No blood, guts, shooting, cursing, violence, or sex - just thought provoking and imaginative movie-making. This irritates some of the other jurors, who are impatient for a quick deliberation, especially Juror 7 who has tickets to the evening's game, and Juror 10 who demonstrates blatant prejudice against people from slums. Hey look, the man wants to talk! A non-unanimous verdict results in a hung jury which in turn forces a mistrial. Where is it getting us? It is every bit as good as the original jury room drama, but doesn't really add anything other than a color rendition. He is appalled at some of the behavior of the other jurors especially Jurors 3, 7, and 10. Listen, you pulled a pretty bright trick here, now suppose you tell me what it proves. And they proved in court that at night you can look through the windows of a passing el train with the lights out and you can see what's happening on the other side.
He is convinced that the defendant is guilty, though it may not be through the facts of the case. The way the other jurors processed the case was really like this updated and original version of 12 angry men with Henry Fonda. The man is guilty, there was a witness. It now becomes your duty to try to separate the facts from the fancy. At 10 he's at juvenile court, he threw a rock at a teacher, at 14 he was in reform school cause he stole a car, he's been arrested for muggin', he's been picked up twice for trying to slash another teen with a knife, he's real good with that switchblade you know.
Juror 8 reminds the rest that personal prejudice can cloud judgments as they retake their seats. Why won't you let the man talk? He is convinced that the defendant is guilty, though it may not be through the facts of the case. Alright, let's stop all this arguing, it's just wasting time. Humanity would not long for immortality if the cosmos had. So then, why did you vote not guilty for? I began writing fiction in 1997, and sold to Barbour publishing in 1998. Hey baseball, why don't you stop with the smart remarks all the time? You can handle this any way you'd like to. Juror 3 accuses Juror 5, who grew up in a slum, of changing his vote out of sympathy towards slum children.
For example: Whilst all of the jurors in the 1957 film were white anglo-saxon, in the remake there is an ethnic and racial mix of jurors. Great emotional stress or not! I don't know if I believe his story or not, maybe I don't. This man is a dangerous killer, you could see it. In a secret ballot, Juror 9 is the first to support Juror 8, and not necessarily believing the accused is not guilty, but feeling that Juror 8's points deserve further discussion. Not a doubt in the whole world.
It wasn't up to him—he had no choice about it. And no one saw him going into or out of the theater. The kid you just decided is not guilty was seen ramming that thing into his father. Look, it's only gonna take 15 seconds according to you! You haven't got a leg to stand on, don't you? The beatings 'n' all, right? To me it's a very weak motive! If her testimony don't prove it, nothing does. But perhaps he'd make himself believe that he heard those words and recognised the boy's face. The final vote is unanimous for acquittal. I mean it's the weirdest thing sometimes, the way they.
Two: The boy went directly to a neighbourhood junkshop, where he bought, what do you call it? I went from home to my office, stayed until Alright. As with many such remakes, this film consequently suffers from anachronisms and from bizarre reinterpretations of the original story. Let's just remember that this is gotta be twelve to nothing either way, that's the law. He got to his front door as fast as he could, swears it couldn't have been more than 15 seconds, - Now if the killer started to run immediately. What are you making here? And I wanna stop wasting time. Could I ask you a personal question? No, I voted guilty cause I think he's guilty! Highlighted by an all-star cast, there are many well-known actors who are members of the jury, including Tony Danza, George C. What the hell does that got to do with anything? I mean, if I'm on trial for my life I would want my lawyer to take all of the prosecution's witnesses and just tear them to shreds, or try.
His real name is Davis. Conceding that he has merely , Juror 8 suggests a secret ballot, from which he will abstain. Both of these acquit themselves well, of course, as is to be expected. Bear in mind that he could face the death penalty. You won't be satisfied till you see this again, so I'm gonna give you a little demonstration. I don't think he should joke about it.
And don't open your filthy mouth again. All those in favour of not guilty raise your hand. He would find it hard to recede into the background, when there's a chance for him to become a. Finally, you're behaving like a reasonable man! You don't go out and just kill somebody for no reason, unless you're just plain nuts. We came out at half time and it. I just think that he's guilty. Who's got the cough drops? And we go into extra innings here.
Come on, what are the guessing games for? Don't start with me now! Get that window, come on! Isn't that the dumbest thing you ever saw? You know, there's something we're forgetting here, that I was just thinking about and that's that old business that dragged down forever with the psychiatrists, where he got all involved with. It was not until its first airing on television that the movie finally found its audience. Listen, you wanna do this? The old man's apartment is exactly like it, directly underneath. I don't think the kind of boy has anything to do with it. Let me ask you a question, this is something I wanted to bring up in court. So what do we do now? An initial vote is taken and eleven of the jurors vote for conviction.