“Twelve Angry Men”
NCLC 375: Prof. Ampthor
The movie “Twelve Angry Men” is about twelve male jurors, brought together in a deliberation room to decide whether a boy is guilty of killing his father. The deliberation starts with an 11-1 vote for guilty. As the movie progresses, the one man who had a reasonable doubt about the guilt or innocent of the young boy, convinces the other members of the jury to question the facts presented. This paper examines the application of leadership concepts in the characters of each juror. Throughout the movie several leaders evolved, the main one being Juror #8, the man who stood …show more content…
As a majority to acquit develops (the vote to acquit or convict must be unanimous). We see the group dynamics shift until Juror #8’s lone voice is joined by 10 others. Psychodynamic theory is present in the scene in which the motivation behind the single-handed holdout's passion to convict becomes apparent. He has displaced his anger towards his estranged son onto the defendant, a "no good, ungrateful kid" like his son.
Each character presents themselves in a different manner. To gain a deeper understanding of each man, we have listed them, and a few specific characteristics that stood out:
Juror #1 (The Foreman): (Martin Balsam) A high-school assistant head coach, concerned about keeping the proceedings formal and maintain authority; easily frustrated and sensitive when someone objects to his control. (Dirks)
Juror #2: (John Fiedler) A wimpy, balding bank clerk/teller, easily persuaded, meek, hesitant, goes along with the majority. (Dirks)
Juror #3: (Lee J. Cobb) bullying, rude and husky man, extremely opinionated and biased, completely intolerant, forceful and loud-mouthed, temperamental and vengeful; estrangement from his