In fact, Juror 11 faces outright hostility from other jurors because he is different from them. Moving to the main part of the film and the central procedure we can emphasize on the juror3 and juror10 who are the main representatives of such prejudiced behaviors. Keywords: Forming, Storming, Norming, Performing, Adjourning… 1698 Words 7 Pages 12 Angry Men In a world where the jury is the voice of the people's justice, twelve men sit in a room poised to determine the fate of one boy's life. At this point, all we know is that a young man is on trial for killing his father. Throughout, Four is rational and levelheaded. Take Juror 3 for example.
Their hidden area is immense, resulting in an equally large blind area. He spent the next few hours correctly going over the evidence, showing a similar knife that he owned that the boy also used to kill his father. However, Juror 8 continues his assault on the evidence by proving that it was impossible for one of the witnesses an old man to have been in the place he was when he allegedly saw the defendant fleeing the murder scene. He is a refugee from Europe who immigrated to the United States. This proves to be a challenge as members of a group want to be appreciated and feel as though their point of view is valued as part of the greater conversation. He could be Italian, Turkish, Indian, Jewish, Arabic, Mexican. Arriving at an unanimous not guilty verdict does not come easily.
It lost to in all three categories. One of the most critical elements of the play is how the personalities and experiences of these men influence their initial majority vote of guilty. This dramatic reveal, complete with stabbing the matching knife into the wall, shows that, to some extent, Eight has planned his defense of the kid. They are all sitting around a hard wooden table still in the center of the humid New York in a sunny day. These disparities add to the intensity of jury deliberations surrounding an eighteen-year old Hispanic male, accused of killing his father. Specifically, the fact that all of them are men and moreover white men represents main biases of that period. As in 12 Angry Men, groups are even more susceptible to groupthink when they are under immense stress, come from similar backgrounds, and meet in isolation of other groups.
Probably he recognizes some voices like his and decides that it is time to set up a coalition strategy. Personality influences things such as a personas behavior and who that persona interacts with and how the interactions occur. He arranged a similar knife and brought brainstorming with the evidences. In this style, Henry demonstrates low task focus and high relationship focus. As the film enters the jury room, the frame dissolves and eventually the inside of the jury room is revealed, a dysfunctional fan is immediately seen by viewers, this is.
But after one last epic blowout, even this guy has to let go of his hate and find the kid Not Guilty. With this said, the topic of human nature has been around for a very long time, it is a complex subject with no right or wrong answer. It revolves around the opinions and mindsets of twelve diverse characters that are tasked with pronouncing the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of patricide. The preliminary vote shows that many of the jurors at this point are not interested in deliberating at length. However, the attitude of the 8th jury contradicted with the attitude of other jurors. Adding to this, juror10 weights the value of the young boy less than the cost of a trial.
In one case, Juror 11 reminds them of their democratic duty: ''We have a responsibility. This time, however, Juror 11 finds his voice. The Guard reminds the jurors and the audience of the presence of a world and legal structure beyond the jury room. Individual biases are not expected to affect the decision making process. The underlying theme that seemed to be presented in the film was that the addition of multiple perspectives would provide different points of view that would eventually lead to the best solution.
Saturday Night Live parodied the film in 1984 in a sketch called First Draft Theater. These men have never talked before. Lumet uses closeups rarely, but effectively: One man in particular--Juror No. If he didn't, who did? Juror 8 votes not guilty and convinces the others to look at the evidence and testimonies more closely. He is a bully, and, of course, a coward 9.
Right off from the beginning at the original vote the Architect stated clearly his position in the matter. His defenses start to crumble as his unconscious emotions become visible to him. According to business dictionary, an attitude is a tendency to respond either positively or negatively towards a certain idea, object, person, or situation. Juror Seven is defensive about how fast he voted. Ethics in the workplace: Tools and tactics for organizational transformation.
Angrily, he accuses Juror Eight of being stubborn and says Juror Eight will accomplish nothing even if he hangs the jury. So, he finds the weakest of the group who are about to change side and ask for their opinions. He explains that there is too much at stake for him to go along with the verdict without at least talking about it first. In other words, I feel the need to incorporate the ethical consideration of diversity more than other members of the organization. . A Cooperative Community Among Divergent Worldviews In the viewing of 12 Angry Men, we get an excellent example of how cooperative communities can be formed among diverse and divergent worldviews.
Although other jurors got mad and started yelling, Henry stayed calmed throughout the situation and was a good listener. The opposing views of the jurors were utilized in order to understand differing perspectives. A 19-year-old man is on trial for the murder of his father. Juror Four pushes the point that the lawyers took the jurors to the el track and they were able to see what was happening on the other side. They begin their deliberation with a preliminary vote. In the United States, a verdict in most criminal trials by jury must be unanimous. In the wake of a week-long trial, twelve men, who remain nameless throughout the movie, convene in a small, sweltering room in a New York City court building.