SAKSHAM AGRAWAL (332/2019)

Organisational Behaviour Assignment

Movie Review- 12 Angry Men

Twelve Angry Men is an American courtroom drama movie which was released
in 1957 directed by Sidney Lumet. It shows a typical American courtroom
procedure. The American Judicial System is a jury-based system where an
accused is judged by group of people known as jury. The movie starts absurdly
where the judge directs the members of jury about what they are suppose to do,
whether to convict or acquit the accused for the charges of first-degree murder.
The judge also added that whatever decision the jury makes it must be
unanimous, also if there is an reasonable doubt in the minds of jury the must
bring the verdict of not guilty or if there is no reasonable doubt they must bring
the verdict of guilty and a death penalty is mandatory in the latter case. We do
not have any information about the accused or what the lawyer’s said in the
courtroom or any details of witness, we get to know more about those details as
the movie progresses. The jury consisted of twelve men, who were now given
the task for deciding the future of an eighteen-year-old boy who is accused with
murder charges of his father. Also, the names of member of jury was not given
in the movie except for two person that is juror number 8 as Davis and juror
number 9 as McCardle. Although, the background of each juror was disclosed
in the movie at some or the other point of time, the details of which are given
below: -
Member 1, was head of the jury, he was assistant high school football coach.
Member 2, he was a bank worker, also he is very shy in nature and was mainly
dominated by member 3 in the whole movie.
Member 3, was owner of a messaging service, he was the who was advocating
for the accused to be guilty till the end of the movie he was very adamant in
nature.
Member 4, he is a stock broker, he also advocated for accused to be guilty but
when he was objected on the point of eyeglasses, he changed his opinion.
Member 5, he was the one who was born and brought up in slum area, he also
played an important part in the scene where the discussion was based on how
the knife was used for murder.
Member 6, he was a painter, he also defended the old man (member 9), when
he was insulted by the member 3.
Member 7, he was a salesman, he was a baseball fan and was continuously
ranting about the baseball game which he would miss if the verdict passed
delayed.
Member 8, he was an architect, he was the only one who voted for not guilty at
the start of movie.
Member 9, he was a senior citizen, a keen observer, he managed to gain the
vote of member 4 by his point of eyeglasses.
Member 10, he was a garage owner and he was among the last three members
who was saying the accused was guilty.
Member 11, he was a European watchmaker, he made it very clear that if
someone is changing his vote from guilty to not guilty, they need to provide a
reason for the same.
Member 12, he was an advertising executive, he was confused if he wants to
vote for guilty or not guilty, he can be easily manipulated
The movie, though has a plot of courtroom drama, but it provides some very
good example of social-psychological principles like conformity, group process
and prejudice.
Conformity
Conformity mean to comply or change one’s behaviour to fit in the group. It is
the process of matching one’s attitude, behaviour, thinking with other members
of the group so that one is not left out. Thought the conformity do not apply
fully to the movie but there were two instances where it can be seen clearly.
Instance one: In the start of the movie when the members of the jury is seated
and a preliminary vote was taken and 11 members voted guilty and one person
voted not guilty. If we look closer in that seen some member were hesitate when
voting for guilty but as many people voted guilty, they also thought it was the
right decision. Only one person had the courage to stand out and vote for not
guilty. Again in that scene when member 8 voted not guilty, the head of the jury
requested him to give explanation why he think the accused was not guilty, but
one of the person objected and said let us try to convince him by telling why he
should be guilty by going round the table. So, this was an attempt to bring
conformity in the group.
Instance two: Towards the ending of the movie we see that member number 12
shifts his vote from guilty to not guilty then again to guilty and then finally not
guilty. Initially member 12 voted for the accused guilty but then he had changed
his vote to not guilty when the demonstration was made that anyone
comfortable with switchblade knife would not stab downward rather, he would
slit. But then again when member 4 said about the point of eye witness of
woman who saw the boy killing his father and anyone had no answer for the
same. When asked about his views he panicked and changed his vote to guilty.
As the movie proceeds, we see that the woman’s eye sight was brought to
question by member 9 where he noticed that marks were made by the eye
glasses on the sides of the nose of old woman but she was not wearing any eye
glasses. Again, a conflict arises in the group and finally it was settled by way of
argument and cross argument which resulted in everyone except member 3
voting for not guilty.
So, these two instances prove that there was conformity in the group.
Group Activity and Thinking
Group refers to two or more people coming together for a common cause. Most
people confuse between group and team. A group refers to a set of individuals
who come together for a common cause but it is not necessary that they
understand each other and have a healthy relationship. But a team refers to set
of people coming together to achieve a predefined goal also all the members of
team are interdependent on one another. So, in the movie it was a group
exercise where twelve unrelated people come together to decide about the future
of eighteen-year-old boy. Also, at the start of the movie, the judge made it very
clear that the jury decision must be unanimous. Member one showed true spirit
of a leader, he tried to bound all the member together. He also listened to all the
member and also conducted voting unbiased whenever called for.
The judgment which need to be taken was a group activity so whenever
someone took a break everyone waited for him so that he does not miss
anything. For example, when everyone got into jury room member 9 went to
washroom straight away and after a while when someone pointed that should
we start discussion, member 1 pointed out that one person is missing and we
cannot start discussion without him. Also, when the preliminary vote was taken
one person voted not guilty, instead of passing a judgment of guilty by the
method of majority vote 11-1 in favour of guilty, everyone tried to convince that
one person who voted in the favour of not guilty.
Also, when member 8 tried to proof any point no one forbade him to do so.
Everyone was ready to hear the argument of member 8 why he chooses to vote
for not guilty. Though everyone opposed his decision initially but they all were
ready to participate or argue with him or even support him to prove his point.
For example, when he tries to explain the time taken by the old man to get up
from his bed to lobby would be more than 15 seconds. Everyone participated in
that activity.
Prejudice and Discrimination
Prejudice means having a preformed perception or opinion about someone or
something. Prejudice is usually a negative opinion about something or someone.
When a person decides something on the basis of his prejudice, he creates
discrimination between one thing and other. Prejudice and discrimination go
hand in hand. For example, in the movie, there is a scene where member 10 has
some prejudice about people living in slums and he takes his decision of guilty
only by hearing that he is from slum. He also speaks about it that these people
living in slum are all same, they are all innocent looking but are murderers
inside. Member 5 got offended by this statement because he was also from slum
and he says not all men are same.
Also, the whole movie is based on the prejudice of member 3 where he believes
that all teenagers are same, they do not care who they are talking to they just
want to win. He had this prejudice because his own 22-years old son had hit
him. When he was 16-years old he and his kid had a fight and the kid had hit
him on the jaw and ran from the house. He said you work your heart out for
these kids and they just leave. He had built this prejudice that if own son
behaved in such a way then other kid would believe in the same way too. So, he
was so determined to punish this accused that he would yell at the top of his
voice to make his point. But in the end, he accepted the fact that the accused
boy was not guilty.
Conclusion
The movie clearly depicts the scene which happens inside the jury room. The
movie also sums up all the things very clearly. It provides with various social-
psychological principles the three of them are discussed above. The movie is
sum total of leadership, sympathetic behaviour, critical thinking, prejudice,
discrimination, how a group should function and how one person’s point of
view can change the view of several of others. Though the movie is complete in
itself but it did not disclose the names of accused boy, the judge, the attendant
who brings evidences and most importantly the names of members of jury. The
movie started vague without any prior context but ended quit well warping thing
up. As the movie progresses we come to know various evidences, eye
witnesses, some facts and testimony and their counter. In a whole movie is fun
to watch.