Zachary Williams

12/3/2015
Principles of Speech
Video Critique #5
The movie 12 angry men is an intriguing idea for a drama. It pits 12
ordinary men with the extrodinary requirement of deciding a young man's
fate. This film paints the humanity and human fragility that is our legal
system as humans are deciding other human's ultimate mortal fate, the fate
of life or death. All of the different indidviduals on this trial do a pretty good
job of visualizing the different classes and ethnicities of America.
Though many of the characters in this movie are intriguing there are
two individuals that stood out to me at the very begining and continued to
distinguish themselves through the rest of the movie. Though the movie I
viewed was the 1997 version as oppossed to the 1957 film of the same name
and plot, there was not a tremendous change from the character deveopment
of the two individuals i was interested in: Juror 4, a wealthy white
stockbroker, and juror 11, a watchmaker and an immigrant from European
descent it appears. Both individuals seemed to be level headed but I chose
to go with Juror 4 because of the wisdom, rational, and authority that comes
with his age.
Juror 4 was intriguing as an individual; based on rational, he starts with
his begining choice as a guilty verdict, mainly because of the evidence that
was produced by the prosecution. His verdict would be based on the facts
that were presented, the facts that were presentable; though the knife wasn't
as unique as it once seemed, the knife was still evidence. When the old
lady's eyesight was called into question becuase of the revelation that she
wore glasses, he changed his verdict to not guilty. He also played an
important part in changing Juror 3's verdict to not guilty by saying "Let him
live!" Because of these things the man known as Juror 4 helped change the
outcome of this young boy's possibly very short life.