthermore he also plays naughts and crosses when others are talking once again implying his care-free manner)
I know this is a hard thing to say, but I think this is my favorite movie of all time. It's SO brilliant and masterful. I'll never get sick of experiencing it.
Another great courtroom drama is "Anatomy of a Murder" with James Stewart.
Inherit the Wind too.
@@auckalukaum and "Justice at Nuremburg."
@@Shadowman4710 Judgement at Nuremberg is a film I believe every single person has a duty to watch at least once.
Stewart and Fonda were great together in 'The Cheyenne Social Club'. A less serious movie for sure.
Another great courtroom drama is Liar Liar.
Powerhouse performances across the board from an absolutely stacked cast. So many fantastic character actors in one room.
This classic is still so powerful. A masterpiece of making the audience "become" a character in the drama.
Fun Fact: Juror #2 (The Meek Baseball One) was played by John Fiedler, whom you might know as the original voice of Piglet in Disney's Winnie the Pooh productions, voicing the character in every production and related appearances from 1968 all the way until his death in 2005, minus a short-lived live-action TV series running from 1983 to 1984 titled "Welcome to Pooh Corner", in which he was voiced by Phil Baron, best known for voicing the Teddy Ruxpin toyline of dolls. Aside from Christopher Robin actors Bruce Reitherman (Mowgli in The Jungle Book) and Jon Walmsley (Jason on The Waltons), as well as Roo actor Clint Howard (the brother of Ron Howard), Fielder was the last surviving original member of the original Winnie the Pooh cast lineup.
Even though this movie is so smart, it feels natural and effortless. Like a glimpse into a real life situation. No overbearing BGM and no tacky one liners. This makes other passable legal dramas seem like fireworks show. One can see why this is regarded as a masterpiece!
Of all the things that make this a masterpiece, the shot composition is absolutely remarkable. A supreme example of a cinematic stage play.
Not just the composition, but the camera position as well: at first there were many wide shots from a higher angle, putting the viewer as an observer, but as the camera height got lower you slowly became part of the jury, and then close-up shots of people's faces talking puts the viewer even closer.
The unrelenting jury room claustrophobia is also one of the reasons this movie works.
Fantastic script. Incredible actors. Love it. Fun fact: The one juror - John Fiedler - was the voice of 'Piglet' in the Disney 'Winnie-the-Pooh' animated features.
Once upon a timeâŠ.Acting, writing, dialogue, thought provoking ideas were elements of good movies. This one had no car chases, explosions, CGI effects, nudity,, multimillion dollar budget, etcâŠ.yet it holds up pretty well.
Those films are still out there. The question is do you support them when they do?
The reasons I think this movie is so good: the amazing actors, most of whom were already well-established, or went on to great careers; the acting; the crisp, authentic dialog, the careful reflection of the times, and the claustrophobic set!
@@kenjisparks Suggest a few for people to check out
@@mikeshoe74 Wind River, Nebraska, The Station Agent, Parasite, anything by John Sayles or Ken Loach. I don't think anyone needs to make suggestions other than to look beyond the multiplex and the typical corporate Hollywood studio product playing there.
Amen, brother
One of the best films ever. Should be required viewing in schools everywhere.
The reason they donât show it in school is because the majority of people these days are just like Juror #3, arrogant, self-righteous, and totally brainwashed by the media. Facts are simply nonexistent in todayâs culture.
I couldn't believe this movie didn't win the Academy Award for Best Picture in 1958 -- but then I saw that it lost to _The Bridge on the River Kwai._ What a great movie that was too.
@Raylan Givens I didn't realize that. And not even nominated either. That is a travesty.
@@arkwill14 Hi @arkwill ... not to disagree with what you said, but rather to place an even larger point on it: the REAL travesty is that 99% of the cr@p churned out by Hollyweird these days heralded as supposedly "the best" stuff of the year -- i.e., "Academy Award winning" or even "Academy Award nominated" -- is SO putrid and unimaginative as to be UNWORTHY of even "50th place" compared to the movies made EVERY year during the "Golden Age of Hollywood." An "also ran" movie from back then SHOULD "mop the floor" with today's movies ... "IF" the voting were honest. Then again, even back then (but most especially now), the voting wasn't always honest.
I think if Alfred Hitchcock had directed this film, he would've at least considered having the twist at the end that Henry Fonda (Juror #8) was always the actual killer all along.
That's funny because Hitch directed Fonda in "The Wrong Man" where he played an average man framed for a crime.
Please⊠have you seen Billy Wilder films? Watch Witness for the Prosecution after this (which was also nominated for best picture in the same yearâŠ.).
@@osmanyousif7849 Love that film and Billy Wilder
I always thiought that it would have been a good ending if Herny Fonda's character had said at the end ''Actually, maybe he is guilty after all'' and they'd all have to start again.
One of my favorites ever. So very important and still relevant. Most of the actors arenât even household names but rather character actors from their day and theyâre all so good!
Sorry, these actors were well known in their day.
Was really worried it was gonna be the 1997 version, but glad it's original.
I know! I was so annoyed "Millennial Reacts" saw the 90s version.
Honestly that one isn't so bad(I haven't seen it in years). Though it doesn't hold a candle to this one
@@bombomos True. This one is a classic. The remake is just good. It does also have a terrific cast though
â@@bombomos The 1997 remake is fine, I actually like it. BUT that one should NEVER be your first exposure to this story. You almost always watch the original first, then the remake-- you only watch the remake first if it's the more acclaimed and definitive version, for example "John Carpenter's The Thing" over the original "The Thing" from 1951. That Millennial Movie Monday chick is a grown woman and she shoulda known better in that you can only be surprised by a story and its twists and turns the FIRST time around.
Was anything added into the 1997 version that made it worth remaking the original?
Please add âTo Kill A Mockingbirdâ to your to-do-list. Another Black & White masterpiece with a true master actor Gregory Peck.
Movie has been canceled by the WOKE.
@@DK-ed7be no it hasnt
@@DK-ed7be Are the "Woke" the ones who canceled the Dixie Chicks?
@@ricardoarreola8256 Nobody canceled the Dixie Chicks. Nobody fired them, nobody doxed them in an attempt to have them stalked or worse. And there certainly was no organized effort to ban them from the industry. As I understand it, as of 2020, they are still a group and have won several music awards since Natalie Maines upset their target audience in 2003.
@@DK-ed7be They stopped playing their music on the radio, canceled their concerts. They had rallies to destroy their cds and records. Their lives were also threatened, and needed armed security. They took a huge impact on their career and survived.
Many of these actors became famous later on. The juror who grew up in a slum, as example, is Jack Klugman. The one who doesn't sweat is E. G. Marshall.
I am so glad I got to see this. I first saw 12 Angry Men in the mid 80s. It was almost 30 years old back then. I couldn't believe how much I loved it. So brilliant letting the case unfold strictly in the room with the jury. Even watching their breaks. These are such fine actors. Intriguing dialog. Enjoyed your observations. Thanks for the excellant reaction video.
Lee J. Cobb (the Juror with the son) is my favorite in this movie. None of the actors are bad (all A+ actors in this) but Lee J. Cobb really shines as a tragic father figure. His monologue at the end still tears me up and I have seen this movie dozens of time. Love your reaction!
Watch him in Death of a Salesman where he truly shines.
"Rashomon" by the great Akira Kurosawa might be something of interest: a murder trial is in progress but all the witnesses give contradictory accounts: are they somehow protecting their own interests, and to appear innocent? Sure it's an older film and the pacing is very slow to the modern viewer, but it's a classic for good reasons.
"Rashomon" is a masterpiece in it's own right, especially since it's cited as one of the earliest examples of a POV style film/narrative. Kurosawa was decades ahead in his craft, truly one of the best.
That would be an awesome introduction to Kurosawa
Rashomon rules.
Random trivia: John Fiedler, the soft spoken juror #2 (the guy who asks if anyone wants a cough drop) is also the voice of the old man who gets throw out the window for throwing off the emperors groove in The Emperors New Groove.
This movie is a cinematic masterpiece, I remember the first time I watched this movie it grabbed me from start to finish.
Thank you Cassie.
Cassie: "He's so young. I don't think he did it."
Me: "Have you learned *nothing* from Burk and Norman Bates!?"
@@Caseytify Much less common in the 1950s.
@@Caseytify Worse, most of the school mass shootings are done by other students.
lol
The el-train is like a subway train above ground. Sometimes, its tracks are even connected to the subway.
El for Elevated.
Great use of the EL in The French Connection (1972) with Gene Hackman.
@@thomast8539 Or in The Fugitive with Harrison Ford, when Tommy Lee Jones and his team were able to hear the train over a recorded phone call to realize that Richard Kimble was back in Chicago, so they knew where to look for him.
@@serpentisma Or Running Scared, where Billy Crystal and Gregory Hines drove a car over the elevated train tracks
@@serpentisma â @Thomas T "How often does the train go by?"
"So often you wont even notice."
Cassie, a couple of remarkable things about this film:
1. It was the first feature directed by the genius Sidney Lumet.
2. Lumet directed DP Boris Kaufman to use smaller to longer focal lengths, with different lenses, and high to low angles throughout the mostly one-room shooting, to achieve the effect that as the film progresses, there is a sense that the walls and ceiling are closing in, becoming more claustrophobic. A very subtle touch, but extremely effective.
This was great filmmaking, right out of the gate.
This has been one of my all time favourite films. The setting, cast and emotion are just fabulous to watch. And if you pay attention you will see the angle of camera change as the film progresses. I went to see the stage version when it was shown here in the UK (Newcastle upon Tyne), it was just as captivating as on film.
Even though this movie focuses more on characters, and less on plot, it's still one of my favourite courtroom dramas, right up there with "To Kill a Mockingbird." Lee J Cobb's "not guilty" monologue makes me sob buckets every time! đ
Me too.
Well, speaking of monologues, Scent of a Woman has a good one...
I think that's the point. The world isn't built around plot, but character.
LOVE "Mockingbird". Gregory Peck's finest performance in my opinion.
Movies about characters tend to be better than those about plot
No matter how many times I watch the film, the ending monologue always makes me tear up. One of my absolute favorites.
Simply one of the best films ever made and one of my all time favourites. In the event a jury canât decide on a verdict, itâs declared a hung jury followed by another trial. Thatâs why deadlocked juries are given so much deliberation time.
None of the reboots of this movie hold a candle to this one (there was a slightly earlier version too that was shown live about 3 years before, which was based on a play, but this one is better).
We never actually KNOW if the boy is guilty or innocent, but the whole point is that there is now _reasonable doubt_ that he's guilty.
If you liked this, I think youâd really enjoy âRear Windowâ by Alfred Hitchcock in 1954. It stars Grace Kelly and Jimmy Stewart. Itâs also in color!
@Raylan Givens She was VERY nice to look at,
but Jimmy Stewart makes that movie his own.
He's JIMMY STEWART.
Grace Kelly looks divine in that movie. Jimmy Stewart is not bad either lol
@Popcorn in Bed "An L train" or what's called "The L" is any train that runs on ELevated tracks. THAT'S how it got the nickname... That's THE train and then there's THE L, and in NYC? When you say THE train...that can actually mean three different things. You can either mean you're taking the train as in the subway cuz some people do call it the train. OR you couldn't mean like you're taking the train out to Long Island, which is the LIRR which travels above and below ground. OR you could mean that you're taking the train aka the train line OUTTA NYC, as in Amtrak. That's the only train line that comes in out of New York City from anywhere else in the country. You can get into different boros of the city by car or subway... Except of course Staten Island. Staten Island is like the red-headed bastard son of NYC~you got to take the ferry there. So let's say you wanted to come in to Long Island from Staten Island right? The quickest way is to hop on the ferry into Manhattan. Jump onto the subway to Penn Station...then get onto the LIRR. IF you catch an Express train from NYC to let's say Hicksville... You could be here in less than an hour, add in the subway in the ferry it's less than two total. It seems like it's disjointed but it's a lot quicker to do it this way than driving. AND you get to travel on the L and see the sights from above! đ
Yes indeed. Greatest Film Ever.
They are playing this in my city in a few weeks on the big screen. This comment pushed me over the edge to go and see it
What?? How is this possible?? No CGI, no explosions, no special effects, no martial arts....not even a car chase, hell there ain't even any color!!! This is genius!!! Who would have ever thought that you could have a great movie with nothing more than a good plot and great actors??? They should make more just like this!!!
This movie is such a classic, itâs also the only one Henry Fonda produced.
I discovered it in my 8th grade social studies class. My teacher showed it to us when we were learning about the judicial branch of the U.S. government. Iâll always remember one guy in my class, he was nervous about watching a movie from 1957 because he thought he would lose street cred. The teacher said âjust tell them I made you watch itâ. Then when the movie was over the same guy said âthat actually was pretty goodâ.
My late sister won first place in a writing competition about this book and movie in the 80s. Her poetry went on to be published. It's such a great book and movie but it just makes me think of her.
This is one of the few films that I think everyone NEEDS to see at least once in their life. Everything about it is executed to near perfection. Critical thinking needs to be more common & films like this can help people find their way down that path haha.
I saw it as a teenager and I was utterly engrossed in it.
This is exhibit A when you want to convince an 'I don't like old movies'-person otherwise. Lee J Cobb the MVP.
My Cousin Vinny would be a good courtroom movie for you.
I agree. My Cousin Vinnie would be a great movie for Cassie to watch.
The two yoots. Two what? Two yoots.
Agree on both counts. I still don't prefer old black and white films, but this one would certainly be exhibit A for trying to convince someone. And My Cousin Vinny is terrific.
For "My Cousin Vinny" I prefer the TV version with the toned down cussing. I don't mind cussing, but it was just too much. But either way, it is a great movie.
Lee J Cobb was brilliant in this movie.
I so envy you seeing this movie for the first time. I experienced many of your reactions and emotions when I first discovered it many years ago. Since then I've watched it countless times and it never fails to impress. The set may have been 'cheap' but the rest of the production is pure quality.
I loved the reaction "Popcorn in Bed" had to this film in particular- she truly was sucked into the story, just as most viewers are, and made some great observations regarding the jury process, and how different personalities and motivations can adversely affect the outcome in regards to making a fair, impartial decision.
Richard Burton: the set was "cheap" because it was basically one room and many metropolitan municipal buildings were old and out dated by the 50s.
Yeah, this is a wonderful film. Whole room full of powerhouse performers. The direction is marvelous, too. It's tough to keep a closed-room drama compelling, and Sidney Lumet did a wonderful job. I love the camera work, how it starts with the camera looking down on them, as we lord above these people, distant and aloof, and the camera slowly moves lower and lower, until they loom above us by the end. You obviously really liked Henry Fonda in this, and he has a career filled with excellent performances. The Ox-Bow Incident is a western with him, exploring similar ideas. He also plays a delicious baddie in Sergio Leone's Once Upon a Time in the West. Lee J. Cobb played the final holdout, and he also had a marvelous career, appearing in classics like On the Waterfront, The Exorcist, and The Three Faces of Eve. Sadly, all twelve actors have passed on. I believe Jack Klugman (who played the juror who was also from a rough background, and who showed them the way a man would use a switchblade) was the last one to pass back in 2012.
Lee J Cobb originated the role of Willie Loman in the first Broadway production of Arthur Miller's great American tragedy "Death of a Salesman" in 1949.
I don't believe there's even one person that's put off by watching you eat popcorn.
True story
I didn't even notice most of it anyway.
Itâs more about _hearing_ her eat popcorn. I have really bad misophonia when it comes to any sort of chewing/eating sounds, but it was quiet enough that it wasnât a problem. It can be REALLY bad when people are eating directly into a microphone.
Legendary movie with legendary actors
It deserves all the historical acclaim it gets
Juror #8 is a hero of mine
The whole movie in one room. No names, hardly any props. Amazing cinema
I remember having to watch this in Jr High. Thought it was great then, and even better when I finally watched it again a year or so again. A fantastic film.
It's a real tragedy that they don't make films like this anymore. It's also tragic that our culture can no longer enjoy a movie that's all dialog.
There are plenty of successful movies that are mostly just dialogue. 127 Hours (2010) and Before Midnight (2013) immediately spring to mind. I mean, the fact that narrative podcasts have exploded in popularity in the last decade shows that people donât mind just dialogue.
Also, the whole âthey donât make films like this anymoreâ has got to be one of the laziest, most meaningless sentences of film critique Iâve ever heard.
There still movies like that being made but mostly indie movies. Some examples: Good Will Hunting (1997), Closer (2004), Carnage (2011), Before Sunrise (1995), Before Sunset (2004) and Before Midnight (2013)
"you can't enjoy a movie that's all dialog? hold my beer and watch this" - Quentin Tarantino
@@jasonschuler2256 Why is it lazy, and if that is bad film criticism then what is good film criticism?
@@cbalan777 It's lazy because it's so nebulously vague that it can be applied to literally anything and everything. You could insert any movie you wanted into it and it wouldn't really change the sentence. The OP's second sentence is much better because it brings up a specific point about dialogue that can actually be argued for/against and have specific examples, like the ones I and "Sarkast" have brought up.
But what the hell does "films like this" mean? Does the OP literally want carbon copies of _12 Angry Men_ to be made today? Do they want a return to black and white movies? Movies with all-male casts?? I'm assuming none of the above, but the statement is so incredibly ambiguous that one honestly can't be 100% certain without clarification.
Another excellent movie...
To kill a mockingbird.
Gregory Peck.
Agreed, check out Fail Safe
I've actually seen and loved loved it
Wow to kill a mocking bird ....luv luv luv
Seconded, I watched both "Twelve Angry Men" and "To Kill a Mockingbird" for a class studying the depiction of the justice system in the media, and they definitely blew me away!
@@PopcornInBed The original?
Youâve won my subscription.
Your willingness to watch Black n White.
To watch a well written script.
Youâve won my never-ending respect.
Damn the rest. Iâm a subscriber. â€ïž
I like how you think.
Great Reaction to this Classic......
I saw this Presented Muliple Times as a play in High School (Early 1980's).......
Shout out to the Legends in this Movie...... Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Klugman, Martin Balsam, E.G. Marshall, Jack Warden, Ed Begley
What I like was that as the film progresses, Lumet used closer and lower-angle shots to increase the sense of claustrophobia in the room and up the intensity.
The room is a set too, they are literally shrinking it during the run time to make it seem more claustrophobic.
... not to mention the perspiration!!
I was just about to mention that...it's really fascinating to watch things like that.
Iâm a Fantasy/Sci-Fi/Action fan myself, I rarely watch movies outside those genres besides Westerns and even I think it a pinnacle of film. Within minutes youâre drawn into the story and you find yourself waiting on edge for every twist.
Great moment, the "old man" recognizes the marks on E.G.Marshall's nose, the slow dawning of realization in Marshall's eyes as the camera slowly closes in, brilliance, El train is shorthand for elevated, this movie could be called 12 Oscar performances
Some great courtroom dramas (and comedies) for you: "Primal Fear", "A Time to Kill", "Philadelphia", "The Trial of the Chicago 7", "A Soldier's Story", and (the comedy) "My Cousin Vinny". - There are many more, of course, but those are some of my favorites.
Thankyou so much! 3rd year law student here, Primal Fear was 10/10, the plot twist pissed me right off though đ
Just this weekend I played Juror 4 in a local stage production of 12 Angry Men. It was so great to hear you, an audience member reacted as the story unfolded.
In the US the rule is " beyond reasonable doubt ".
I appreciate you mention "margin of error" regarding the death penalty. I once told a judge (during the jury selection process) I thought I could give an unbiased opinion, but would not be comfortable doing a murder trial because I'd seen movies (this one and "I Want to Live" specifically) wherein it looked as though an innocent person could be executed, and you couldn't go back and make amends later when they're shown to be innocent after the execution. He told me life wasn't like movies, but I think he understood my point (that this situation could happen in real life).
...(that this situation could happen in real life). It has and still does. How many times have you read stories about a long time prisoner being exonerated when new evidence is brought to light?
As an old guy, I must sound like a cranky old man when I talk about younger people not watching black & white films, because they're not in color. Back in 1971, I took a film class at then Chapman College, and learned to love silent movies. I now have a huge collection of them on DVD. So much of what we see today was developed in silent movies, carried on the classic black and white and is being re-told for the third, fourth or fifth time in today's movies. There are many exceptions, of course, but there is absolute brilliance in these masterpieces of the past. As one excellent comment stated, the weather itself plays a role in this story, and the grey shades of black & white film also plays a role in many of these films. I used to show the silent comedies of Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, Harold Lloyd, Harry Langdon, and Laurel & Hardy one night a month at my Lodge, and give background on the history of the film. It was great seeing both older and younger members find the genius in these films. So much of the content has been used, re-used, and re-used again in today's comedy, with slight tweaks and adjustments, but I don't think it's ever been done as well. Thank you for sharing your first watching with us on this incredible movie. It is a wise person who gives the "old movie" a chance, because sometimes they find just how truly incredible they were. I truly appreciate you giving me a fresh view of it again!
Cassie, can't recommend enough, "A Few Good Men," a military courtroom drama adapted from the stage play, both written by Aaron Sorkin, creater of The West Wing. Brilliant performances, great cast! If you haven't already seen it, of course.
Agreed! :) A Few Good Men, Rain Maker, A Time To Kill, Devil's Advocate ... all FANTASTIC court room drama's :)
"You can't handle the truth!"
@@michaelriddick7116 No "And Justice for all" with Pacino? You're out of order! This whole thread is out of order!
@@cboscari When I read that I could hear him screaming it from Scent of a Woman! đđ€Łđđ€Ł
"There was a time I could see ya know.... " đđȘđȘđȘđ
Just a FYI - nearly every single actor was a star in their own right âback in the day.â Most went on to do many movies, with some big hits. Most notable was Henry Fonda, the one you liked the one - first one Not Guilty. Check the actors out. Love your reactions! Big fan of yours đ
Some of them like Jack Klugman continued on for quite a while after this, he kept going almost until he died in 2012.
Lee J Cobb was one of the great character actors. Cobb also played the Detective on The Exorcist.
And Martin Balsam, the foreman, played the detective Arbogast in Psycho.
I always adore and aim to be like juror number 4. He was voting guilty not because of his personal bias but because he analized the evidence carefuly and made his judgement based on evidence, when the key evidence was challenged he accepted that there is room for reasonable doubt and that's when he voted not guilty.
Great cast, great classic movie and great bracket. I'm glad we never learn that yes, it was or wasn't the boy.
The Glasses Juror is one of my favourites.He's not evil, he just treats it very logically and when he has a doubt, he doesn't pettily refuse to change his vote.
Agreed. His character really is the âmain characterâ in my opinion.
@@QuintTheSharker I get it.