"Twelve Angry Men" is a work that I personally like, and its simple story contains philosophy and is thought-provoking.
<h1 class="pgc-h-decimal" data-index="01" > introduction</h1>
Twelve Angry Men is a film directed by Sidney Lumet and starring Henry Fonda, Lee Cobb, Martin Bauersam, Jack Walden, and others, released in the United States on April 13, 1957.
This is a black-and-white movie that removes the glitz of color, makes people calm, and pays more attention to the characters and plot direction.
The film is 96 minutes long, and you can find a little time to watch it.
<h1 class="pgc-h-decimal" data-index="02" > plot</h1>
The film tells the story of a boy who grows up in a slum accused of murdering his biological father, and the bystanders and murder weapons are all presented with ironclad evidence. The 12 people who served on the jury in the case had to discuss the case in the jury lounge before the case was concluded, and the outcome of the discussion had to be unanimously approved before the case could be formally closed.
Twelve men each had their own professions and lives, including well-tongued advertisers, outspoken engineers, rich men with no opinion, new aristocrats who discriminated against commoners, old policemen with a hot temper, shrewd and calm bankers, and salesmen who were only in a hurry. Everyone has their own way of thinking and speaking, but with the exception of Henry Fonda's engineer, the rest of the people are dismissive of the case, identifying the boy as the murderer long before it can be discussed. In the end, through the conflict of different outlooks on life, the contest of various ways of thinking, all the jury members responsibly cast their sacred votes.
<h1 class="pgc-h-decimal" data-index="03" > highlights</h1>
"Guilty or not guilty?"
Guilty or innocent? This is a question that runs through the entire film and television work.
From the initial objection of one person to the final unity of opinion, this person's opposition pokes at the heart of every judge, making them face life squarely, making them understand the sacredness of the vote in their hands - the life of a child.
He repeatedly raised doubts in the case, making the whole case confusing.
The jury consisted of twelve people, from all walks of life, all with their own ways of thinking and values.
Participation in the judging can earn three yuan, and the final result of the jury will directly determine the life and death of a person. Good life irony.
Interestingly, the environment changes in the film.
At first, it was very hot, and the fans were broken, and the judges in formal clothes were all sweating, and they were all hot and impulsive.
Then, as doubts were raised, the voting results changed.
During the break, one person found that the fan was working, and people calmed down a bit.
"Everything is getting better, aren't they?" The man's exclamation was like a pun.
Finally, a torrential rain suddenly came, and the crowd completely calmed down, pondered the case, and led to the final outcome.
<h1 class="pgc-h-decimal" data-index="04" > depth</h1>
I think the film has an element of irony, a vote that determines a person's life and death is decided by twelve judges who come for three dollars.
The point of view from the opponents – I can't guarantee that my decision is true, I'm just presenting my opinion, a possibility.
And the question that runs through it—"Guilty or not guilty?" is more like evoking respect for life itself.
I'm a newcomer author and a taster who discovers movie treasures. Please give us your support.