Stereotypes In 12 Angry Men

Reginald Rose wrote and co-produce the classic film 12 Angry Men back in 1957. It tells the story of 12 men have the life or death decision with a young man’s life and it makes every jurors question their morals and values to see if beyond a reasonable doubt the boy murdered his father. It is so popular and was such a hit it has even made references on famous TV shows like Family Guy in the 2000s and even had several remakes thought out the years, but like all movie remakes none compare to the original. In this classic MGM film 12 Angry Men, the jurors revealed their prejudices though their attitudes, stories, and beliefs.

In the beginning of the movie it seemed like all of the jurors were ready to be done with case and just wanted to get

on with their lives. When the first ballot votes were done the tally came out eleven votes guilty and the one lonely vote of not guilty some jurors were shocked thinking who has the nerve to this. Juror three, who is a businessman, who is stubborn and has temper was distraught on how the votes came out and threw a fit along with others just wanted to get this over worth but juror eight has the attitude to think this is boys life and it needs to be taken seriously and this guys are acting like this is a game and it doesn’t matter. At one point in the movie 2 jurors were playing a game not paying attention to anything juror eight was saying. Roth talks making a change and to flip the switch (Roth 105). Juror eight is trying to make a switch to the others jurors that is not a joke and this is a serious matter and should not be taken lightly. while juror three was tired of this and literally wanted to flip the switch too, but to the young man’s electric chair.
Most of the jurors thought this was an open/close case because of the stories they heard from the witnesses from the case.

When the eighth juror was singled out the rest of the jurors was on his him because the stories made it obvious that he boy did it. The eighth juror had something to say about every story because he realized that some of what they heard didn’t make sense. The weapon that killed the man was told to be one of a kind and it was the only sold at the store then the eighth juror whipped out the knife he bought that was nearly identical to the murder weapon and the others were in shock and disbelief. The men argued about it and couldn’t come up with a conclusion so they voted again and this time the eighth juror stayed about of it and the votes came out ten guilty and one not guilty. The ninth juror member switch because he realized that the stories didn’t add up. After more and more arguing about the stories they heard in court the vote was six guilty and six not guilty. This shows that people can be wrong and can make mistakes. Roth says it is important to realize we all have biases which can lead us to make false claims and assumptions (Roth 118). The jurors changed their minds because they realized they cannot ignore the facts and they were

wrong.
When the jurors kept changing their votes their beliefs were in question by the others who thought the young man was guilty. When juror seven switched his votes they asked him why and he could think of a reason. He didn’t know what to believe in so he just followed the crowd. The third and tenth juror were sick of the hearing the facts and believed the boy did they killing because he was for the slums and the kids now-a-days were out of control. The fifth found that offense because he grew up poor and came out a good man. Those men had a wrong self-image for the young man and with his life on the line the not guilty voters wanted actual reasons there needs to be proof if the boy did it. When the old man, juror nine, pointed out the lines on juror four nose from the glasses they found out the lady who saw the young man murder his dad had the lines too. They believe that she saw everything and that’s why they didn’t change their votes. They came to the conclusion that there is no way the lady saw the murder had her glasses on. That makes it nearly impossible to get a good eye on who did the murder. They talked it through and the vote was eleven not guilty to one guilty. The third juror wouldn’t change his mind because he was mad at his own son who disappointed him. He yelled and argued for longer while no one said a word the finally destroyed ripped up his son’s picture and changed his vote, saving the young man’s life. In the beginning of the movie each man had their beliefs on what happened, but in the end the twelve men came together and work as one to save a life.
Those twelve men fought and fought about not only if they should save the boy’s life, but they changed too. Beyond a reasonable doubt that came to the conclusion that if they worked as a team and believed in each other the right thing will happen. They all had their attitude, stories, and beliefs about that young man and thought out the movie they argued, but in the end they all had the same.