*12 Angry Men* is sooo good!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 11 май 2024
- New to the AFI updated Top 100 list for great reason #87 :"2 Angry Men" IS one of the best movies I have ever seen! It's life changing! And true film canon!
Thanks soo much for watching and supporting my channel!! It means a lot to me!
Hit the subscribe and the like! And give me a good rating on the survey :) I really appreciate the love and support you all give!!!
Here are some links if your interested!👀
Come Level up on Patreon and join the amazing crew that is building there! Become a Goomba and help vote on polls, general support and discord benefits! or become a Blockbuster Buddy and access the Watch alongs ! We watch A LOT of movies over there!
I appreciate all your support!!
/ holddowna
🎉🎉🎉Enter to win your own POSTER! 🎉🎉🎉
Movie Poster Giveaway from movieposter.com
Enter for a chance to win any poster valued at $20 or less, please provide your name, email and address here! draws are once a month!
docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FA...
👀Be sure to check out;
www.movieposters.com/?sca_ref...
Disclaimer: This is an affiliate link. If you click and make a purchase, I might earn a small commission. This supports my channel and helps me make more videos like this. Thanks for your support!
Original Movie: Unforgiven (1992)
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use. No Copyright infringement intended. All rights belong to their respective owners. 
Развлечения
No special effects, no shooting, no explosions, no car chases, no large sets. One room. Twelve guys sitting and talking. One take. One hour, thirty-six minutes.
Not ONE boring moment.
What an incredible movie this is.
I was just going to post that I found the CGI lacking and the stunt work laughable. 😁
It did what it intended and did it exceptionally well. I use the above when people complain about lack of character depth and nuanced plot in action movies.
No, there's none of that, but any and every genre, style, approach in filmmaking can produce crap, mediocrity, competent, to brilliant movies in the right hands. There's plenty of movies w/ no action/SFX scenes that are boring as hell w/ lame, wooden acting, too.
Not in one take. Just we'll edited.
@@veerabhadraraokoppula Yes. Feels like one take. So well done.
Technically it has ONE special effect. The walls of the Jury Room were adjustable, and as the tension mounts apparently the director had those walls moved in. It's a practical effect, of course, but probably counts as much as matte paintings or lens tricks used in some old movies.
The camera angles were also changed as the movie progressed too. And the lighting.
The entire room is full of classic character actors and lead actors
And all just giving a master class on how not to look like you're acting in a movie.
Saw this movie countless times. Each time as riveting as the first. Real actors .... acting.
Two of the jurors, Martin Balsam and Jack Warden, played newspaper editors in _All the President's Men_ with Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman. And Henry Fonda... where to begin? He was nominated for an Oscar (Best Actor) for _The Grapes of Wrath_ , but he didn't win. Jimmy Stewart won for _The Philadelphia Story_ (which I can't quibble with... they're both great performances).
I didn’t know 3 of them: Edward Binns (although, he looks familiar), Joseph Sweeney, and George Voskovec, although I may have seen them in other films. Rest of the cast I knew. I had been watching some 1970’s TV series and saw Robert Webber guest star in one of them. I want to say it was _McMillan & Wife_ but I’m not sure.
Edit: I just checked and my hunch was right, Robert Webber was in an episode of _McMillan & Wife_ , I think I watched the series on Tubi where there’s a dedicated live channel and also on-demand video of the series.
John Fielder, bald juror with glasses, is the voice of Piglet in Winnie the Pooh.
❤🧡💛💚💙💜🙂
He was also in the movie version of the Odd Couple and a semi regular patient on The Bob Newhart Show.
And in the original True Grit.
OMG totally
I think he was on a couple of Star Trek's
It's acting 101. Every actor gave their best performance.
Absolutely! My favorite was juror number 11, the watchmaker. His speech on democracy and how he calls out juror # 7 are fantastic. " What kind of a man are you? " Brilliant.
I've seen this movie dozens of times. Tears came into my eyes as I saw you watch it the first time. It is one of the greatest movies ever made.
Omg, as soon as I saw the movie name in the notification I just had to open it instantly. This has got to be in my top 10 favorite movies of all time. A classic.
Same- needed to see her reaction to this GREAT movie.
Jack Klugman has always been a favorite of mine, especially his portrayal of Oscar Madison, in the TV series, “The Odd Couple”.
Same here! I was like "Ames. Watching 12 angry men? Yes please!!"
+1 A true classic. And still as relevant today as it was back when it was made.
The cinematography in this on a completely different level compared to a lot of films of that time. The blocking and shot composition.. ugh 👌
@@reservoirdude92 I would even dare to say that the cinematography is better than many movies of nowadays. It has such a smart way of using the camera to focus on details. And usually movies this old don't have great camera work or acting. This movie exceeds in that category. The portrayal of the characters is flabbergasting since the beginning, and the character development is insane due to the script and the way the actors performed their roles. Definitely a 10/10 movie.
My most excellent English teacher showed this in High School, 1970. Thank you, Mr. Tarrant -I’ve had it in mind for life, always with me.
Same here but 1992
I saw it for the first time in high school as well in 2002☺️
Also saw it in high school. Round about 2005. Whole class was disinterested when it started, but everyone was engrossed by the end.
I first saw this movie when I was in the 8th grade in 1964. It came on Sunday night at 10:30. I was only able to stay up and watch about 30 minutes of it and my parents made me go to bed. The next day my English teacher brought it up and we discussed it as a class. Thank you Mrs. McCalla!!! Like your Mr. Tarrant and so many other teachers, she was also an instructor in how to think and reason.
A college professor showed it to me in an English class. It's been one of my favorite movies ever since. It's amazing how it's all just 12 men talking in a room, yet it's as exciting and suspenseful as any Hollywood blockbuster spectacle.
There’s a lot of classic films that are “good for the time” but this one is just great for all time.
I'm so glad you noticed the action of helping the last juror with his coat. It's such a kind gesture to someone he'd disagreed with.
AFI is out of their minds having this as low as 87. This is, at worst, a top 20 film and I've got it in my top 5.
Yeah, I had that same thought. It should be way higher than 87!
If you're a real film nerd, go and look at the AFI list. It's pretty embarrassing. To be fair, I think they tried to make it a "cultural impact" ranking more than a Best Films list (which is why, say, E.T. is above Apocalypse Now - lol), and the old version had a disproportionate preponderance of silent film.
@@Melancthon7332 I feel like that would stress me out, but it also makes sense that they were looking more at impact than pure quality. I love E.T., it was one of my favorites as a kid, but it's not better than Apocalypse Now by any real measure.
Maybe they should refer to their list as something like, 100 movies that shaped American film or something like that.
I dunno if ranking matters that much just be happy it made the list? Which is a great list
its in my top 20.
My aunt showed me this movie and To Kill A Mockingbird when I was 12 and they both made a huge impression on me.
To Kill a Mockingbird is another great movie.
I hope you didn't let him slip through our fingers!!
It's so refreshing to watch a movie focused on dialog and not special effects. The absence of any kind of background music really focuses attention and adds even more seriousness to the dialog.
Without one F bomb!
And takes place in just two locations, the jury room and the bathroom :)
Try "The Man From Earth", similar premise: one room, several people, one overarcing topic, just talking, brilliant movie as well.
The rain was the background music
@@Corvmatt Or "Fail Safe" from 1964 (they edited just a handful of short outside scenes but the screenplay is for a theatre room and 98% its just in the presidents atomic bunker). Highly recommend, a forgotten treasure, especially now where we are facing a crazy new russian empire
Movie came out almost 70 years ago and is still relevant today. I watched it for the first time in 9th grade 20 years ago and thought it was amazing, so I think it can still translate to the current generation despite its age.
"So gentle yet so powerful" - that's the Henry Fonda special.
One of the top three movies ever made in my opinion. Just 12 guys sitting in a room and talking and it's absolutely spellbinding.
I just made this same comment. This movie is in my Top 3!
This is what you get with great writing, great actors at the top of their game and a gripping story.
Plus great direction and cinematography
This is proof you don't need epic landscapes, convoluted action sequences or tons of special effects to make a gripping movie. Just put a bunch of good actors in a room with a great script and leave them to their craft.
I was born in that hot summer of 1957. Seeing this movie always reminds me that classics never really fade.
12 Angry Men (1957). It was based on a teleplay from 1954 but produced as a feature movie for the cinema. The director was Sidney Lumet and one of the producers was Henry Fonda (Juror 8, Not Guilty) the present superstar in the ensemble. The film stands on two factors: Lumet's master direction and the absolutely brilliant cast. In 1957 this was among the Hollywood elites, both old and upcoming. These guys knew how to deliver. Juror 1 (The Foreman): Martin Balsam, Juror 3 (Guilty): Lee J. Cobb. Juror 4 (No Sweat): E. G. Marshall. Juror 7 (Ballgame): Jack Warden. Juror 10 (Loud Mouth): Ed Begley. My personal favorite is Lee J. Cobb, a veteran actor from both the stage and the screen, usually in very potent roles, heavies, angry men.
Don't forget Jack Klugman, who in the seventies starred at Quincy ME, the very grandpa of CSI shows.
@@yvorfalcon3025 You mean TV's messiest bachelor? From the TV version of The Odd Couple?
@@FloridaMugwumpYou mean the actor tied with Burgess Meredith for starring in the most episodes of the Twilight Zone?
Lee J. Cobb played the detective in The Exorcist, another magnificent film. That character was the direct inspiration for the creation of the one-and-only Mr Columbo.
@@FloridaMugwumpCan two divorced men share an apartment without driving each other crazy? I used to love that show.
The actor in the white suit is Henry Fonda, who was the producer of this film. He made a lot of comedies and dramas beginning in the 1930’s, made a lot of westerns especially with John Ford, was a best friend of Jimmy Stewart, father of Jane and Peter Fonda, and starred in several masterpieces including “Fail-Safe” (directed by same man who did this film) and won an Oscar at age 76 for “On Golden Pond.” He mostly played morally and ethically upright individuals but was phenomenal when cast against type as the villain in “Once Upon A Time In The West (1968.)”
Fail-Safe's a movie I'd love to see more reactions to
@@JabbaTheAmerican "Fail-Safe" is so underappreciated it. Unfortunately, the studio shuffled the release date to AFTER "Dr. Strangelove", and it never recovered.
Fonda once said that "Once Upon a Time in the West" was one of his favorites because he got to play the bad guy. And boy, he nailed it.
Don't forget "The Grapes of Wrath"
He also played a villain in the western Firecreek. A great movie!
A side note. As a film maker I studied this film for multiple reasons. One of which was use of lenses. Please note, that the further we progress into the story, the lenses get "longer" in focal length. That gives the shots a more claustrophobic feel along with the growing of tensions in the story. It's a classic way of telling a story visually and this film was the perfect example.
My favorite line will always be:
Juror 10: What are you so polite about?!
Juror 11: For the same reason you are not: That's how I was brought up.
He just straight up roasted him. Sure you don't want him to be polite any more, slick?
"Rear Window" 1954
I love this movie and have loved it for decades. Henry Fonda was not only the lead actor but also the producer of this film; one that he is most proud of next to "Grapes of Wrath".
Love this one Jeffrey!
He was also proud of _The Ox-Bow Incident_ cuz all three films dealt with social justice.
@@holddowna I saw some superhero stuff around you. If you've ever seen Superman 2, Juror #4 (E.G. Marshall) plays the President that kneels before Zod.
I hope you didn't let him slip through our fingers!!
This was director Sidney Lumet's first feature film. He had done work for television prior to this. Some of his other movies include The Pawnbroker, Fail Safe, Serpico, Murder on the Orient Express, Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict, and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. Dog Day Afternoon is a favorite of mine.
Lumet began the movie using camera angles above the jurors' heads, and slowly moved it downwards. He also used more close-ups as the movie went on. The result was an increasing feeling of being in a small space.
One thing I like about this movie is how the different characters bring their own experience and perspectives into the jury room with them. The old man understood why another old man would testify the way he did. The guy who lived in a slum knew about how switchblades were used in actual fights. The smallest juror who brought up the question of the kid stabbing downward while being so much shorter than his father.
When the bigot finished ranting, the cool-headed juror told him not to open his mouth again. From that point forward, the bigot didn't utter another word. Even when he voted not guilty, he did it by shaking his head. And the look on his face suggested that he knew how wrong he had been, and that he'd been voting to send someone to die who might very well not have done it.
Ed Begley was Ed Begley, Jr.'s father. He was in a lot of movies and TV shows, including "Sorry, Wrong Number" and "Hang 'Em High". Juror Number 10 is his best-known role.
Yeah he's one of the greatest filmmakers of all time. It's such a shame the general public doesn't really know his name because his work is so important to cinema.
@@earlchatterton9133 If you haven't seen the documentary about him, you should check it out. It's called _By Sidney Lumet_ (2015).
This is one of those films that teaches people not to dismiss a film due to it being black and white.
Its script is tight, and I can’t imagine cost much to make for its time. It would be nice if we got more smaller films like this.
The problem if it were made today is you would have to find actors who love the art and not want to maximize their salary. You have so many leads and great character actors you are looking at north of $200 million to get that cast today.
@@manueldeabreu1980I think it would be harder to even get a green light. “You mean to tell me this takes place in one room with no action? How do you keep the audience engaged? The algorithm says it’ll flop.”
Executives today are pure money men and have never made a film on any level. I highly doubt most are even fans of the product their industry creates. I know there are exceptions, such as the guy running 20th Century Studios right now ironically. Robert Meyer Burnett speaks highly of him.
@@manueldeabreu1980 Speaking of that, I saw yesterday that Ben Affleck is in an upcoming remake of Witness for the Prosecution. I can't imagine that turning out well.
@@manueldeabreu1980 Great big time actors do smaller roles with a smaller pay if the director is known to be talented and the project is greenlit. Just look at Wes Anderson films. Actors don't have a lot to say about projects if they're not producing themselves. It's the studios that are the problem. They put all the eggs in the same basket and superhero films, animations and other huge blockbusters are a big part of the reason why. They want masses to the cinemas. Big budgets, little risk, big victories. Studios have never been motivated by art first and foremost but it's gotten worse and worse the past 20 years.
@@manueldeabreu1980 That's a little unfair. Big name actors take roles in small budget movies for scale all the time; they do it for great writing, to challenge themselves and to work with talented people. Sure, not all of them do it, but a heck of a lot do - successful stars often make big money on big studio projects so that they can afford the time for roles they care about.
Juror #8 is no. 28 on AFI:s list from 2003 of 100 heroes. Well deserved.
Juror No8 (Fonda) said "I dont want to change your mind" and "I dont have anything brilliant" and "I only know as much as you do" only to pull out a knife out of his pocket like David Copperfield. What a shady person! BTW smuggling in "evidence" like that and lurching around the crime scene is illegal and would lead to mistrial in real life. I guess Juror No8 is holier than thou and is allowed to break the law, for the greater good I guess. However anything illegal he did, is illegal for a reason!
This film is as near to perfection as is possible. The screenplay, the acting, the lighting, the direction are all superb. Sidney Lumet's directorial debut. Engrossing adult drama. Brilliant.
To me, its one of the "perfect films" a perfect Film does not mean free of mistakes or problems. A perfect Film happens when you got the following points right....actors, Script, timing, Story, director. It rarely happens, but when it does, you get a Film like this. Other examples are Ghostbusters 1984, Metropolis 1929, (german) Das Boot / the boat (the 6hour version) and to some Empire strikes back.
A little interessting fact. Lumet filmed all scenes with one lense before using the next lense that was difficult for the one to one conversations, meaning, sometimeshe filmed one actor talking and then there had been days or weeks before he filmed the other side of the argument. Knowing that, makes the Action so much more powerfull.
These 50s-60s character studies are fantastic. Check out "On the waterfront"and "The flight of the Phoenix".
No CGI, no fancy scenes, just pure acting with a great storyline. A classsic for sure.
So good
"It is better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
- William Blackstone
That quote is the foundation of western civic jurisprudence
The problem is that there is no such thing as "western civic jurisprudence" anymore.
I've posed this as a multiple choice on internet forums. Many people today think it is better to lock up 10 innocent people than to let one guilty person go free. It's really depressing
@@izzonj I don't believe you. I have never heard one single person ever say that. Here's a question for you. ---- Do you think there are more innocent people sitting in jail, OR are there more victims of crimes committed by known criminals who are arbitrarily released without bond or incarceration onto the streets again?
@jeffreiland7463 you haven't spent time online with far-right nutjobs.
You can see it by looking at the comments section of news agencies.
As soon as someone is arrested, those comments are filled with people assuming guilt.
No charges need to be filed and no evidence needs to be presented.
It's fucking terrifying.
For those of you who weren't around or know about New York in the 50's...the THEY the were alluding to were Puerto Ricans. There was a huge influx of Puerto Ricans into NY/NJ in those years. The tension between the old New Yorkers and the PR "immigrants" (who were in fact American) was explosive. The kind treatment of Old NY and New Puerto Ricans was the basis for the play and movie West Side Story.
Thank you for sharing this. I didn't know it was Puerto Ricans he was referring to. I had always thought the 18 year old defendant looked a little bit Italian, so I had always assumed/wondered if "they" meant Italians.
When the juror went on his last racist rampage, even Lee J. Cobb's character turned his back to him. I think that's when Fonda's character knew he wasn't all bad, just a hurting, damaged father.
My Father was one of those immigrants from Puerto Rico. I was born one year before this movie came out.
I think the point of the filmmakers is to not define the “they” so it could represent any “other” group of people. It makes it more universal.
@@redpine8665 Lee J. Cobb's character didn't turn his back because of the racist rampage. What happened was they took another vote and it was 9-3 in favor of not guilty, and it ticked him off. He immediately got up from his chair, turned his back on the rest of the jurors and started staring out the window. And THEN the racist rant started. I always just wished Lee Cobb's character just left the room (to the bathroom or something) during the rant, cuz it makes more sense for his character.
I first saw this on a school excursion in the 70s, at the height of 'Star Wars' mania, with a busload of rowdy middle-school tech boys. Black and white? You're kidding. By 10 mins in, you could hear a pin drop. By the end, 50-odd much-chastened adolescent boys filed soberly out, wiser and more mature for the experience. Such is the power of a first-rate script in the hands of first-rate actors and director. Thanks for sharing this, Ames - your usual thoughtful and typically astute response. I guess my only quibble would be that they sound more like actors than typical jurors, but a certain 'staginess' can't be helped. Well done once again, ma'am.
When the film was released in 1957 only three states--Alabama, Mississippi, and South Carolina--still did not allow women to serve as jurors, so having the jury be comprised of just men was probably an artistic decision. 1957 is also the year that women were finally allowed to sit on federal juries, regardless of which state the trial was held in. Mississippi was the last state where women were not allowed to serve as jurors, which they dropped in 1968. Alabama had done so in 1966 and South Carolina in 1967.
Well you know, women.... j/k
Thank you for that information. I had just assumed that women were not yet allowed at this time.
But it was common in that era to routinely excuse women from jury duty if they were caregivers at home, so most women could get out of jury duty pretty easily if they wanted to.
Mississippi... always the last horse outta the gate. They were also the last state to officially outlaw slavery, which they did after Lincoln... the movie (from 2012).🤣
that is correct however in New York at the time only men were required to show up when called for jury duty resulting in male dominated jury pools and many all male juries
This film does so much with so little! Basically two small rooms and a cast you see nearly the entire time to go through a single thought experiment, and it grips you the entire time.
The truly great films are timeless, aren't they? Great script, great performances, great directing. I remember the first time I saw it and how impressed I was at the time. Seeing young folks discover classics like these and show exactly the same type of wonder is fantastic!!!!!
Notice how amazing was final scene, when last juror could not admit that boy is not guilty and trefore his own son is not guilty he was smaller in the frame than everyone faces, and when he broke down he moved closer to the camera filling the whole frame becoming big again in the frame, this camera work is genius
This is one of my absolute favorite movies, a highschool social studies teacher made it required watching for our lesson on the courts. I'm 53 now and it still hits just as hard.
"love this guy" - Henry Fonda always plays the "love this guy" part.
Not always....
This movie is one of my favorites. I still can't comprehend why someone thought that a remake could improve this jewel. The acting is superb and the camera work outstanding.
You are so right about all those cinematographic features applied in this film.
It’s not considered a master piece for nothing.
Characters, environment, discussions are all used to perfection. And then you add the brilliance of cinematography, lighting and such, and 12 angry men will forever be a film you can watch over and over again.
The number of incredible actors in this film was amazing. Henry Fonda (Jane Fonda's father), Lee J. Cobb, Ed Begley, Jack Klugman (later on did the "Odd Couple" series with Tony Randall), Jack Warden (so many incredible films he did), John Fieldler (did so many different shows, even an episode of the Original Star Trek). Another great review Ames!
Thanks BILLY!!!
@@holddowna It's funny because John Fiedler plays such a soft-spoken high-pitched voice guy in this movie, but in the Star Trek episode called "A Wolf In The Fold" he plays a time travelling version of Jack The Ripper and was the most cunning evil MF'er in the entire universe. He did some great acting in that show. lol
@@BillySBCthat's where I first saw him. I saw that eoisode as a kid and it scared me.
@@BillySBC And in "Wolf in the Fold" John Fiedler's character Hengist is exposed as a killer in a courtroom scene of a different sort, a hearing held in the briefing room of the *Enterprise* .
@@gregsager2062 Interesting, I hadn't thought of that, but you're right it was a courtroom situation. John Fiedler was great in that episode, so very much not like the average characters he would play in most of his work.
The Guy that played the prejudiced juror, Ed Begley is father of Ed Begley Jr., who played in many Films and TV shows. He was Clifford in Better Call Saul.
George Voskovec was born in Czech Republic (technically still part of Austria-Hungary at the time). He was half of the famous dramatic duo Werich-Voskovec who ran the Liberated Theatre. He was forced to emigrate twice, first for his anti-fascist works and later for his anti-communist works. He was also detained in 1950s during the McCarthy trials in the US.
John Fielder was voice of Piglet in Winnie the Pooh, as others already pointed out.
The consistency of the characters is also amazing. None say anything out of character.
Next time you watch, observe the order in which they vote 'guilty' with their hands in that preliminary vote. Some are slower to raise.
My favorite line is when the Juror 7 walks away from the table when Juror 9 wants to explain his change, and Juror 8 says, "He can't hear you. HE NEVER WILL."
I love how Juror 3 starts with saying "When I was a kid I called my father 'sir.'". Then a few minutes later he's dissing McCardle, Juror 9, a man who is his elder.
Overall, i think Juror 11 (watchmaker) has the best lines.
The Watchmaker is juror 11. Juror 10 is the racist.
@@seanmonahan thanks. fixed it.
"For the same reason you're not; it's how I was raised." as a response to the snyde comment about why he was acting so polite all the time is such a great response.
That one is my favourite in this movie.
One of the great films of all time. I never get tired seeing this film with a many elite actors of their generation- the film is always riveting, dramatic, realistic, and essentially filmed in one room
The strength of this script… I’ve seen this movie dozens of times, the newer one with Jack Lemon dozens of times, I’ve seen it onstage many times… no matter the cast, the script is so damn good
I'm so happy you're covering this absolute TITAN of a film!!! More and more people are rediscovering this movie & it warms my heart because its one of the best movies ever made. I first saw this as a sophomore in physics class & its been one of my favorites ever since!! Each and every performance is unique & the story is so captivating & incredibly relevant nearly 70 years later! 🤗😎🔥
I appreciate your understanding that you don't need special effects to make a. compelling masterpiece.
As often as not, elaborate special effects get in the way of characters and story. The effects should be "special" and not the reason for the film.
I have a personal relationship with this movie. I had been dating a girl about a week or so and we decided to have a movie night. I asked if she'd ever seen this film, she hadn't. I warned her, this movie will trigger you to anger and frustration. She knew nothing about it. Not even half way in she was literally yelling at the screen. Long story short, I feel this movie night was what really bonded us. So, here we are a year and a half later and she's my fiance and we're getting married in September. We both pinpoint this particular night, this particular movie, that we had identical personalities.
Brilliant movie, and Lee J. Cobb was phenomenal as usual.
Not only a great classic film, also one of the best to watch people react to. Busts the myth that movies need extreme visuals, quick edits, explosions, etc. Great writing, acting, and directing. (Civil rights and the U.S. Constitution are also characters here. )
One tightly made film that borders on perfection.
Totally
Awesome that you're watching movies B&W movies. Some fantastic movies in your future.
12 Angry Men always makes me think.
It's amazing no matter how many times you see it. Twelve of the greatest actors at the top of their abilities. The cinematography! The blocking! Every frame is so beautifully composed and lit! And one of our greatest playwrights and greatest directors! Look what can be accomplished with one set and a modest budget.
“Listen…”
“I have. Sit down and don’t open your mouth again.”
😂 brutal dialogue.
The feeling you got that the room was getting closer and closer is true. They made the room smaller over time and changed the camera angles. The room in many ways is part of the cast...
Great movie and great reaction. When he took the man's jacket and put it on him, that simple gesture to me is one of the greatest example of compassion displayed in any movie. Chokes me up every time.
I always go back and forth between this and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest for best movie I have seen.
I love the Exchange:
What are you so polite about?
For the same reason you're not. It's the way I was brought up.
I'm a massive fan of character in stories and this has been my favorite movie since I first saw it back in the mid 70s as a 10-12 year old kid.
These are some of the best actors of the day and they are all amazing.
Always happy to see folks being exposed to this film for the first time.
Sidney Lumet is one of the great directors of all time, and this is one of his best.
Another movie by Lumet that I always recommend is Fail Safe from 1964. Other older movies that I suggest that are not from Lumet are To Kill a Mockingbird(1962), Inherit the Wind(1960), and Judgement at Nuremberg(1961)...all three are highly renowned courtroom dramas.
Thanks for your comment...I have seen all the movies you mentioned...Henry Fonda in Fail Safe when I saw it as a kid was amazing and scary
I heartily second all of those films! Also consider "Witness for the Prosecution" and "Anatomy of a Murder". All great courtroom films with some of the greatest actors we have ever ben privileged to watch.
Another great courtroom drama directed by Sidney Lumet is The Verdict with Paul Newman and Jack Warden (the juror with the tickets to the ballgame).
What I love about Ames reviews is she doesn’t go in with a preset notion of what’s good or bad about the movie. She reacts genuinely to what she’s watching and takes note of things like lighting, camera angles and sets. Clearly she has an insight into movies that a lot of other movie reviewers don’t have. She’s there to enjoy the movie, not to trash it. Ames has actually got me to enjoy movies I thought I wouldn’t like by watching her reviews. She is a breath of fresh air in a world full of negativity.
Two of these guys reappear in "All the President's Men." This film came to mind when I watched DUNE. When the Fremen are said to be “dangerous and unreliable,” I sarcastically said, “Oh, there’re some GOOD things about ’em, too. I’ve known a COUPLE who were okay.”
Just one of the best movies ever made. The blocking is immense. Performances immaculate. The more I watch it, the more I think Lee J Cobb’s performance is a marvel, such depth below the bluster.
This was the film that i saw as a youth that made me realize there are good black and white films (as well as good stage plays, which this originally was one).
It's the movie that makes the 20-somethings I work with not fully grown-ups, until they watch it. It isn't just a great movie, it's about being a great human being. Watch and learn, kids...
The scene that really stuck out to me is when Henry Fonda had no response to the guy that said to him " I'm not one for supposing but I'll give it a try ...Suppose you talk us all out of this and the Kid really is Guilty "
Man, Jack Klugman, and Henry Fonda are the two I remember most. Amazing actors.
EG Marshall
What a banger. Not only does it still hold up after like six decades, but it's seems to be more impressive every time I see it. Great reaction
So happy to see this reaction. It seems you are working through the AFI list in no particular order which is cool. I have enjoyed the ones I have seen so far. I am hoping you hit some of my favorites. "Lawrence of Arabia", "Rocky", "The Searchers", "To kill a mockingbird", "The Maltese Falcon", and "The Bridge Over The River Kwai" to name a few.
Absolute masterclass in acting, writing, and ESPECIALLY shot composition and blocking. Sidney Lumet was a maverick. Dog Day Afternoon, Serpico, Q&A, Night Falls on Manhattan, Prince of the City, Deathtrap.. man, so many greats ❤
Don't forget The Verdict with Paul Newman and Jack Warden.
Great Reaction to this Classic......
I saw this Presented Muliple Times as a play in High School (Early 1980's).......
Shout out to the Legends in this Movie...... Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Klugman, Martin Balsam, E.G. Marshall, Jack Warden, Ed Begley
Director Lumet wrote in an article: "I shot the first third of the movie above eye level, shot the second third at eye level, and the last third from below eye level. In that way, toward the end, the ceiling began to appear. Not only were the walls closing in, the ceiling was as well. The sense of increasing claustrophobia did a lot to raise the tension of the last part of the movie."
The kid not remembering the films is a believable statement. Movie houses weren't multi-screen when this movie was made. A cinema showed one or two movies so in the evening you could buy a double feature ticket without ever asking the name of the films. An angry kid wanting to get out of the summer heat buys a double feature ticket and spends the time stewing in anger paying no attention to the films is quite believable.
The hand towel machine in the restroom doesn't reuse the same cloth. As you pull it down off the top reel, it wraps around another reel in the bottom. Eventually you pull all the towel off the top reel. At that point, all the used towel is wrapped on the bottom reel and can be removed to be laundered. These still exist today ion some places and there's usually a service company that supplies clean rolls and washes the dirty ones.
The "Them" they are refering to in the original script were "Puerto Ricans" who had Immigrated......
Another Classic Movie that takes place in one room, is "Arsenic and Old Lace" It had a long run on Broadway, and the movie was shot using most of the actors from the Broadway Production.....
Awesome! The Ox-Bow Incident is my fav Henry Fonda movie & similar to this one, involving a lynch mob. Thanks for your great reactions!
My favorite Fonda film as well and one of my favorite westerns too.
I'm quite partial to Once Upon a Time in the West. It's wild to see Fonda as the villain.
I second the motion on the movie, The Ox Bow Incident (1942) directed by William Wellman. The final scene is one of the sharpest endings of any movie.
Another movie to consider watching is "The Miracle Worker (1962) directed by Arthur Penn." The movie is based on the true story of Helen Keller and her teacher, Anne Sullivan. Patty Duke and Ann Bancroft won Oscars for their performances.
I saw 12 Angry Men play with Richard Thomas and George Wendt while I was in High School and It was fantastic!
John Fiedler (Juror #2) voiced Piglet from Winnie the Pooh, Jack Klugman (Juror #5) was in The Odd Couple with Tony Randall and he also played Quincy M.E. , Henry Fonda (Juror #8) is the father of actress and activist Jane Fonda and Ed Begley (Juror #10) is the father of actor Ed Begley Jr. When I compare this classic film to the 1997 remake I really enjoy watch George C. Scott’s performance as Juror #3. The script in book form was published under Penguin Classics.
This is why you’re one of the best creators in the genre of content! I love that you have such a variety of movies and classics rather than just the ones we always see people post videos on.
1:03 Every juror should be required to watch this movie
LOL!
No they shouldn't. It's just a film, it is not a documentary.
If Juror No8 had done these things in real life then it'd be declared a mistrial
@@Mantis_Toboggan_MD. A mistrial after 3 hrs? Nope. It's a film about looking for reasonable doubt.
Do you know of any documentaries that showcase a jury trial that does, what this movie does?
Besides this was the 1950's where you could smoke on airplanes and carry a weapon into court. So today's rules of what is acceptable, don't apply.
@@LezArtist5iG No.
A mistrial because they basically retried the case.
They asked questions of the witnesses, when the witnesses were not there to provide answers
Juror No8 carried out his own private investigation in to the case.
You are not allowed to do ANY of that in real life.
It's a well written & well acted film BUT it is just a film. It's not real life
@@Mantis_Toboggan_MD. From "Handbook for Trial Jurors Serving in the US District Courts"
"In the Jury Room
...
Jurors are expected to use all the experience, common sense and common knowledge they possess."
Common sense, common knowledge, and experience (at least for many of us) tells us that the woman who claims to have been able to positively identify the killer (from 60 feet away, at midnight, through the passing windows of an elevated train) wore glasses, because she had marks (2 deep depressions) on the sides of her nose. Common sense, common knowledge, and experience (at least for many of us) also tells us that she almost assuredly was not wearing her glasses when the crime occurred.
From "Handbook for Trial Jurors Serving in the US District Courts"
"At any rate, it is only fair that the parties have a chance to know and comment upon all the facts that matter in the case."
If a woman probably wears prescription eye glasses, and almost assuredly was not wearing prescription glasses when she claimed to make a positive identification of a killer - from 60 feet away, at midnight, through the passing windows of an elevated train - that sure seems to be a fact that matters in the case.
@@Mantis_Toboggan_MD. Although you are correct that the film portrays multiple instances of juror misconduct, it still likely wouldn’t result in a mistrial because the courts are extremely reluctant to intervene in a jury’s deliberations or overturn a jury’s verdict even when jurors are not following the law or the judge’s instructions. That’s just more reason why jurors should not be shown this movie as an example of how they should carry out their duties.
Ames, this movie was directed by Sidney Lumet, all in all, my favorite director, along with Alfred Hitchcock, and like Hitchcock, Lumet never won the Best Director Oscar. Sidney Lumet began as a director of live television drama, such as "Playhouse 90" As a result, he was a master of minimalism. A single set, precise lighting, an anthropomorphic camera. I think you would really appreciate some of his later movies, such as "The Pawnbroker," "Fail-Safe," "The Verdict," and "Network."
I just gotta say that even though clearly you've watched some fantastic movies on this channel, there are some (starting to grow in numbers to many now) that not only influence your emotions and reactions during your filming but affect you long after. I think these are what makes them classic movies, the force of acting, script, direction, camerawork all add up to something more moving than the typical cinematic experience.
This is what I love about you and your channel, when these great classics (in all forms and decades) clearly take a grasp of you and we witness you getting pulled in and just know these feelings stay with you for far longer. You also add to this with noticing the acting and especially the camera work (in this movie alone, several early references to how good the pans are).
We are movies 'affect' you and leave a mark on you, and that is much more interesting and beautiful than a regular reaction, it's astounding; so thank you for your reactions, to the editor(s) for their skill in capturing this and keeping the pace despite heavy RUclips edits (as skilled as editing a movie in the first place, surely) and please continue to mix up new with old and across so many genres, it's a joy to witness each time... and 12 Angry Men being able to influence emotions and leave a mark so many decades later that it s working against vastly different trends, fashions and times, that's a movie experience.
Sorry for the long pompus post, but yep, thank you!
Every actor on the Jury was already in the midst of or on the way to brilliant careers in film or television or both. Every man put in a Grade-A performance whether you hated him or liked him at any given time. And special kudos to the director and the whole crew; this is still a master class in camera work and scripting. One of my all-time favorites and still stands up as one of the best- if not THE best- court dramas ever put to film.
I loved the full watch along version on Patreon, Ames and was only planning to watch a few minutes of this edited version. Hahaha! So much for those plans! I enjoyed every minute of it! 🤣🤣🤣Such a brilliant script and cast! Henry Fonda was so perfect in this role... calm but compelling! This film really earned its place on the AFI List!!
This kind of story only works if you have great actors to bring it to life. Every single one of these men were incredible! Henry Fonda was one of the greatest American actors of all time
I like Juror number 4 the most. Although he's technically an antagonist, he's motivated purely by the facts and when the facts run out, he honestly changes his mind. Throughout the movie he engages with people's arguments, acknowledges their points, and defends his position with his own reasoned arguments as well. And sometimes, when someone makes a good point (like Henry Fonda's point out the train being too noisy to have heard the boy shout), you see Juror 4 sitting and looking at the table, having a good long think. And he's visibly irritated by the antics of the other jurors, even though they're "on his side".
He might be an antagonist, but he's the least emotional and arguably the most honest man in the room; he's just not swayed by emotional appeals. Henry Fonda's character picks up on it too, and very often as the movie progresses, he speaks directly to Juror number 4 when he's trying to reason with his opposition.
The story behind how this movie was shot is an entire study in filmmaking.
This was a Broadway play, I wish they would revive play. This should be required in highschool. There's another black and white movie you should react to is Jimmy Stewart's Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.
Specifically, it was adapted into a play AFTER it had been, first, a TV drama, and then this film. It didn't play on Broadway until 2004.
This is a straight up masterpiece
2:26 -- RE: "Is this movie going to be all about the Jury in Deliberation?"; A: Yes. This film was adapted as a screenplay from a theatrical stage play, and thus it gave the production and the director a huge savings, since it pretty much all happens in one room for us, the Audience. You even noticed how excellent the cinematography is in the opening sequence, with the camera dollying in through the various people at the Court House.
Henry Fonda is also quite a big headliner, but known for his political leanings, as was Lee J. Cobb.
Half the actors in this, Lee J. Cobb especially should have got an Oscar.
Note to self: when in a 1950s movie, being friendly with Jack Klugman is okay, but never oppose Henry Fonda.
This is a great legal drama film from director Sidney Lumet, as this was his directorial debut.
Nominated for 4 Oscars including Best Picture, but lost to the epic WWII drama The Bridge On The River Kwai, which took home 7 Oscars.
It was nominated for 3 Oscars, not 4. But Fonda and Cobb should have been nominated for their performances.
I read a review that spoke about the height of the camera shots from beginning to the end...where the opening scenes were shot from near the ceiling and gradually were lowered to below eye level at the end...BRILLIANT...
This has been one of my favorite movies for decades....Her comments were very compelling and entertaining...!
Fonda was just one name in a cast full of heavyweights. Lee J. Cobb (juror #3) really brought his a-game.
You're commentary on the camera work and other cinematic issues tells me you would love the book written by the director, Sidney Lumet, titled "Making Movies". The book is about making 12 Angry Men and the cinematic choices Lumet made. Each chapter deals with a different issue (e.g. camera work, lighting). Watch the movie again with the book at hand. You'll see what it takes to make iconic cinema. I guarantee you'll enjoy the experience and learn a lot from it.
The blocking and shot composition in this is on a completely different level. I believe Lumet's theater and live TV background was perfect practice for him before making the leap to film.
These are all A list actors, when Hollywood choose to make movies not make statements. Great Pick.
Hahaha! This movie is one big statement. It's very preachy about prejudice and social justice and the death penalty. It's great, but it's definitely making a "woke" statement.
Lol, what nonsense is this? Have you ever heard of the civil rights movement? There was plenty of actors involved in that and including Henry Fonda
That ensemble is arguably the greatest cast ever assembled in film history. Fonda, Cobb,
Klugman, Balsam, Warden, Begley, Warden, Fielder and E.G. Marshall. Sidney Lumet's masterpiece with his trademark camera work.
Back in 7th grade we did a roundtable version of this play for my drama club. I was the angry dude and it really was a fascinating role. I didn't understand the nuances of the role then. However, now, having been divorced and at one point having conflict with my son, no longer thank God, I can see how one man can become so bitter. What a fantastically written script!
_"I played the angry dude in 12 Angry Men."_
Well... that really narrows it down, doesn't it?🤣I'm gonna assume you mean the angriest one, Juror #3 (the bitter father).
Hey Ames. So glad you picked this one. It’s an acting tour de force. Except for Fonda, most of this cast went on to careers as stellar character actors.
This is when people actually acted
They still do.
It would not be easy today to find enough movie actors with sufficient stage experience to pull off a film like this.
I never tire of watchinig this incredible movie, nor reactions to it - everyone is blown away by it. A film-making masterclass, in every single aspect.
I completely forgot that Jack Klugman was one of the jurors. He was one of the greatest character actors of all time. So glad you enjoyed this movie.