After all these years, I can still be surprised: Criterion's 12 ANGRY MEN in Off Topic Discussions Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

After all these years, I can still be surprised: Criterion's 12 ANGRY MEN

Author	Comment
Elisabeth		#61	[-]
Nov 19 11 9:24 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yep. We went to a modest restaurant in NJ, and my dad had on a sports jacket and polo shirt. This was in 1962, and the matre d' handed dad a necktie. Seems you could go into the bar, and have a beer and sandwich, but table service required a necktie and jacket. "E" Your Signature ... "....I do hope he won't upset Henry..."
	Remove this ad
DonM435		#62	[-]
Nov 19 11 9:43 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Y'know, after reading this I had to go back and watch it again. I must have thought that there was some resolution that I'd blinked and missed, like a confession or new evidence, that proved Fonda's character was right after all. Nope. It was all in his head. I must have remembered one of the shows with similar plot. If the idea was to influence a juror to keep an open mind, it's laudable, but the script betrays that idea. Yes, it's possible that an alien did it with a lightning bolt, so the prosecution's case must be wrong. I agree that it was well acted.
Monsterpal		#63	[-]
Nov 19 11 10:04 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Remember Reginald Rose's teevee series, "The Defenders," with E.G. Marshal? Reg got to do a courtroom drama every week on that show.
Joe Karlosi		#64	[-]
Nov 20 11 6:47 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Wich2 wrote: >And it sure makes you think.< Bottom line, tele; and as MP says above, it's still doing that. But it's making us think what a sham this movie is, not whether or not Juror 8's got a point or whether the boy's guilty or not! (But yes, I do think it's a strong film - and I own the DVD). "Guy named Squeamy got thrown from the fifth floor. He's deader'n a mackerel."
thebrainfollower		#65	[-]
Nov 20 11 9:18 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hey Joe, Tom nothing personal but if I started pushing my political beliefs at CHFB I'd be shut down pretty quick. Mind discussing the film on its merits and leaving the politics out of it? Thank you.
Wich2		#66	[-]
Nov 20 11 9:34 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	>But it's making us think what a sham this movie is, not whether or not Juror 8's got a point or whether the boy's guilty or not!< You might expand your "us" to include all of the varied posters (with varied opinions) in this thread, Joe...
MikeTheMook		#67	[-]
Nov 20 11 9:47 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Just for the record, my own problems with some of Fonda's arguments in this film notwithstanding (which I had LONG before this thread) I shall continue loving this film and watching it every once in a while, as I always have. Carry on! Check out my NEW childrens story book! https://www.createspace.com/4065369 Please visit my online store at www.Cafepress.com/mwcoolpix for COOL photos and designs! Please visit my OTHER online store at www.Zazzle.com/mwimages for MORE cool stuff!
DonM435		#68	[-]
Nov 20 11 1:55 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The judge is supposed to instruct the jurors that "beyond a reasonable doubt" does not equate to "beyond any possible doubt, however fanciful."
Wich2		#69	[-]
Nov 20 11 9:45 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Exactly the mindset that got O.J. off in his criminal trial, Don (I've heard lawyers complain that jurors have watched too many courtroom tv shows & movies.) But Juice is in the Big House now; the cosmos tends to right itself.
Joe Karlosi		#70	[-]
Nov 21 11 7:02 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	"Guy named Squeamy got thrown from the fifth floor. He's deader'n a mackerel." Last Edited By: Joe Karlosi Nov 21 11 7:25 AM. Edited 3 times.
	Remove this ad
TomWeaver999		#71	[-]
Nov 21 11 2:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hard to believe the 12 ANGRY MEN old man (above) replaced Karloff on Broadway in ARSENIC AND OLD LACE. He looks more like a victim of the Melbourne Method!
Joe Karlosi		#72	[-]
Nov 21 11 5:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	He looks scary as hell. He looks like a killer himself. Well, I mean -- it's POSSIBLE, right? "Guy named Squeamy got thrown from the fifth floor. He's deader'n a mackerel."
Monstroso Sabroso	I guess that makes it official	#73	[-]
Nov 21 11 6:31 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts
Monsterpal		#74	[-]
Nov 21 11 6:35 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Jesus is clearly visible on the top slice, and part of the virgin Mary's robe can be seen on the one under it, MS.
telegonus	Formal Excellence	#75	[-]
Nov 21 11 6:42 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yes, it's the movie's "formal excellence", the way it's put together, that puts it over. First time (movie) director Sidney Lumet really knocked one out of the park with this one.
Wich2		#76	[-]
Nov 21 11 7:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	MS, Tom said "melbourne," not "melba"!
Michael Elliott		#77	[-]
Nov 21 11 9:12 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	You can't really bash the plot and then call the film great. I mean, if the boy had been found guilty at the end then it would have taken everything away from what the film is. Of course he was going to be found innocent because there was a message trying to get across from the director and producer. It really doesn't matter what evidence turned up because it wasn't a strong case either way. I don't think the "point" of the film is to determine whether or not the boy did it. Hell, even at one point Fonda says that the boy could have done it. The point was to get the message across. We could rip INHERIT THE WIND, THE DEFIANT ONES, GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER and countless other movies with a "message" to get across. The plots sometimes took a back seat.
CapnDunsel		#78	[-]
Nov 21 11 9:45 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Joe Karlosi wrote: My comment is that I think it's a very good and gripping movie, yet Henry Fonda's character is a manipulator with an agenda from Scene 1. Manipulator? He saw the kid didnt get a fair shake. Agenda? Everyone has one, which the drama demonstrates. Does being open minded have to be reduced to a label (political or other)? TomWeaver999 wrote: Every piece of eyewitness and ear-witness testimony is judged unreliable by Fonda, whose reasons are beyond idiotic... Isnt your rant doing the same thing you're criticizing? Taking points out of context, framing them to sound stupid? I seem to recall someone doing that in a dvd commentary to reach a completely erroneous conclusion...
TomWeaver999		#79	[-]
Nov 21 11 10:15 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	<< Isnt your rant doing the same thing you're criticizing? Taking points out of context, framing them to sound stupid? << Welllll, not as far as I can tell. Remind me, what were the motives of the old man eyewitness downstairs and the lady eyewitness across the street, for them to lie that they saw the boy at the murder scene (and cost the boy his life)?
thebrainfollower		#80	[-]
Nov 21 11 10:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	And last I checked we weren't supposed to discuss politics here at the CHFB. Which is exactly what those who rip this were doing IMO. One thing I absolutely love about this movie is the cinematography. Rarely has a situation which, on face value, has so little VISUAL drama been done so well. The dripping sweat, use of closeup, tight focused editing all put you right inside the tense situation. I've seen it done on stage as well (as 12 Angry Jurors, with the racist character a woman) but it doesn't work nearly so effectively at creating an atmosphere.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

After all these years, I can still be surprised: Criterion's 12 ANGRY MEN