Fujinami 1

Shun Fujinami
Professor Sean Hooks
English 103
9 March 2016
12 Angry Men: Capturing the American Spirit
The American government was created in order to prevent a regime from controlling the
people without representation. One way America exemplifies these beliefs is in the court room.
With every person given the right of due process, they can be granted a trial in front of a jury of
their peers. This jury carries a great honor of protecting the rights of the people in this nation, but
they are still consisted of regular people. The film 12 Angry Men features how a jury of regular
people can uphold the American spirit, while providing the audience with entertainment and a
multitude of great teachings.
12 Angry Men has been one of my favorite movies since I was first introduced to it. One
of my teachers in high school showed the film as a representation of how our government works.
At the time, I mainly watched the movie with that lesson in mind. I focused mainly on the terms
reasonable doubt and innocent until proven guilty. However in the midst of the teachings
about American government, I also recognized how great of a film 12 Angry Men is. As a fan of
whodunit type of stories, the first time I watched it, I followed the narrative extremely linearly,
trying to piece together all the evidence that was mentioned throughout the movie. The key facts
that led to each juror being swayed stuck with me as the most interesting parts of the movie. It
may have also been my interest in logical reasoning that kept me so invested in the arguments
about the El-Train drowning out any other exterior noise, or the fact that an experienced knife
wielder would not stab downwards. The way the evidence added up was the most captivating

Fujinami 2
aspect of the movie during my initial viewing. After seeing the conclusion of the film, and
knowing how the events were going to unfold, I saw many different things during this showing.
The first thing I noticed while watching 12 Angry Men again, which actually has no
bearing on the movie itself, was that the picture had been remastered. The picture was incredibly
clear, and almost looked too defined for the era it was shot. I recalled watching the movie with
artifacts flickering across the screen, and the titles dancing back and forth; all the things evident
in an old black and white film. After getting over the uncanny high definition of the movie, I
began to take notice of the differences in cinematography compared to todays features.
There are much fewer cuts in this 1950s classic than there would be in a 2010s
blockbuster. The camera work is almost reminiscent of watching a play in a theater. For the most
part there is just one shot that moves to change the focus of attention, or pans in or out. This type
of framing is similar to how a persons eyes would scan across a stage to see who is talking, and
change their focus as subjects change. The smooth camera work really allows the viewer to feel
more a part of the story, as you would during a live play. This technique was much welcomed
compared to todays movies that have jump cuts every two to three seconds, trying to curb the
populations short attention span, and keep people interested.
Along with the method used to shoot the movie, the manner in which the director evokes
emotion with each shot is also one of the movies major pros. During character development of
specific jurors, the camera is zoomed into their facial features, and everyone else is excluded
from the shot. While the character is talking, it gives the audience the sense that he is speaking
directly to them like an actual conversation. This type of shot is also used to single out a
character when he feels alone. Whenever a juror is alone in his stance, he is alone in the shot,
while the camera would cut to a shot with multiple other jurors together to show the opposition.
The angle of the shots also adds to the emotional aspect of jurors. When a juror is feeling
passive, or unsure of himself, the camera is set up as if the juror is falling away from the screen;

Fujinami 3
while a juror is taking an aggressive stance they are leaning into the shot, almost moving towards
the audience. These kinds of shots really give the audience a good feel of the emotions that each
juror is going through. Using these character developments, the movie also gives the audience a
lot to think about when it comes to how people behave when interacting with different races, or
classes in society.
The defendant is an 18 year old boy who grew up in the slums, and is implied to be from
an immigrant family. Juror 10 in the movie is seen several times making negative remarks about
them; he calls them liars, and that they are all violent. Since this movie was made in 1957,
during the post-war era in America, there were a lot of civil rights movements occurring at this
time. It was culturally accepted during this time to be tolerant of different races and religions,
and this movie represents this period by having the majority of characters disgusted by Juror 10s
blatant racism. Nearing the end of the movie, Juror 10 begins to realize how he is acting during a
powerful shot in which he has gone off on a rant about not trusting those people, and each
other juror slowly walking away from him, and ignoring him. This shot represents the civil rights
movement in America at the time, as racism begins to die out, and the public eventually takes a
stance against it.
12 Angry Men has a lot of different aspects to it that makes it a great film, including its
take on racism and the American government, as well as the character development, and also the
technique used to shoot the narrative. There are also many other parts of the film that can be
discussed such as the ideals of being innocent until proven guilty. With all this packed into one
movie, there is no question why it is an American classic.