You young men are not aware of how famous all of these cast members were.

@MichaelJShaffer

Ай бұрын

In a way it probably helped them because they had no prior biases of characters these actors played beforehand.

@jeremiahrose4681

Ай бұрын

Never seen the movie before, but looked up the cast, I was like I know him, I know him, I know him.....great cast.

@andreaschmall5560

Ай бұрын

@@MichaelJShaffer Just seemed interesting to me that I was able to name most of them and even the ones whose names I could not recall were totally recognizable to me despite the fact that I was a baby when it was released. Really was a great cast and at the time these actors were the probably one of the reasons that people flocked to see the film. Just goes to show that great art endures.

@isabelleger2815

Ай бұрын

The last guy with the son issue was the detective in the Exorcist- Lee J Cobb RIP- they are all gone now unfortunately and the little guy w the watch is the voice of Piglet from the original Winnie the Pooh

@ronaldyankovich8363

Ай бұрын

@@isabelleger2815 Lee J. Cobb was a legend. He originated the role of Willy Loman in The Death of a Salesman on Broadway., and he brought so many great characters to life on film.

This is absolutely one of the greatest films ever made. Hands down. So glad you guys are not only reviewing it but appreciating it for how amazing it truly is.

@deenormus1975

Ай бұрын

Yep. Facts.

Black and white, no special effects (except for the rain outside the windows). No soundtrack (except for the end score). 12 Angry Men is a prime example of excellent writing, production and talented performers at the top of their game. Movies are storytelling and this one has stood the test of time and will continue to do so for generations.

@Reclining_Spuds

Ай бұрын

and not one F bomb! 👍👍

@user-mg5mv2tn8q

Ай бұрын

The jury room set was actually smaller than it should have been. There was no way that big table could have been brought in there by normal means, the studio carpenters literally built the room around the table. This was done very deliberately, to crowd all the actors together in close quarters, in each other's faces, in order to raise the tension level that much higher.

@user-yu9uw8wo9o

Ай бұрын

Too true, not one swear word, gun shot, car chase or explosion

This is one those great movies. I want to bring up an important point. This movie is from a time when the real man, a mature man, is often portrayed as wise, thinking, considerate, courteous, and respectful. In being this way, he gains respect without using force, threats, or bravado, only his thoughtful deliberate words. In this movie, you clearly see that. The loud, bullying, and vulgar men are seen as childish and immature, the worst kind of man. Even in the last scene when Henry Fonda helps the last holdout with his jacket in a mature and respectful manner. He never disrespected the man. This was common in movies and TV shows of the 40s, 50s, and 60's as examples of how to behave and gain respect, and began to change in the 70s, 80s, and 90s. Today, we see man-boys in movies and on TV most often. I love how these 12 men seemed so ordinary. None of them were super attractive or overplayed their roles. They were so ordinary; people we have all seen or heard in real life. These men are people we see everyday. The childish men weren't normalized the way we normalize them today. The adults were exhibiting a higher standard for how we should behave, debate, and reason. How often do we see grown men today acting like overgrown children? We can see how these adult mature men gain respect and how the childish men lose it. The childish reasoning made by the childish men could be heard today almost verbatim. Despite being made in 1957, it still has so much relevance today with one exception. In 1957, maturity was a standard to aspire to. That has disappeared today. This movie is about a jury deliberation but it's also a movie about life, about justice, about prejudices, about reason, about the ideals we are supposed to uphold, and about maturity and respect.

@mikemccabe6258

Ай бұрын

Well said...thx

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

👍🏽🎯🫵🏽

@LA_HA

Ай бұрын

[Edited for grammar and clarity] I really enjoy this point of view. The ideal man, the philosopher-king, is indeed what men aspired to be. Especially after two devastating world wars that took the lives of so many and left a hole ripped in the fabric of Western societies. However, the philosopher-king is not just a thinker. He is a capable leader of the kingdom, which consists of the social order and the military. The philosopher-king is an ideal of that sought-after perfect balance of thoughtful deliberation, questioning, and weighing out the possibilities. And of knowing how to temper the brutality of war with civility. Davis, Fonda's character, is the successful philosopher aspect at play while Cobb's character is the failed king. Cobb's character saw his son fail to defend himself and attempted to fix this weakness by overdoing his role as the strong, protective leader by not taking his son's nature into consideration. He thought being tough on his son would encourage him to be more aggressive in the pursuit of defending himself as a child and later, as a man who will be looked to by his own family as a protector and leader. Instead of leaving this to a professional (a boxing coach or martial arts teacher, for example), he took it upon himself and went overboard trying to force his will upon his son and bring his desires into being, causing a serious rift between them. His heartbreak is real. You can tell by his exclamation, "Rotten kids, you work your Life out..." which absolutely indicates his true and deep desire to help and protect his son by making a man out of him. His embarrassment at failing to teach his son as a child is intermixed with his son's failure to protect himself in a fight (the other kid's father "obviously" taught His son to fight), making him miss the importance of Understanding his son First. He was a good provider. He runs a successful business -- as he's anxious to point out to the stockbroker, who is obviously very successful and intelligent. Something he respects and shows he is, as well. It's why he sticks to the broker throughout the argument and is lost when the stockbroker finally switch sides. This shows he has a problem understanding deeper issues and nuances. A problem he had with his son, which he doesn't fathom until this experience and exposure to a difficult situation with another view he couldn't face at first. I always feel sorry when other reactors treat this character with contempt, as though he's purposely being a bad person and father. He isn't. . He's a one note human being who failed to understand how to handle the situation between his feelings of failure and his insistence of knowing how to handle his son's nature when it's clear, he didn't. Being a good provider and being strong for your family doesn't always equate to the ability to be a good mentor and trainer in an area outside your experience. Teaching his son business, a good work ethic, financial independence, etc was well within this character's wheelhouse. But those are Very different skillsets than teaching self defense training. Even kings delegate that kind of thing to professionals -- Someone who knows how to approach the different types of people they train according to their strengths and weaknesses. That's my (kinda sorta) deep dive into this character and why I feel bad when he's narrowed down to a simple bad guy template, which is exactly what this film is Not trying to get across

@bryanCJC2105

Ай бұрын

@@LA_HA Wow! Thank you so much for this perspective on Cobb's character. With that information, I agree with you. He's not the worst kind of man, just one who is suffering with an open wound that he can't heal, and doesn't know how else to manage it. He's still an immature and childish man who is loud, bullying, and vulgar (not admirable qualities) but with a more complex background that reveal him to be a wounded man who is redeemable, not the worst kind of man. His breakdown at the end may have been what he needed to confront what he has done and perhaps find a way to recognize and accept that his son is not like him so that he can move forward and repair that relationship. Henry Fonda's act of compassion to help him put on his coat takes on a more empathetic tone. I appreciate your very thoughtful response. It provided some great insight that I had been blinded to by his abrasive nature.

@LA_HA

Ай бұрын

@@bryanCJC2105 I just really enjoyed your perspective. So Thank You. It makes so much sense for the character and I believe it will help people see more than they initially think for Cobb's complex character, which was an excellent performance by the actor. What an amazing cast for an amazing movie

Top 5 greatest film of all time. Its relevance is timeless. Lee J. Cobb, juror #3 absolutely killed his role. Phenomenal.

@pommie5093

Ай бұрын

And he played Detective Kinderman in the Exorcist, among many other film roles. I knew when I heard his voice, I recognized him but I couldn't place him right away.

The last juror to say, Not Guilty, was sad and upset about his own relationship with his son. He doesn't think he did anything wrong with his son, therefore he thinks the defendant had to be guilty. He finally gets it at the end. This is one of my top 5 movies of all time. I don't know anyone who doesn't love this movie.

@jeancoppin6353

Ай бұрын

And one of the first things he said was that he had no personal feelings about it.

The GIFT this movie gives to people is that it GENERATES CONVERSATION....REAL CONVERSATION....and people can learn when they talk with each other. I think everything that sees this movie...and listens,....learns from it AND learns about themselves.

@in8hope617

Ай бұрын

*Everyone....

@isabelleger2815

Ай бұрын

Til this day this film sparks tons of conversations!!! And still relevant today only outdated thing seems like women weren’t allowed to be jurors

@in8hope617

Ай бұрын

@@isabelleger2815 That is right!

@15:43 “He can’t hear you. He never will.” Powerful words that are synonymous with the expression, “It’s like talking to a brick wall.”

@BetterGreta13

Ай бұрын

That line made me choke up.....

I'm grew up watching all these great actors. To have them all, in one movie is a real treat. Peace!

j lee cobbs at the end says 'not guilty' twice. first one for his own boy. second one for the boy who is on trial.

One of the rare black and white movies that people who don’t like black and white movies love

@bcriswell

Ай бұрын

I’ve watched several reactions where the reactor is initially turned off because it’s black and white, but end up loving it.

@mickyandrosie

Ай бұрын

I don't really agree, There are hundreds if not thousands of great B + W movies that if younger peoples actually watch, I'm confident they'd love them.

@markmorningstar5374

Ай бұрын

It needed to be filmed in Black and White, to depict the polar opposite viewpoints of guilty, and not guilty!

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

@@mickyandrosie I couldn’t agree more. I grew up in an age where we could see a lot of those old movies on standard tv. Now, you have to pay some cable company or streaming service to watch most old black and white films. Young people don’t have the same exposure to those types of movies, so it seems like something foreign to them. It’s really a shame because they have no idea what they’re missing.

@DistractedArachnid

14 күн бұрын

​@@mickyandrosie I agree. Lot of people just don't give them a chance.

Not guilty is something completely different than innocent.

@Thoxxxik

Ай бұрын

Edward James Olmos agrees.

@user-qj6fk9px8l

Ай бұрын

At 14:07 , the second Fonda does 2nd knife- IT IS AUTOMATIC MISTRIAL DUE TO EVIDENCE NOT PRESENTED IN COURT & FONDA GUILTY OF A FELONY FOR JURY TAMPERING WITH UN-OFFICIAL EVIDENCE..... It's like have an Uncle call their nephew on Jury & say that a guy on 3rd street saw him running with bloody knife & YOU vote on Uncles' call and try to get others to vote same way.

I am 77 yrs old. GREAT reaction to this absolute cinematic MASTERPIECE! You two were great to watch! You got it all!!!! 👍👍👏🎉

The best part is that we still don’t know for sure if the boy did it or not, and it absolutely does not matter.

@tfpp1

Ай бұрын

Well, not exactly...it DOES matter, but the point is we will never know for sure.

@joeb588

Ай бұрын

@@tfpp1I think he meant it absolutely does not matter to coming up with a verdict

It’s one of the BEST movies EVER made. Part of why it’s one of the highest ratings I expect. It’s really timeless. Happy to see your reaction to this epic movie. 😊❤

@ninja_tony

Ай бұрын

I completely agree. I’m 38, and somehow only saw this movie for the first time about a year ago, but fell in love with it immediately. I got so obsessed with how tightly crafted it is that I have since watched it at least 10 more times.

Two other older classics which are pretty much inevitable for reactors are Casablanca and It's a Wonderful Life. These films have aged extremely well, and people are always surprised by how relatable they still are.

@reneerocha1796

Ай бұрын

I want to say they’ve done It’s a Wonderful Life…but you can check me on that. 👍🏼

@lisathuban8969

Ай бұрын

@@reneerocha1796 I have, and nope, they have not done it! I know, I was surprised also.

I recently served on a jury for the first time. I was grateful that my high school civics teacher had us watch this film in class (circa 1998). It has a lot to say about our standards of Justice. The accused is presumed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the state. And personal biases should never cloud our judgement when deciding someone’s fate. Great movie! Love you guys’ channel!!!

The man in the glasses and shaking voice is John Fiedler, the original voice of Piglet.

@gokaury

Ай бұрын

He's also the voice of the old man who gets tossed out the window when he "threw off the Emperor's groove" in The Emperor's New Groove.

@jeancoppin6353

Ай бұрын

He was in an episode of the original Star Trek, where he was (or was possessed by) a murderer and ended laughing hysterically.

Henry Fonda (juror in white) was the person who wanted to bring this play to the screen, and acted as producer.

@francoisevassy6614

Ай бұрын

Henry Fonda had just finished acting in Hitchcock’s « The Wrong Man » based on a true story where a man looks like the true murderer and is unlucky enough to have the same writing (I won’t spoil the end) : maybe it influenced him into bringing this play to the screen. An other film about a trial Fonda plays in is « The Oxbow Incident », excellent movie too. Greetings from France 🇫🇷

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

He was a fine, very popular actor

The brilliance of this movie is that they were able to create this compelling drama with all manner of twists and turns, an it all takes place in a single room for the entire movie.

I grew up in the 1960's, and I recognize many of the jurors from their later work. Just a wee bit of talent in that room.

@jamesalexander5623

Ай бұрын

4 Oscar Winners and some Emmy Winners here!

@chris5947

Ай бұрын

I did recognize Jack Klugman from the Odd Couple!

@Panzer4F2

Ай бұрын

@@chris5947 Klugman would go on to play Quincy, a medical examiner. The bald guy (John Fiedler) played Jack The Ripper on original Star Trek, and many other roles.

@markmorningstar5374

Ай бұрын

It could only have been improved if God portrayed the judge's part!

One of the best moments in this movie is when Lee J. Cobb breaks down and nobody is mean to him, in fact Henry Fonda actually helps him getting dressed

Great reaction, fellas. One of the greatest films EVER made. The writing, the acting, the message. It’s elite. And notice how as the tension mounts, camera angles go from way above head to from below. From wide out to close-ups. The engage us in these ways that we don’t even consciously notice. Genius.

Lee J Cobb says something like: lousy kids, you work your life out… Yes, his issue was his anger/broken heart about his own son and he was taking it out on the young man on trial since he was about the same age.

@billparrish4385

Ай бұрын

Yes, and the fact that the defendant was on trial for his father's murder. So given his own troubled relationship with his son, he figures the kid probably did it. He's transferring his own pain onto the facts of the case.

@billymuellerTikTok

Ай бұрын

@@billparrish4385 and if the boy's lawyer was any good at all (which he wasn't), that juror would have been excused during the Voir dire process before the trial even started

@billparrish4385

Ай бұрын

@@billymuellerTikTok Yep, lot of things would have been done differently by a competent attorney. All that stuff that Henry Fonda brought out, which wasn't just his forceful arguments or personality, but the self-evident nature of the points of reasonable doubt that he raised. I think that was part of the message of the movie, a penniless kid from the wrong side of the tracks not being adequately represented by his court-appointed lawyer.

@billymuellerTikTok

Ай бұрын

​@@billparrish4385 "I started to feel that the defense counsel wasn't doing his job. He let too many things go. Little things." "It's also possible for a lawyer to be just plain stupid, isn't it?" "I kept putting myself in the boy's place. I would have asked for another lawyer, I think. I mean, if I was on trial for my life I'd want my lawyer to tear the prosecution to shreds, or at least to try." "It's the kind of case that beings him nothing. No money. No glory. Not even much chance of winning. It's not a very promising situation for a young lawyer."

@praapje

3 күн бұрын

´Rotten kids, you work your life out.`

This movie is a masterpiece in character exploration and development. It was purposely set in that one small room, which sets a claustrophobic environment. These were some of the biggest stars of that age.

This is one of the best shot American films I've ever seen. The marriage of lighting, blocking, shot composition, and camera movement is truly something to behold in this. Sidney Lumet MUSTS: Prince of the City, Deathtrap, Night Falls on Manhattan, Q&A, Dog Day Afternoon, Serpico, Network, The Offence... I mean, the man made so many masterpieces, it's just silly.

@user-mg5mv2tn8q

Ай бұрын

He also directed a great courtroom drama called The Verdict, with Paul Newman (Best Actor nominee) and Jack Warden (who played the juror with the baseball tickets here).

The first time i saw this movie i was in awe i think i must’ve been like 12 or 13 when my mom showed it to me. i was obsessed with audrey hepburn so she was showing me just a bunch of black and white movies after i watched all of hers. The sheer brilliance of this movie truly stands the test of of time and is a masterclass in filmmaking, acting, and how the best films are just storytelling first and foremost. you don’t need all the crazy shots and cgi that’s all over movies now. you just need a great script, brilliant actors and team. this is one of the movies that made me fall in love with film

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

The people who make movies seem to have forgotten that, for the most part. Good storytelling should be the principal reason for making a film. That’s why I don’t watch a lot of the trash that comes out today. They’re just in it to make a buck. They rehash the same tired ideas over and over again. It’s really very sad.

@aliciaa4859

Ай бұрын

@@MsAppassionata it really is sad because when you watch movies like this, you’re reminded that this is an art form

Everyone gets HEATED when they watch this movie. Thats what makes it a classic. Timeless

9.9! & 9.85! AMAZING, GUYS. You both brought out so many reasons why this truly is a masterpiece. Henry Fonda was just exceptional in his role as the protagonist. 😊❤

We did this play in high school. I was the “I’ve lived in the slums all my life-I used to play in a backyard that was filled with garbage” guy. During rehearsals I’d struggle to not break character because it always felt like such a surprising way to start a point.

No car chases or explosions. No special effects. No gratuitous sex scenes. Just outstanding writing and acting. I would love to see this live on stage. So glad you liked this one!

I file this under the category of important films that everyone should watch. It's timeless.

Another B&W classic that is so highly regarded by the AFI top 100 that it is rated #3 of all time. It was released in 1942. It is called “Casablanca” well worth the wato

The jury doesn't determine whether the defendant is guilty. They determine whether guilt was proven by the prosecution.

I watched this movie in law class in highschool. When we heard it was a black and white 50s film we all groaned. Boy were we blown away at how good it was.

“You could give this script to someone today, and it would not necessarily be as good.” Yup, they tried that in the 90’s. 😂 It was not as good.

Lee J. Cobb’s character says. just before he breaks down, “Rotten kids, you work your life out (for therm)”. He’s angry, and hurt because of his estrangement from his adult son, and looking to take it out on the defendant.

@isabelleger2815

Ай бұрын

That’s how my dad used to express his love!! He would say stick all my 6 kids in a meat grinder and u couldn’t pull out one meatball!! Aahhh the love lol

This is my favorite movie. It's absolutely perfect; a masterclass in blocking, in pacing, in acting, in screenwriting....it's magnificent.

Back during the 50s, a credible witness was considered the gold standard of evidence. We now know how inaccurate witness memory can be

36:05 This man's abandoned him (after a fight) and is never coming back. He resents his son deeply for this, unable to understand that it was his own fault. Now he is on a jury trial for a son accused of stabbing his own father to death. His staunch guilty verdict is his personal revenge by proxy against his own son that he will never be able to get. His breakdown is him coming to realize his guilty verdict is not about justice, but vengeance for himself all along. This boy on trial is not his son, and he doesn't deserve his personal rage.

I'm sure you guys caught it, but just to make sure, for clarification: the last juror (#3) to be convinced was taking his wrath from his estranged relationship with his son out on the defendant. Once he was able to admit to himself that what he really is is mad at his son (probably because they don't speak anymore or something) he realized it has nothing to do with the evidence and he finally had to admit to himself during his breakdown that the defendant is "not guilty". It was a cathartic moment for him in some ways.

I have always thought that the man "who needs therapy" got in touch with his estranged son after this trial. Great reaction, both of you❤

@zatoichi1

Ай бұрын

The whole deliberation ended up being that therapy since it got him to break and face his own emotions.

Lee J. Cobb is in this , then 15 years later, is in The Exorcist. Great actor? You betcha

@SueProv

Ай бұрын

He's the original actor who played Death of a Salesman on Broadway. He was considered a great actor as was the juror who didn't swear EG Marshall. Marshall was considered an actors actor.

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

He was also in “On The Waterfront” with Marlon Brando.

Did you notice that none of the characters' names were revealed until the very end, when the two jurors introduced themselves to each other on the courthouse steps? This was director Sidney Lumet's first feature film. He had done work for television prior to this. Some of his other movies include The Pawnbroker, Fail Safe, Serpico, Murder on the Orient Express, Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict, and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. Dog Day Afternoon is a favorite of mine. Lumet began the movie using camera angles above the jurors' heads, and slowly moved it downwards. He also used more close-ups as the movie went on. The result was an increasing feeling of being in a small space. One thing I like about this movie is how the different characters bring their own experiences and perspectives into the jury room with them. The old man understood why another old man would testify the way he did. The guy who lived in a slum knew about how switchblades were used in actual fights. The smallest juror who brought up the question of the kid stabbing downward while being so much shorter than his father. When the bigot finished ranting, the cool-headed juror told him not to open his mouth again. From that point forward, the bigot didn't utter another word. Even when he voted not guilty, he did it by shaking his head. And the look on his face suggested that he knew how wrong he had been, and that he'd been voting to send someone to die who might very well not have done it.

I was on a jury. It wasn’t murder but it was a serious crime. None of us really liked the defendant. Early in deliberations it was mostly guilty. As we went along and talked and argued we eventually worked our way to 11 not guilty to 1 guilty. The holdout guy refused to go along with us because of his “gut feeling” so we were a hung jury.

@samfann1768

Ай бұрын

Yeah, as great as this movie is that's probably the more realistic outcome lol

@user-mg5mv2tn8q

Ай бұрын

I was on a jury in a medical malpractice trial. Most of us voted in favor of the plaintiff, but one guy kept whining that lawsuits against against doctors drove up medical costs, and he was bound and determined that he was going to reform The System singlehandedly, so he hung the jury.

@user-qj6fk9px8l

Ай бұрын

At 14:07 , the second Fonda does 2nd knife- IT IS AUTOMATIC MISTRIAL DUE TO EVIDENCE NOT PRESENTED IN COURT & FONDA GUILTY OF A FELONY FOR JURY TAMPERING WITH UN-OFFICIAL EVIDENCE. Like an Uncle of juror (who hates defendant) texting him that 'a guy' on 3rd street saw kid running with bloody knife & then YOU vote on Uncles info and try to get others to vote same way..... "person" who claimed running with knife never tesified so what they say means NOTHING in jury

Since you guys enjoyed the writing in this so much I hope you’ll check out more older classics like Casablanca. Older classics couldn’t rely on special effects so tend to have amazing writing.

Cam & Zay Keep looking into old movies. You will be pleasantly pleased.

The great thing about the limited musical score is that it reinforced that the jurors were there to discuss facts. The music can convey emotion and lead viewers in one direction or the other. The absence of a score during the bulk of the movie invites the viewers to consider the facts without bias as well. Great reaction guys! It's wonderful to see a younger generation both enjoying and appreciating this classic. The best move I've seen in my 53 years.

You guys want to see an old courtroom drama....watch Inherit the Wind

@jamesalexander5623

Ай бұрын

My all time favourite!

@richruksenas5992

Ай бұрын

Witness for the Prosecution. The end twist.

I think you two missed that when the last holdout juror threw down the case evidence files onto the table, he also threw a picture of him and his son down, which is what he ripped up as he broke down. He was angry at his son, and projected that onto the defendant; but he also had a lot of regret and self hatred subconsciously that eventually boiled to the surface, and caused him to break down. He was in denial the entire time, but he probably realized what he was saying and doing when he saw the photo with his son, and finally cried, and said “not guilty”.

14:01 Lee Cobb: "I say it's not possible!" Henry Fonda: "Hold my switchblade"

I agree. What brilliant writing, and kudos to you two for recognizing the beauty of this film. I am a 73 year old man, and it is nice to see you two recognizing the common humanity beyond your years. Bravo!

Good reaction to an excellent movie. You should check out others from that era. Such as; Rear Window and North by Northwest, (both suspense) Harvey, (comedy with a deeper message), Rope, (creepy twist on senseless murder). You can learn a whole new range of story telling and photography.

There's something so satisfying watching 2 young men probably 40 years my junior enjoy and appreciate a film that ranks in my top 5 of films ever made..great reaction video.

The Wizard Of Oz 1939😮😊

One of the best films of all time! Nominated for 3 Oscars including Best Picture but lost The Bridge On The River Kwai.

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

That was another great film. David Lean is one of my favorite directors.

@isabelleger2815

Ай бұрын

I saw bridge on river kwai recently it was top notch no doubt but 12 AM should’ve won at least 2 acting and cinematography

Legends across the board in the making of this classic! Thanks guys, I’ve been on a jury, and yes you connect with your fellow jurors and then go your separate ways, the collective verdict you render affects many lives in different ways, so big responsibility,

Please do a reaction video to In The Heat of The Night from 1967. One of the greatest films ever, IMO.

The play was written originally for live television and 2 of the cast from that were in the film. The director spent 2 weeks on rehearsals before filming began. The walls of the room were movable, so they could be placed closer to the actors, to create an atmosphere of tension, or moved farther away to create a sense of ease.

I was born in the hot summer of 1957. Jeez, you were talking about that as if it was one click before the stone age-😏 I'd say you need to stretch your imaginations and look at great films from the 30's and 40's as well. It must be said that I do congratulate you for seeing this gem with open minds and appreciating the brilliance of the script, the acting and the direction/cinematography. All in all, keep up the journey--the trip is well worth it.

Watched this in a history of film class. Even 65 yrs old it is considered an important work. You two probably aren't familiar with all the faces, but some of these actors became huge and all of them were well-known theater/movie character actors. It was purposely filmed on a closed hot set with no AC/industrial fans so the actors were actually sweating and getting irritable. The geatures and body language is important. Notice the guy who leaves his hat on? That was a social faux pas, so he's a questionable character. The slick young ad man in his perfect black suit can't be taken taken seriously. When the old man starts his racist rant, notice the men stand and move away from him. I really appreciated the way you guys actually listened and watched. Your comments were insightful and intelligent. So many times I have watched reaction videos and find I'm pleading with the screen, "Please stop chatting and pay attention to the movie!" Thank you for a delightful viewing. I'm definitely subscribing to your channel!

When you watch it again, and everyone will, notice how the angel of camera changes and look for the size of the room to change. These subtle adjustments impact the moments. Beyond the writing and the acting, which are definitely top notch, the cinematography is off the chart for a one room experience. It was originally a play and why the focus is all on the deliberation.

I always thought that the reason Lee J. Cobb's character (the very shouty Juror #3) fought so hard to maintain the defendant's guilt is because he conflated it with his guilt over absolutely screwing up relationship with his own kid. The only way he could accept the truth about the defendant was to confront and overcome his own self-loathing, and that is an incredibly difficult thing to do. In a sneaky way he was the real hero of the movie because he was able to accomplish that to deliver an honest verdict -- I don't think most people would be able to do what he did.

Paul Winkle, who says the boy is definitely guilty, has been saying to me for months that the knife fight in "Rebel Without a Cause" is a crusher for the defense. But it's not, at all. Anyone can watch the "Rebel Without A Cause" knife-fight scene on KZread. The best video is titled "Rebel Without a Cause (1955) - The Knife Fight Scene (5/10) | Movieclips" and the channel is Movieclips. 1) During the knife fight scene, at least 13 stabs/jabs/thrusts are attempted with switchblades, and *all of them* are attempted with an "underhanded" motion/grip: that is, the way a switchblade knife should be used, not the way a normal knife would be. 2) From the beginning of the knife fight - from the first point where both fighters have their switchblades open (0:33) - to the end - (where the winner throws down his knife (2:02)), it lasts for 1:29 seconds, which is 89 seconds. There are 2 fighters with their knives open through nearly all of that, so I will multiply that by 2: switchblades are open for about 178 seconds. Of that time, only 1 fighter at any point holds his switchblade the wrong way - that is, the way a person would hold a normal knife - and that lasts for only about 5 seconds (1:25 to about 1:30). 5 seconds is less than 3% of the total time. To recap: 1) 100% of the 13+ stabs/jabs/thrusts are done the correct way for a switchblade. 2) For less then 3% of the time is a switchblade held the wrong way, and no stab/jab/thrust is done with it when held the wrong way. THIS IS PAUL'S CRUSHING EVIDENCE, THAT OBLITERATES THE DEFENSE!! PROOF THAT THE BOY IS GUILTY!! THE CRUSHER THAT HE'S BEEN YELLING ABOUT FOR MONTHS!! LOL!!!

The guy who wants to get to a baseball game always reminds me of Alexander Pope's line, back in the early 18th century, saying that "wretches hang that jurymen may dine."

What amazes me is juror 2. Going on to being the voice of piglet for all he could do of the disney shorts and films

"Rotten kids, you work your life out!" I believe Zay pretty much nailed it. Juror #3 (the last one to change his vote) was projecting a lot, seeing himself in the murdered father and his son in the accused. And saying "not guilty" would mean admitting to himself and everyone around him that his own son was not guilty of ruining their relationship, realizing it was himself that drove his son away. That's why he had to break down first, only saying not guilty with his son's face in front of him, imagining dooming his son to the chair, realizing his pride is not worth this boy's/his son's life. I believe Twelve Angry Men will always be the best movie I've ever seen. I've seen it for the first time when I was 17 or 18 and immediately fell in love with the script, acting, blocking, sound design... And now, over 10 years later, I can still watch it every few months and find new details that fascinate me.

@ninja_tony

Ай бұрын

Totally agreed. I’m 38, and I only saw it for the first time a year ago be3cause it randomly popped up on KZread for me, and I had always heard great things about it. I’ve since watched it 10 more times, and absolutely love it.

Better to not convict a murderer than convict an innocent.

The stubborn juror who had the breakdown and was the last to vote not guilty at the very end was played by the actor Lee J Cobb......he also played the homicide detective Kinderman in the Exorcist... (you guys remember him?)

Great choice, guys. Twice I've been a lead juror/jury foreman. One case was for an assault; guy threatened and chased a couple around a parking lot brandishing a broken bottle. We found the guy guilty, but some people had doubts. I brought up _12 Angry Men_ as an example of how everyone should speak up, and we should discuss our doubts and determine if they were reasonable. Not one of my fellow jurors had seen it, and some have never even heard of it. Deeply disappointing, especially since I read #3 in an eighth grade, in-class performance of the play.

Mr “you said we could throw out all the other evidence” is the voice of Piglet.

Incredibly written and a heck of a big name cast. This movie is right up there with "Fail Safe" which also stars Henry Fonda.

@MsAppassionata

Ай бұрын

I didn’t care much for “Fail Safe”. I didn’t find it very plausible.

I've heard people talk about how crafting an entire TV episode or movie around a singular scene can be quite challenging as the writing then has to carry all the weight. But when it does work, it's quite impressive.

Lots of love from NM - you two are a lot of fun.. One of the best things about this movie is the use of music - it’s there, but only in the most important moments Also, all the professions of the jurors plays a huge part in their reasoning and thought process: architect, watchmaker, ad man, salesman, contractor, small business owner, etc.. ❤

This is a timeless film. It's gripping every time you watch it, and definitely rewards rewatching. You notice new things every time. So glad you guys saw it.

For sure one of the greatest movies ever, with some of the greatest actors ever. I was always amazed how a movie just set in one room could be so captivating. From the good old days when great writing and actual acting made the movie. Thanks for the reaction guys !

Cam, Zay, I admire how knowledgeable you guys are AND how well you express your feelings. Great films from any epoch are both intellecutally stimulating and emotionally moving. I'm 72 and first saw this film in my teens in the 1960s. After that I started going to Art Cinema in NYC and watching the best old movies. I now have a collection of around 7,000 films. As you discovered a great film from 57 I can assure you there are equally great films throughout film history. Best of luck in future endeavors. I will be keeping an eye out for your content. Jim, retired

The opening scene in the courtroom and the closing scene on the courthouse steps was created for the movie. The jury room drama came straight off the 1954 Live TV teleplay on CBS. It finally hit Broadway in 2004. The guy who played the old man (Jury#9) who was the 1st convert to not guilty, reprised his role from the 1954 teleplay. Everyone else was Hollywood and a few dabbled on stage like Lee J. Cobb and Martin Balsam. Geirge Voskovec, who played Juror #11 the immigrant/naturalized US citizen, was in fact born in that part of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire that is now the Czech Republic. This movie was voted by the American Film Institute (AFI) has the 2nd greatest Courtroom Drama behind “To Kill a Mockingbird”. It was remade as a TV movie in the 1990s. In the TV movie the cast was a mixture of ethnicities.

He did it and they let him slip through their fingers ! Dont you guys make the same mistake by letting these movies slip through your fingers........ Blue Collar - Richard Pryor The Brave - Johnny Depp Nightcrawler - Jake Gyllenhaal The Game - Michael Douglas American Psycho - Christian Bale Cult classics

I loved watching your reactions throughout and your critiques and ratings afterwards. I watch every reaction to this film that I can because its story and development are so surprising and deep-reaching. Thank you both!

I cannot tell you how FAST i clicked. I’ve been waiting for you guys to release this one, i knew it was gonna be such a banger for both of you. I’m so excited that yall have seen this now. This is top tier cinema. Period. It doesn’t get any better. ❤

You need to react to Casablanca! That is a classic from 1942. You would really like it.

Another movie that takes place almost entirely in one setting over the course of a few hours is *Coherence.* It's a mind-bending sci-fi thriller, and after it's over it's hard not to believe such a thing is possible. It was very well done.

I simply LOVE the different but equally priceless expressions on your faces after the best line of the movie is uttered at 22:34. Nice!

My favourite film of all time. My father introduced it to me when I was 11. I probably watch it once a year and over forty years later I still get something different out of it and never tire of it. A masterclass of film making.

The thing about older movies that people forget is they don’t have all the flash and glitter of cg and drone footage and fancy effects. They had to do more with less, which means they put more into sets, shots, and writing. So if you like good writing and dialogue, older films are some of the best. Casablanca is my absolute favorite film for those reasons.

You just don't get this level of acting anymore.

@reservoirdude92

Ай бұрын

You really don't. Not only that, this is one of the best written and shot films I've ever seen.

@ninja_tony

Ай бұрын

@@reservoirdude92oh absolutely. It’s insane to me how tightly written this was. There’s not an ounce of fat, not a single line or moment in the script that wasn’t absolutely necessary in my opinion. It blows my mind that any film can be this well done on all levels.

There’s another version of the movie done years later in color. Staring Jack Lemon.

I've watched this film several times over the years so here are some things that only occurred to me on the umpteenth time watching it. We do not know how much time had elapsed between the murder and the trial. This is important in regards to the two eye witnesses: - The old man with the limp - Maybe his limp in court was now worse than it was on the night of the murder and maybe he could move faster on the night in question. This was never established by the defence in cross examination. The old man testified that he saw the boy run out the house seconds after the killing and the defence lawyer never questioned this in court. - The woman with the glasses - Maybe her eyesight had deteriorated since the night in question and she now wears glasses all day but maybe 6 months ago, she only wore reading glasses. Or maybe she didn't wear glasses at all and those marks on her nose were birthmarks, or maybe she didn't have marks at all? 3-4 jury members say they saw marks on her nose but "Eyewitnesses make mistakes" was Juror No8's whole argument from the beginning so he can't have it both ways. Maybe the jurors are wrong about the marks on her nose? But in any event, the woman was never asked in court if she wore glasses and if so what kind of glasses they were etc.... So for all we know, she doesn't even wear glasses and has perfect eyesight. Juror No8 basically conducted his own investigation in to this case and cross examined the witnesses WITHOUT the actual witnesses themselves being there to be able to answer his questions. Before the trial takes place, the prosecution has to provide a list of witnesses and the defence lawyers are allowed to speak to these witnesses prior to the trial. So for all the jury know, the defence lawyer did ask the old man how he got to his door so fast and he did ask the woman if she wore glasses or not etc.... Juror No8 is just assuming that none of this occurred to the defence lawyer because he didn't ask about it in court. But as one of the other jurors hinted at, maybe he didn't ask in court because he'd already found out the answers and knew it was a dead end. Juror No8's whole thing is "don't give in to assumptions and personal bias" etc... but he makes the most assumptions of anyone in the room.

This film was shot in sequence, which is rarely, if ever done before this film. Every actor on this jury were very well known actors.

Sidney Lumet's first feature as director. Later, he directed Dog Day Afternoon, Fail Safe, Serpico, The Verdict and Network, to name a few. A superb cast of A list actors. Lumet and his cinematographer, Boris Kaufman, cleverly manipulated the audience by starting with camera angles above faces, lowering to eye level and for last third of film, below and close up. I think this classic movie is perfection in cinema.

I love that the last thing we see is Juror #3 walking slowly down the outside steps, obviously lost in thought and I am guessing really shaken up by what he went through in that jury room.

I couldn't wait to watch this reaction. Excellent film. I generally watch it once or twice a year. So glad this got on the channel. Great job. 👏

The greatness of this film cannot be overstated, nor can the writing and intention of it. We as audience members became part of the jury, whether we wanted to or not. Some of us started watching this with indifference, some with certain expectations, and others out of sheer boredom. And as the plot unraveled, we had to confront our own ideas and biases, we were forced to practice a certain amount of critical thinking. We had to ultimately understand that it is not necessary to find this kid innocent, but whether or not to find him guilty. From the beginning we kind of agree with the main protagonist, and start pulling for him, and not until they drop the line about letting him go and he kills again, do we realize that we also have to be the voice for the victim as well. It's just brilliant. Great job guys, you never fail to impress me with your deeper than average take on the complexity of the stories and craftsmanship of film making.

This was first a play on Broadway and was a success. It was then made into this movie. The Broadway set was just the jury room. That is why 99% of this movie was in the jury room. The actor who first voted not guilty was Henry Fonda. His daughter is Jane Fonda. John Fielder later played the voice of Piglet in the Winnie The Poo movies. Jack Klugman was on TV in The Odd Couple and Dr. Quincy.

Good call on leader of death squad. Every man in that room is a notable actor for the day. So impactful.

Oh and comparing the witnesses in this film to those in My Cousin Vinny (line-of sight/vision issues and time discrepancy) it boils-down to SEE NO EVIL, HEAR NO EVIL...SPEAK NO EVIL

When you see such brilliantly writing and equally brilliant acting like this, then look at what Hollywood has been putting out recently, you can see how far away we have come from skilled writing.

On September 20, 1954, before the advent of magnetic videotape, this debuted as a LIVE performance and broadcast on the CBS anthology series Westinghouse Studio One. The filmed kinescope for rebroadcast on the West Coast was missing the last half and thought lost until a complete version of the episode was found in 2003. It’s on KZread. Many of the same actors were in it.

Wow. Amazing star power sitting at that table. Loved this movie.