This Blog is a resource tool for the students taking the "FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES" elective at Westborough High School, Westborough, Massachusetts.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
PERIOD 3 - 12 ANGRY MEN
Over the past two days you have watched the film “12 Angry Men.” Please share with the class what you think was the most important message of the film.
31 comments:
Veda Awasthi
said...
I think the most important message of the play is to demonstrate that people should not be judged on where they come from and their past. Juror #10 was the main character who judged the boy on the fact of where he was brought up and his past crimes. Another important issue that was shown was that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Juror #8 thought it would only be fair for the boy to discuss the trial until they were sure whether he was guilty or not guilty. The boy's life was at stake and it was only right to talk about evidence and deliberate the innocence of the boy.
I think the most important message of the film was how despite opposition it is possible to stand up for what is right. Obviously Davis understood that a boys life was at stake and he could clearly see he was up against everyone in the room. However because of the first he could do the second. A life is too much responsibility to just give in to "guilty" because everyone else voted that.
The most important message of this film, in my opinion, is the fact that nobody should come to any conclusions without concrete evidence. Since the boy's life was at stake, majority should have taken the trial more seriously and not just jumped to the accusation that he was guilty.
I think that the most important message of the film is to stand up for what you think is right. Mr. Davis wasn't sure if the boy was guilty or not guilty but he went with his gut and then picked out the details to show the other jurors that he was not guilty. Even though he wasn't sure he was persistent in his argument and stood up against all of the other jurors.
I think the most important message of the film was the importance and difference an individual can make when they stand up for what they believe in. The film showed that at the begginig only 1 out of the 12 jurors thought the boy was not guilty, and that he should not be sentenced to the death penalty. But that one man was able to convince the 11 other men that there is not enough evidence to prove that this boy is 100% guilty.
Personally, I believe the most important message from this film is to see other peoples point of view and to accept and consider how they think and believe. Everybody thinks and feels differently about certain subjects and has the right to have their own opinion. I, also, think an important message is to not take things to heart when they don't need to be. Juror #10 had a personal connection to this case with the relationship he had with his own son. Of course a person's first instinct is to become defensive and stick to what they believe, but in this case it was more important for Juror #10 to put his own life aside and think about the right decision and outcome for the young boy. Everyone should be able to put others first sometimes and put themselves in their shoes so they can truly make the right decisions.
I think the most important message of this film is doing what you think is the right thing, no matter what other people think. Mr. Davis was the first one to suggest the idea of "not guilty" even though he knew many of the other jurors would be strongly against him. It also shows that if you work your hardest for what you believe in, then you can make a difference. Mr.Davis made a huge different in the young boy's life by sticking to his gut feeling and convincing others along the way. I thought this was an interesting movie and it reminded me of the Casey Anthony trial that took place this summer.
I think Olivia pointed out another important lesson in the film which was "to not take things to heart when they don't need to be". I hadn't really thought of this when viewing the movie, but after reading her comment, I can see how this would relate to the movie and especially to Juror #10.
To me, the most important message of '12 Angry Men' was not to judge based on prejudices. If all of the jurors had voted guilty in the first round of voting than a potentially innocent man would have gone to the chair simply based on the prejudices of where the boy grew up. If they had just simply looked at where he grew up and the environment in which he grew up than the boy would not have had any chance at the rest of his life. The film is showing the negative effects of juding based on what you think you know or the prejudices that you think may be true.. sometimes you need to look at the facts and not the assumptions.
I think the main message of the movie was that you can't jump to conclusions so quickly when dealing with something important like in this case someone's life and that you have to go through all evidence to get to the true ending
I think that the mst important message of the movie was in fac not to just go with what you hera. You have to analyse everything that you here. What that man did was not herioc, he was doing what everyone should do. If someone tells you something does that mean that you have to automatically believe them? I don't think so. In fact what you do is break it down and try to undestand every possible angle. Especially in a trial. What that man did was the right thing to do. But also it think it show that its alright to "suppose" if you dont know, especially if theres evidence to aupport other wise.
I support what ali had to say beacuse its not right to just jump to comclusions. I understand that evidence is "fact", but what if fact isn't in fact fact?
I think one of the most important message that was being prevailed throughout this film was "every one is innocent until proven guilty". Obviously Davis understood this statement was able to get others to realize it. Someone life is not something to decide in a five minute discussion. All evidence must be discussed and rediscussed multiple times. I am very happy with the outcome of this movie. It is hard to watch jury members make decision based upon their personal prejudice. I felt the jury members did a great job with working things through.
I think that this film shows that it is important to not immeadiatly judge someone based on what is assumed to be true. Some of the jurors were prejudiced against the defendent, and therefore wouldn't give him a chance and immediatly voted guilty without reallyexamining the facts presented in the case, and whether or not they could be considered valid. i think that it is important to give everyone a chance, especially in this situation where it is ina court of law. People deserve the same protection under the law, as well as in everyday life. I agree with Colleen that it is important not to judge based on prejudice ideas, because they can be incorrect.
I think the main message of the film was to evaluate what really happened and not to jump to a conclusion. Most other juries in that time period would have easily found him guilty because of two witness testimonies but this jury went deep and thought about if their judgement could be accurate. Hopefully they made the right decision to find him not guilty.
I think that the most important message of 12 Angry Men is the fact that one person can make a difference. Even though Mr.Davis was unsure if the boy was guilty or not, he took his time to replay the whole case so not only could the rest of the jury be sure, but so he could know for sure if the boy killed his father or not. Mr.Davis never tried to presude the other jurors either. He just knew that if he let that man go to the chair without a fair jury, he would be responsible for it.
I think that the most important message is not to judge someone without even knowing them. When the trial first began only one person votes not guilty. Everyone else said guilty based on what type of person the boy was. Once mr. Davis stood up for the boy and didn't just say guilty based on what the kid looks like from the outside everyone started agreeing with him realizing that he truly is not guilty.
I agree with tayLor that one person can make a huge difference. If it wasn't for mr David the boy would have been sent to the electric chair because everyone judged him based on what he looked like from the outside.
I think the most important message is to stand up for what you beleive in. Even though Mr.Davis was not positive that the boy was innocent, he still gave him a chance to be proven not guilty. Since he felt this way, he convinced all the other jurors that the boy was not guilty which shows how strongly Mr.Davis feels about it.
I agree with Colleen that another important message of the film was to not judge people based on their appearance. The twelve men were quick to make assumptions that Mr.Davis chose to overlook.
I think the main message in this film was to show that you can't jump to conclusions even if the answer seems so obvious. This film is eye opening because at first you go along with thinking that the boy is guilty but after breaking down the facts and proving what happened, it's quite surprising knowing that this kid is innocent. If it weren't for Mr. Davis this case would have gone in a whole other direction and that boy would be dead.
I felt the most important message of the film was," we are all innocent until proven guilty". yes, there are circumstances in which our own preconceived notions out way logical and analytical thought. 12 angry men however, was not this type. Unfortunately a majority of the jurors were susceptible to persuasion (for bad or worse). Fortunately some could also be presented logical and in-depth details of the case allowing them to see reason and not condemn an innocent young man's life.
I like what Veda had to say about how everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In the court room all the jurors had jumped straight to conclusions and just decided he was guilty. The decision was made because everyone agreed on guilty but Mr. Davis didn't agree with this. Everything needs to be proved, you can't just assume that its the right decision.
I agree wirh Kim's stand point, playing with a kid's life simpley because he's black or because a "mountain of evidence" was presented is wrong if there's no Indisputable evidence and the jury has a reasonable doubt(s).
The most important message I took from this film was that even if your out numbered never give upon your ideas. Also this film showed this message when juror number 8 never gave up on his ideas even if they were different he always stuck to what he beleaved in.
I think that the most important message of the movie was to not just assume thing based on pre-conceived notions. Even though Mr. Davis wasn't sure about the boys innocence he thought that it was important to look at the facts more carefully and too examine the situation from different perspectives
I believe the most important message of the film is that people should not judge others based on race and should not jump to conclusions without hard evidence. Too many times nowadays people look before they leap, and in this case it could have resulted in the execution of an innocent boy.
I believe that the most important message in this film is that it is important to stick to your morals when dealing with opposition. Davis started off being one man versus eleven others and he was still able to hold on to his beliefs. The other jurors were especially harsh towards Mr. Davis especially, yet one man was able to change the outcome of the entire trial. Don't vote guilty just because others tell you to.
Colleen makes a very good message when saying that if Mr. Davis hadn't stood up and stayed with his opinion, an innocent boy may have been put to death. I especially had a problem with the juror that wanted to get out of jury duty because he had baseball tickets. A man's life is a stake, and the only thing he could think of was what he was doing after the trial? That's especially bad in my opinion
The most important message of this film was to strive for legitimate truth, and don't base decisions off of past judgement. The one lone juror had a belief in truth and even when no one agreed with him, stood for what he thought was right. He swayed other's opinions with persistence and intelligence hopefully making the correct decision.
31 comments:
I think the most important message of the play is to demonstrate that people should not be judged on where they come from and their past. Juror #10 was the main character who judged the boy on the fact of where he was brought up and his past crimes. Another important issue that was shown was that everyone is innocent until proven guilty. Juror #8 thought it would only be fair for the boy to discuss the trial until they were sure whether he was guilty or not guilty. The boy's life was at stake and it was only right to talk about evidence and deliberate the innocence of the boy.
I think the most important message of the film was how despite opposition it is possible to stand up for what is right. Obviously Davis understood that a boys life was at stake and he could clearly see he was up against everyone in the room. However because of the first he could do the second. A life is too much responsibility to just give in to "guilty" because everyone else voted that.
The most important message of this film, in my opinion, is the fact that nobody should come to any conclusions without concrete evidence. Since the boy's life was at stake, majority should have taken the trial more seriously and not just jumped to the accusation that he was guilty.
I was absent this day.
I think that the most important message of the film is to stand up for what you think is right. Mr. Davis wasn't sure if the boy was guilty or not guilty but he went with his gut and then picked out the details to show the other jurors that he was not guilty. Even though he wasn't sure he was persistent in his argument and stood up against all of the other jurors.
I think the most important message of the film was the importance and difference an individual can make when they stand up for what they believe in. The film showed that at the begginig only 1 out of the 12 jurors thought the boy was not guilty, and that he should not be sentenced to the death penalty. But that one man was able to convince the 11 other men that there is not enough evidence to prove that this boy is 100% guilty.
Personally, I believe the most important message from this film is to see other peoples point of view and to accept and consider how they think and believe. Everybody thinks and feels differently about certain subjects and has the right to have their own opinion. I, also, think an important message is to not take things to heart when they don't need to be. Juror #10 had a personal connection to this case with the relationship he had with his own son. Of course a person's first instinct is to become defensive and stick to what they believe, but in this case it was more important for Juror #10 to put his own life aside and think about the right decision and outcome for the young boy. Everyone should be able to put others first sometimes and put themselves in their shoes so they can truly make the right decisions.
I think the most important message of this film is doing what you think is the right thing, no matter what other people think. Mr. Davis was the first one to suggest the idea of "not guilty" even though he knew many of the other jurors would be strongly against him. It also shows that if you work your hardest for what you believe in, then you can make a difference. Mr.Davis made a huge different in the young boy's life by sticking to his gut feeling and convincing others along the way. I thought this was an interesting movie and it reminded me of the Casey Anthony trial that took place this summer.
I think Olivia pointed out another important lesson in the film which was "to not take things to heart when they don't need to be". I hadn't really thought of this when viewing the movie, but after reading her comment, I can see how this would relate to the movie and especially to Juror #10.
To me, the most important message of '12 Angry Men' was not to judge based on prejudices. If all of the jurors had voted guilty in the first round of voting than a potentially innocent man would have gone to the chair simply based on the prejudices of where the boy grew up. If they had just simply looked at where he grew up and the environment in which he grew up than the boy would not have had any chance at the rest of his life.
The film is showing the negative effects of juding based on what you think you know or the prejudices that you think may be true.. sometimes you need to look at the facts and not the assumptions.
I think the main message of the movie was that you can't jump to conclusions so quickly when dealing with something important like in this case someone's life and that you have to go through all evidence to get to the true ending
I think that the mst important message of the movie was in fac not to just go with what you hera. You have to analyse everything that you here. What that man did was not herioc, he was doing what everyone should do. If someone tells you something does that mean that you have to automatically believe them? I don't think so. In fact what you do is break it down and try to undestand every possible angle. Especially in a trial. What that man did was the right thing to do. But also it think it show that its alright to "suppose" if you dont know, especially if theres evidence to aupport other wise.
I support what ali had to say beacuse its not right to just jump to comclusions. I understand that evidence is "fact", but what if fact isn't in fact fact?
I think one of the most important message that was being prevailed throughout this film was "every one is innocent until proven guilty". Obviously Davis understood this statement was able to get others to realize it. Someone life is not something to decide in a five minute discussion. All evidence must be discussed and rediscussed multiple times. I am very happy with the outcome of this movie. It is hard to watch jury members make decision based upon their personal prejudice. I felt the jury members did a great job with working things through.
I think that this film shows that it is important to not immeadiatly judge someone based on what is assumed to be true. Some of the jurors were prejudiced against the defendent, and therefore wouldn't give him a chance and immediatly voted guilty without reallyexamining the facts presented in the case, and whether or not they could be considered valid. i think that it is important to give everyone a chance, especially in this situation where it is ina court of law. People deserve the same protection under the law, as well as in everyday life. I agree with Colleen that it is important not to judge based on prejudice ideas, because they can be incorrect.
I think the main message of the film was to evaluate what really happened and not to jump to a conclusion. Most other juries in that time period would have easily found him guilty because of two witness testimonies but this jury went deep and thought about if their judgement could be accurate. Hopefully they made the right decision to find him not guilty.
I agree with Kim on how nobody should ever jump to the conclusion that someone is guilty.
I think that the most important message of 12 Angry Men is the fact that one person can make a difference. Even though Mr.Davis was unsure if the boy was guilty or not, he took his time to replay the whole case so not only could the rest of the jury be sure, but so he could know for sure if the boy killed his father or not. Mr.Davis never tried to presude the other jurors either. He just knew that if he let that man go to the chair without a fair jury, he would be responsible for it.
I think that the most important message is not to judge someone without even knowing them. When the trial first began only one person votes not guilty. Everyone else said guilty based on what type of person the boy was. Once mr. Davis stood up for the boy and didn't just say guilty based on what the kid looks like from the outside everyone started agreeing with him realizing that he truly is not guilty.
I agree with tayLor that one person can make a huge difference. If it wasn't for mr David the boy would have been sent to the electric chair because everyone judged him based on what he looked like from the outside.
I think the most important message is to stand up for what you beleive in. Even though Mr.Davis was not positive that the boy was innocent, he still gave him a chance to be proven not guilty. Since he felt this way, he convinced all the other jurors that the boy was not guilty which shows how strongly Mr.Davis feels about it.
I agree with Colleen that another important message of the film was to not judge people based on their appearance. The twelve men were quick to make assumptions that Mr.Davis chose to overlook.
I think the main message in this film was to show that you can't jump to conclusions even if the answer seems so obvious. This film is eye opening because at first you go along with thinking that the boy is guilty but after breaking down the facts and proving what happened, it's quite surprising knowing that this kid is innocent. If it weren't for Mr. Davis this case would have gone in a whole other direction and that boy would be dead.
I felt the most important message of the film was," we are all innocent until proven guilty". yes, there are circumstances in which our own preconceived notions out way logical and analytical thought. 12 angry men however, was not this type. Unfortunately a majority of the jurors were susceptible to persuasion (for bad or worse). Fortunately some could also be presented logical and in-depth details of the case allowing them to see reason and not condemn an innocent young man's life.
I like what Veda had to say about how everyone is innocent until proven guilty. In the court room all the jurors had jumped straight to conclusions and just decided he was guilty. The decision was made because everyone agreed on guilty but Mr. Davis didn't agree with this. Everything needs to be proved, you can't just assume that its the right decision.
I agree wirh Kim's stand point, playing with a kid's life simpley because he's black or because a "mountain of evidence" was presented is wrong if there's no Indisputable evidence and the jury has a reasonable doubt(s).
The most important message I took from this film was that even if your out numbered never give upon your ideas. Also this film showed this message when juror number 8 never gave up on his ideas even if they were different he always stuck to what he beleaved in.
I think that the most important message of the movie was to not just assume thing based on pre-conceived notions. Even though Mr. Davis wasn't sure about the boys innocence he thought that it was important to look at the facts more carefully and too examine the situation from different perspectives
I believe the most important message of the film is that people should not judge others based on race and should not jump to conclusions without hard evidence. Too many times nowadays people look before they leap, and in this case it could have resulted in the execution of an innocent boy.
I believe that the most important message in this film is that it is important to stick to your morals when dealing with opposition. Davis started off being one man versus eleven others and he was still able to hold on to his beliefs. The other jurors were especially harsh towards Mr. Davis especially, yet one man was able to change the outcome of the entire trial. Don't vote guilty just because others tell you to.
Colleen makes a very good message when saying that if Mr. Davis hadn't stood up and stayed with his opinion, an innocent boy may have been put to death. I especially had a problem with the juror that wanted to get out of jury duty because he had baseball tickets. A man's life is a stake, and the only thing he could think of was what he was doing after the trial? That's especially bad in my opinion
The most important message of this film was to strive for legitimate truth, and don't base decisions off of past judgement. The one lone juror had a belief in truth and even when no one agreed with him, stood for what he thought was right. He swayed other's opinions with persistence and intelligence hopefully making the correct decision.
i was once again absent on this day
Post a Comment