12 Angry Men is a classic. It's crazy how one location, with pretty much only 12 actors used with no action set pieces can be so captivating and can pass the time so quickly. It's good for highlighting how writing has deteriorated so much over the years in films

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

Absolutely

"He don't even speak good English!" "... he doesn't even speak good English" FUCKING CHILLS

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

🙌🙌

This movie was just so good!!!!! It doesn’t age. It gets better everytime I watch it. Henry Fonda, E. G. Marshall and Jack Klugman to name a few.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

💯

Incredible how a lot of timeless movies didn't do well at the box office, but climbed their way to classic status afterward, "Shawshanks Redemption" is the same.

I watched this, my cousin Vinny, and a few good men for my Criminal Trials course in college. 3 totally different films with different tones that encapsulated court room procedures.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

Great point

@jnagarya519

Жыл бұрын

"Class Action" is another good one. But note that to achieve drama in "court dramas" there is a violation of ethics or even court rules that wouldn't happen in real cases. In "12 Angry Men" the juror's introduction of evidence -- the second knife -- would have resulted in a mistrial.

Lumet also directed Fail Safe, which featured Fonda as the President and Edward Binns(Juror #6)as the pilot of the aircraft that nukes Moscow.😮

one of the few movies that is actually perfect

This movie is such a classic!

Every actor was at a minimum, great. The little guy was the voice of Piglet in Winny the poo.😊

It cost under $400k. It grossed over $1M. It made money

I’d be curious what you guys think of the 1997 remake. William Friedkin directed it and it debuted on Showtime. Mary McDonnell plays the judge in the opening, and four black actors are part of the main cast (Courtney B. Vance is the Foreman, Ossie Davis as Juror 2, Dorian Harewood is Juror 5, and Mykelti Williamson is Juror 10). Additionally, Edward James Olmos plays Juror 11. It’s a pretty great film in its own right, a solid modern remake. But honestly, the story is pretty timeless and still incredibly relevant today. You could totally change the ethnicities and gender of any juror, and it could still work.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

7 ай бұрын

Watched the trailer and I’m super curious about it

Just watched this for the first time been wanting to watch for a while since I seen your review. Great movie and now looking forward to listening to this podcast

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

11 ай бұрын

Awesome!

Agree with the high reviews and honoring the director and specifically the screenplay. However, another film which is often quoted as one of the masterpiece scripts, which increases its complexity and themes and depth with every subsequent viewing is Robert Towne’s screenplay for “Chinatown.” It is frequently used as a teaching tool on how to create plot, setting and characters that are interwoven and that reinforce and amplify one another. Other screenplays that are honored as among the best ever by the Writer’s Guild and other groups are Citizen Kane, Casablanca and The Godfather. It might be because they are original scripts whereas 12 Angry Men is based on a play that was first done on television. But the praise for 12 Angry Men, and Lumet’s direction is spot-on.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

10 ай бұрын

🙌🙌

One of the best films of all time.....FACT!

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

🫡

It would be great if, when you are going through the description of the jurors, you showed a picture of who you are referencing. Hearing only "juror 1, 2, 3" etc is hard to visualize.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

Жыл бұрын

Roger that!

You should watch the ox bow incident 1943 it's like western version of 12 angry men by same lead actor

A weird little movie connection I made, watching this video. They say one of the actors was in the "Exorcist" and in the 1997 remake of "12 Angry Men" George C. Scott plays the 3ed juror, and also plays in the 3ed Exorcist movie. So just a fun fact

This movie wouldn’t even be considered for an Oscar according to the most recent criteria for nomination..unreal

See also Lumet's great "The Verdict," with Paul Newman.

Sidney was a great director. He said that Henry Fonda and James Mason were two of the best actors he had worked with. As a diehard fan of James Mason (the Verdict, North by Northwest), I find him is also not talked about like he should be. Just like Sidney Lumet.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

3 ай бұрын

💯

I've loved this film from first seeing it many decades ago but there's one part that has always bugged me, the part when juror 4 is asked what he did the past few days. The accused could not recall the films he saw just hours ago, but juror 4 could recall what films he saw four days ago, even some of the people starring in them and the second feature. OK so he made some little mistakes but heck, is it fair to expect anyone to remember such details from four days ago?

@richardarcher3435

Ай бұрын

I recommend another brilliant black & white film - An Inspector Calls. It is an adaptation of a play by JB Priestly. It is probably also based in just one room as a play, I don't know, but in the film they venture out to view certain events in the character's past. I advise not watching the more recent film version, the 1950s one is the best, starring the wonderfull Alistair Sims. A brilliant look into how we treat others and hidden consequences, in other words the 'butterfly effect' in human society.

You are the first one I've seen that brings up the jury not following the proper procedures, researching the crime on their own. You also acknowledge that he probably was guilty. While I disagree with you on whether it's beyond a reasonable doubt, I'm glad you were able to be objective as well as subjective.

@raidersofthelostpodcast_

11 ай бұрын

🫡🫡

One thing I though about every rewatch, is why didn't the prosecution check to see if the kids pants pocket actually had a hole in it! 1:21:35 1:21:35 🤔

There was a women's restroom in the jury room though lol

Reasonable doubt does not mean not impossible. The kid had the unusual, if not unique, murder weapon. The kid had motive, no one else is suggested as a possible suspect. The victim was poor, so robbery was not a motive. In that brief period someone else runs up the stairs and kills him is far fetched. The juror answered multiple questions before he was stumped. Some were off a little, but he remembered quite a bit. The kid remembered nothing. No one saw him at the movies. Say there's a 1% chance that someone else wanted to kill the victim and did it in the short window. Say there is a 1% chance of the killer having the same knife. Say there is a 10% chance the kid can't remember anything. That brings it to a 1 in 100,000 chance. That is beyond a reasonable doubt in my mind.