Question

12 Angry men questions
1. Did any of the jurors voting guilty at the outset of the film have a valid argument
for the defendant's guilt? What was the argument and why was it valid? What
made the juror change his mind? Did you believe the change was valid?
2. Is justice served in 12 Angry Men? Did a guilty man walk free? Was Juror 8
correct?

Answer 1

3. The conditions under which the jurors deliberated were very inhospitable.
Consider how things might have been different had the men been seated in
comfortable armchairs in a large, well-cooled, soothingly decorated room; also
consider parallels between how circumstances provoked the jurors and how
circumstances might have provoked the defendant in the case they were debating.
4. Setting aside the issue of diversity - a jury in 2010 is unlikely to be all white and
all male - do you think this group of characters, with their assorted personalities
and prejudices, is representative of a typical jury today? Why or why not?

Answer 2

5. Some of the posters that were used to advertise the 1957 film contained the
following headline: "Life is in Their Hands-Death is on Their Minds! It Explodes
like 12 Sticks of Dynamite!" Do you think that this was an accurate advertisement
for the film? In what way? If not, in what way is it misleading or inaccurate?
6. What do you think is the directors’ view of the adversarial system of justice used
in the United States? Does he believe, like one juror member in the film that in a
democracy justice should be left to the hands of its citizens to decide? Or, does he
think the system is corrupt, ineffective, and unjust? Give examples to support
your reasoning.