The film is called Twelve Angry Men, which is a work that was filmed in the middle of the last century, but has so far been regarded as a film textbook, but the shooting time is relatively long, the picture is black and white, and the subject matter is more formal, which completely regards the film as a pastime, and friends who pursue visual stimulation and curiosity do not recommend this movie.
But audiences who are interested in the art of cinema itself or the storytelling of the film can read the following analysis recommendations.
1 What's the movie about?
Twelve non-professional legal professionals acted as delegates to discuss a crime suspected of killing a father's child, from eleven agreeing to the death penalty and one disagreeing, to twelve disagreeing with the death penalty.
Yes, the whole film is shot in one room, and the whole time is the process of them arguing with each other, you must be wondering how this kind of content can be shot so well.
So --
2 What's the good?
First, constantly laying contradictions, the debate process is filmed out of the feeling of multi-party game, if only on the matter itself to discuss, then in fact, the ten-minute movie is over, but jump out of the case itself, these twelve people each have a separate personal setting, some also have a story biography, each has their own characteristics, their personal settings affect their personal position and the mood of the debate.
This has evolved an objective discussion of a problem into a multi-party game involving human nature and psychology, and established a visible character conflict and contradiction.
Second, to pull the audience's emotions, in fact, is to borrow the suspense reasoning film technique, a variety of small clues that can overturn the conclusion on the timeline, whenever you are impatient with these people jumping out of the question to talk about themselves or have no marginal arguments, the director suddenly returns to the main line, begins to find the contradictions in the case, tempts you to constantly want to know the truth of the case, and these small clues are very clever, so that you can substitute the perspective of reasoning to constantly doubt.
Third, the narrative rhythm is harmonious, almost textbook-level, in fact, this is the second article, the introduction of the characters and the retrospective reasoning of the case are mixed together, portraying the characters to lead to a little character position, and then returning to the case, and then promoting the debate through the character's position, and then leading to more details of the case in the debate, through these details and then constantly reversing the character's position, a little bit of pushing finally everyone to agree to the "innocence theory".
Because of the portrayal of these character positions and personalities, you will feel that their position is logical, and the details that persuade them solve the contradiction of this position, especially the knot laid at the beginning about a father's son, until the end of the foreshadowing and solve the main line problem, it is not an exaggeration to call it a textbook.
Fourth, human nature, this point is not much to say, these twelve people in the decision of a child's life and death, the child is going to be executed, in this case some people seriously feel the heavy responsibility and some people laugh and disagree, in the end there are still people who do not think so, here human nature needs to be combined with human design to experience themselves, is the first three points of the set of shaped.
3 Overview
The above are basically minor spoilers, which do not affect the viewing at all, if it arouses your curiosity, you can take a look, the total length of more than 90 minutes is over unconsciously.
There is also a relatively high argument that the reason why this film is great is that it interprets in microcosm a certain democratic system of human beings to emphasize the importance of procedural justice, and analyze the significance of the film from various social perspectives, which I do not object to, but I think these are not the decisions on the watchability of the film, any trial can reflect the process of human civilization, but not all trials can make you not doze off for 90 minutes.
Combine the story to taste the psychology of the characters inside, to understand the classic lines in the context, I believe you can understand what I said.
