This Blog is a resource tool for the students taking the "FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES" elective at Westborough High School, Westborough, Massachusetts.
Thursday, October 3, 2013
PERIOD 4: 12 ANGRY MEN
Over the past two days you have watched the film “12 Angry Men.” Please share with the class what you think is the most important message of the film.
27 comments:
GenaRyder
said...
I think that the most important message of the film is that you can't judge someone by their background or where they are from. People shouldn't decide that a person is a certain way based on their background. In the film the men all started off saying the boy was guilty because he was from the slums and kids that grew up there are "bound to end up in jail". The 11 men that originally voted him guilty where being bias and even racist against the boy. What I liked about the film was that you never found out if the boy actually did kill his father or not, the director left that to the audience to decide for themselves if he was guilty or not so it kind of felt like we were part of the jury too.
In the film, 12 Angry Men, jurors had to decide whether or not an 18 year old Hispanic boy was innocent or guilty of killing his father. Some of the men didn't care and voted with the crowd and some of the men voted guilty due to their judgments. One man suspended his personal beliefs and voted not guilty. In the end, that man ended up saving the boy's life by showing the other jurors facts were more reliable than judgments. A few of the jurors believed he was guilty because they had judged him by his background and applied a stereotype to him. I think the film really showed that its important to avoid judging others. Also the character who stood up for what he believed showed that you should not follow the crowd. You can change an outcome if you stand up for what is right.
I think that that the most important message from the movie is that you can't let your feelings get in the way of what you have to do. The 11 men who all said guilty let their prejudices distract them from what their goal as a jury was: decide whether there was a reasonable doubt that the defendant was innocent. Mr. Davis, however, made sure to remember that he was there for the purpose of finding a reason to let the defendant go free. He took a look at the evidence and found holes in all of it. Some people may say that Juror #4 was the most logical, and that's true, but that is not the point of a jury. The point of a jury is to have 12 people take a look at evidence and try to find a way to prove that the defendant is innocent. That's what Mr. Davis did, which is why he was the most objective, and why people should not let their emotions cloud their judgement.
The most important message of the film is not to make hasty decisions when the consequences of the decisions are astronomical. A boy’s life was about to be taken away because 11 out of 12 of the jurors believed he was guilty. They acted with prejudice towards a lower-class teen who had a non-white background.They did not reason out their decisions past the simple eyewitness testimony. Juror 8 was the only rational one and he reasoned out many logical ideas as to why there was doubt that the boy was guilty. He saved the boy’s life, and although the boy may have committed the crime, Juror 8 acted under the letter of the law and was morally righteous. The film teaches not to make rash decisions based on prejudice or bias.
Although I missed the last day of this film, I still saw a profound message in the parts that I watched. Prejudice can be blinding. At the beginning of the film the vast majority of the jurors immediately assumed the boy was guilty because of prejudice. They saw him as a young, Hispanic, and troubled boy who already had many strikes against him. They didn't even want to talk through the trial, they just wanted to say he was guilty and get on with their lives. However there was one juror who was able to see beyond all the stereotypes. He was not blinded by prejudice and therefore could see that the boy was in fact innocent.
I believe that the mot important message of the film was that you can't let prejudice make you over look the facts. The boy may have been guilty but unless it was 100% certain he should not have been sentenced to death. Another important message of the film was to stand up for what is right even if you're the only one. Juror number seven went with guilty or not guilty based on what other people were voting so he could leave as soon as possible. Big decisions should take time and understanding.
I think that the most important message of this film is to always stand up for what you believe in. In the beginning, all but one juror believed that the boy was guilty of murdering his father. The majority of the 11 jurors based their decision off of the fact that the boy was another race, and some of them just followed others and didn't care. Throughout the entire film, the juror the said not guilty the first time stood his ground. Ultimately, his determination to analyze all of the facts saved the boy from the electric chair.
I believe the most important message of the film was to show that people can't judge other people by what they look, they should judge others by the facts or how the person acts. Because when you judge by looks or prejudice, people are often wrong. They are treating people unfairly and are assuming things about others that aren't true. These men were about to kill a kid based on their prejudice and without the one man who stuck up for him he would have died. It teaches people to stick up for what they believe in because anyone's opinion in the world can be change. You have to fight for what you believe in and don't let others try to tell you you're wrong because in the end juror 8 was able to allow the other jurors to recognize their own prejudice and discover that they were wrong. It shows anybody can recognize the fact that there not basing decisions on facts but on their own opinions, and they have to know that is wrong.
I was shocked by the outcome of the movie “12 angry men ” because at the beginning of the movie, everyone except junior 8 voted guilty. Juror 8 voted “not guilty” at the first vote and it was really impressive to see how he persuaded the rest of jurors to vote “not guilty”. He was the only one who devoted to justice rather than prejudice. Although he was not sure of the boy’s innocence, he did not want to decide a 19-year-old boy’s life within 5 minutes without discussing. The film was a good example of group and individual behavior. It clearly illustrated the pressure of conformity and groupthink. The most important message of the film was that people could not judge others by their race, appearance and ethnicity. Also, we should not follow others’ opinions; instead, we need to stand up for our beliefs even though these beliefs are different from that of others.
I think that the most important message from the movie Twelve Angry Men was don't let your prejudice cloud your judgement. At the beginning of the movie Eleven of the jurors voted guilty based on the fact that the boy was a latino slum kid who may have murdered his father. By voting guilty they were trying to send the boy to his death, and they hadnt even bothered to hear out the evidence. Throughout the film as more evidence was brought forward it became more and more apparent that the boy may not have committed the murder. Had Mr. Davis allowed prejudice to cloud his judgement, an innocent boy might have been executed.
I think that the most important message of the movie 12 Angry Men is that society is not always and it is important to stand up for what you bealive in and not fall victim to mob mentality. In the beginning Mr. Davis was the only one in the room that stood up for what he believed in,then another guy and then another,until eventually all 12 men saved this boys life. Even if the kid was guilty or innocent Mr. Davis still stood up for what he truly thought was right and in turn gave reason to let a boy live.
This is the second time I have seen the file "12 Angry Men." My first time watching it, I was enthralled by the story and loved the comeback "win" for the good side when juror number 8 eventually got everyone to vote "not guilty". My second time watching it, I could see the formula of the movie come through. It seemed as though every character was calculated by the director and has some message to convey about life. Sometimes it was blunt, other times it was more subtle. For example, the racism of juror 10. He was blatantly shunned to convey the idea that that style of thought was losing ground in the American public of the time, and that speaking like that was not acceptable. Even though the messages could be blatant, it does not detract from their meaning. This is a story of going against the crowd: fighting for what you believe in, even if it is not popular. Everyone except for juror number 8 went into the room with prejudice, but juror number 8 stood up against this prejudice and prevailed. We can all strive to be like juror number 8.
What really stood out to me at the start of the movie was that Mr. Davis was able to convince twelve other men to change their mind. Although, he wasn't too sure that the boy was innocent he knew he wasn't guilty and wanted to do everything to prove his point. This showed that one person can make a large difference. If it wasn't for Mr. Davis, the boy could have died. This shows how important it is to speak your mind even when all odds are against you.
I think the most important part of this film was that you shouldn't base a decision solely on what a person looks like. All of the jurors assumed he was guilty only because of his race, which isn't justice at all. Mr. Davis was the only one who felt the need to look past his outward appearance and actually figure the trial out. A boy's life was being determined and all of them except one raised there hands; one of them just wanted to get to the baseball game. That's how little this boy's life mattered. The film showed how imperative it is to not just base your decision on what someone looks like.
In 12 Angry Men, a young Hispanic boy is out on trial for the murder of his father. The 12 mean deciding his fate all originally vote that he is guilty, all except for one. The one man who stands up for the boy appears to be the only man who is able to look past his prejudices, because when the others are asked why they think the boy is guilty they are not able to give real answers. By the end, the boy is declared innocent because of the influence of that one man. I think the most important message of this film is that you can not judge someone by their appearance, background, or any assumptions you may have on them. Many of the men had unfairly placed judgement on the boy solely because of his race and where he came from, which many were eventually able to see was wrong. In addition, if you see something that you think is unfair, it is important to stand up for your beliefs, because it can greatly benefit another person.
I was absent for the majority of the film but from the approximate half hour that I watched it seemed like the message was to view everyone on an equal playing field. In order to achieve justice, one must disregard prejudice and treat all individuals equally. The film displayed this message by showing the progression of the characters. As each character realized this golden rule, each began to change their verdict.
The film "12 Angry Men" showed how much prejudice can drive a person's thought process. All of the juror's, except for number 8, were willing to put an Hispanic boy to death because of his background. Juror number 8 was the only one who thought of the law when making his decision. Juror number 8 then proceeded to change everyone's minds by calmly expressing his opinion. Number 3 had opposing opinions and tried to keep everyone on his side but failed because of his rude tactics. This shows how how important it is to keep a good attitude when trying to get everyone to see your point of view or else they will not listen to your points.
When we first started watching the movie and i saw that it was a older black and white film i wasn't sure if i was going to like it. When the 12 men on the jury first went into the room and they took a vote to decide if the suspect was guilty or not, i predicted they were all going to say guilty. I felt this because it was 12 white men deciding if a minority should keep his life or not and it seemed like a reasonable answer. But when juror number 8 said not guilty i was very surprised. Listening to the points he made and convincing the 11 other men to think it though was a very brave thing to do. I felt he did the right thing for standing up in what he believed in.
I think the main message is that people are very quick to make desicions based on prejudice. In the beginning of the story ever man except Davis based there decision on there prejudice. But because one man was brave enough to stray from the group an innocent man's life was saved.
defienitly the most important message of the movie was to stand up to the group. All of the 11 men voted guilty but one man stood up for the acused. Even tho it look likes everyone is against you, you can still make a change. It only takes one person. Another message is not to just make a choice based on your feeling but on the facts and evidence.
Don't let Prejudice get in the way of fact. The only person that does this throughout the entire movie is Mr. Davis. Juror #3 has the most prejudice and everyone stares him down at the end because they know it's just his prejudice towards kids and Hispanics that makes him vote guilty until the end.
In "12 Angry Men" one juror votes not guilty going against the common opinion of guilty. I saw two main themese and lessons to take from the film. One of the lessons is that even though eleven of the twelve jurors voted guilty, Mr Davis went against his peers and was the lone one to vote not guilty. While he was not sure about the boys inoocence he felt he deserved a chance. Another lesson is that prejudice should not decide a case. All of the jurors with the exception of Mr. Davis saw a hispanic boy with a history of violence and saw there was no way he could be innocent. MR. Davis showed that he could overcome prejudice and the common opinion.
I think the important message of this film is that you shouldn't jump to conclusions about someone just because they may fit a stereotype that you believe in. You should look at all evidence before deciding if someone is guilty or not. You have to do what is right, even if it isn't always what you can easily do.
The movie 12 angry men was a very good movie, but delivered an even better message. That being, that many people when deciding who someone is, most people make pre-determined decisions based on someones race. This happens because people are not willing to look deep enough to find out the truth about someone, and instead ignore the facts because of someones race. It is terrible world we live in today, and its sad to see how naive people are to decide if someone is inocent or guilty based on their gender, race, or religion.
they had to decide whether or not an 18 year old Hispanic boy was innocent or guilty of killing his father. the main roll that most of theas charchters play is that they are predjudice and not willing to let a hispanic boy have a fair tryal. the main message is to not pre juge someone and also to go deeper into the evidence before you make a conculsion
27 comments:
I think that the most important message of the film is that you can't judge someone by their background or where they are from. People shouldn't decide that a person is a certain way based on their background. In the film the men all started off saying the boy was guilty because he was from the slums and kids that grew up there are "bound to end up in jail". The 11 men that originally voted him guilty where being bias and even racist against the boy. What I liked about the film was that you never found out if the boy actually did kill his father or not, the director left that to the audience to decide for themselves if he was guilty or not so it kind of felt like we were part of the jury too.
In the film, 12 Angry Men, jurors had to decide whether or not an 18 year old Hispanic boy was innocent or guilty of killing his father. Some of the men didn't care and voted with the crowd and some of the men voted guilty due to their judgments. One man suspended his personal beliefs and voted not guilty. In the end, that man ended up saving the boy's life by showing the other jurors facts were more reliable than judgments. A few of the jurors believed he was guilty because they had judged him by his background and applied a stereotype to him. I think the film really showed that its important to avoid judging others. Also the character who stood up for what he believed showed that you should not follow the crowd. You can change an outcome if you stand up for what is right.
I think that that the most important message from the movie is that you can't let your feelings get in the way of what you have to do. The 11 men who all said guilty let their prejudices distract them from what their goal as a jury was: decide whether there was a reasonable doubt that the defendant was innocent. Mr. Davis, however, made sure to remember that he was there for the purpose of finding a reason to let the defendant go free. He took a look at the evidence and found holes in all of it. Some people may say that Juror #4 was the most logical, and that's true, but that is not the point of a jury. The point of a jury is to have 12 people take a look at evidence and try to find a way to prove that the defendant is innocent. That's what Mr. Davis did, which is why he was the most objective, and why people should not let their emotions cloud their judgement.
The most important message of the film is not to make hasty decisions when the consequences of the decisions are astronomical. A boy’s life was about to be taken away because 11 out of 12 of the jurors believed he was guilty. They acted with prejudice towards a lower-class teen who had a non-white background.They did not reason out their decisions past the simple eyewitness testimony. Juror 8 was the only rational one and he reasoned out many logical ideas as to why there was doubt that the boy was guilty. He saved the boy’s life, and although the boy may have committed the crime, Juror 8 acted under the letter of the law and was morally righteous. The film teaches not to make rash decisions based on prejudice or bias.
Although I missed the last day of this film, I still saw a profound message in the parts that I watched. Prejudice can be blinding. At the beginning of the film the vast majority of the jurors immediately assumed the boy was guilty because of prejudice. They saw him as a young, Hispanic, and troubled boy who already had many strikes against him. They didn't even want to talk through the trial, they just wanted to say he was guilty and get on with their lives. However there was one juror who was able to see beyond all the stereotypes. He was not blinded by prejudice and therefore could see that the boy was in fact innocent.
I believe that the mot important message of the film was that you can't let prejudice make you over look the facts. The boy may have been guilty but unless it was 100% certain he should not have been sentenced to death. Another important message of the film was to stand up for what is right even if you're the only one. Juror number seven went with guilty or not guilty based on what other people were voting so he could leave as soon as possible. Big decisions should take time and understanding.
I was absent for two out of the three days this film was shown.
I think that the most important message of this film is to always stand up for what you believe in. In the beginning, all but one juror believed that the boy was guilty of murdering his father. The majority of the 11 jurors based their decision off of the fact that the boy was another race, and some of them just followed others and didn't care. Throughout the entire film, the juror the said not guilty the first time stood his ground. Ultimately, his determination to analyze all of the facts saved the boy from the electric chair.
I believe the most important message of the film was to show that people can't judge other people by what they look, they should judge others by the facts or how the person acts. Because when you judge by looks or prejudice, people are often wrong. They are treating people unfairly and are assuming things about others that aren't true. These men were about to kill a kid based on their prejudice and without the one man who stuck up for him he would have died. It teaches people to stick up for what they believe in because anyone's opinion in the world can be change. You have to fight for what you believe in and don't let others try to tell you you're wrong because in the end juror 8 was able to allow the other jurors to recognize their own prejudice and discover that they were wrong. It shows anybody can recognize the fact that there not basing decisions on facts but on their own opinions, and they have to know that is wrong.
I was shocked by the outcome of the movie “12 angry men ” because at the beginning of the movie, everyone except junior 8 voted guilty. Juror 8 voted “not guilty” at the first vote and it was really impressive to see how he persuaded the rest of jurors to vote “not guilty”. He was the only one who devoted to justice rather than prejudice. Although he was not sure of the boy’s innocence, he did not want to decide a 19-year-old boy’s life within 5 minutes without discussing. The film was a good example of group and individual behavior. It clearly illustrated the pressure of conformity and groupthink. The most important message of the film was that people could not judge others by their race, appearance and ethnicity. Also, we should not follow others’ opinions; instead, we need to stand up for our beliefs even though these beliefs are different from that of others.
I think that the most important message from the movie Twelve Angry Men was don't let your prejudice cloud your judgement. At the beginning of the movie Eleven of the jurors voted guilty based on the fact that the boy was a latino slum kid who may have murdered his father. By voting guilty they were trying to send the boy to his death, and they hadnt even bothered to hear out the evidence. Throughout the film as more evidence was brought forward it became more and more apparent that the boy may not have committed the murder. Had Mr. Davis allowed prejudice to cloud his judgement, an innocent boy might have been executed.
I think that the most important message of the movie 12 Angry Men is that society is not always and it is important to stand up for what you bealive in and not fall victim to mob mentality. In the beginning Mr. Davis was the only one in the room that stood up for what he believed in,then another guy and then another,until eventually all 12 men saved this boys life. Even if the kid was guilty or innocent Mr. Davis still stood up for what he truly thought was right and in turn gave reason to let a boy live.
This is the second time I have seen the file "12 Angry Men." My first time watching it, I was enthralled by the story and loved the comeback "win" for the good side when juror number 8 eventually got everyone to vote "not guilty". My second time watching it, I could see the formula of the movie come through. It seemed as though every character was calculated by the director and has some message to convey about life. Sometimes it was blunt, other times it was more subtle. For example, the racism of juror 10. He was blatantly shunned to convey the idea that that style of thought was losing ground in the American public of the time, and that speaking like that was not acceptable. Even though the messages could be blatant, it does not detract from their meaning. This is a story of going against the crowd: fighting for what you believe in, even if it is not popular. Everyone except for juror number 8 went into the room with prejudice, but juror number 8 stood up against this prejudice and prevailed. We can all strive to be like juror number 8.
What really stood out to me at the start of the movie was that Mr. Davis was able to convince twelve other men to change their mind. Although, he wasn't too sure that the boy was innocent he knew he wasn't guilty and wanted to do everything to prove his point. This showed that one person can make a large difference. If it wasn't for Mr. Davis, the boy could have died. This shows how important it is to speak your mind even when all odds are against you.
I think the most important part of this film was that you shouldn't base a decision solely on what a person looks like. All of the jurors assumed he was guilty only because of his race, which isn't justice at all. Mr. Davis was the only one who felt the need to look past his outward appearance and actually figure the trial out. A boy's life was being determined and all of them except one raised there hands; one of them just wanted to get to the baseball game. That's how little this boy's life mattered. The film showed how imperative it is to not just base your decision on what someone looks like.
In 12 Angry Men, a young Hispanic boy is out on trial for the murder of his father. The 12 mean deciding his fate all originally vote that he is guilty, all except for one. The one man who stands up for the boy appears to be the only man who is able to look past his prejudices, because when the others are asked why they think the boy is guilty they are not able to give real answers. By the end, the boy is declared innocent because of the influence of that one man. I think the most important message of this film is that you can not judge someone by their appearance, background, or any assumptions you may have on them. Many of the men had unfairly placed judgement on the boy solely because of his race and where he came from, which many were eventually able to see was wrong. In addition, if you see something that you think is unfair, it is important to stand up for your beliefs, because it can greatly benefit another person.
I was absent for the majority of the film but from the approximate half hour that I watched it seemed like the message was to view everyone on an equal playing field. In order to achieve justice, one must disregard prejudice and treat all individuals equally. The film displayed this message by showing the progression of the characters. As each character realized this golden rule, each began to change their verdict.
The film "12 Angry Men" showed how much prejudice can drive a person's thought process. All of the juror's, except for number 8, were willing to put an Hispanic boy to death because of his background. Juror number 8 was the only one who thought of the law when making his decision. Juror number 8 then proceeded to change everyone's minds by calmly expressing his opinion. Number 3 had opposing opinions and tried to keep everyone on his side but failed because of his rude tactics. This shows how how important it is to keep a good attitude when trying to get everyone to see your point of view or else they will not listen to your points.
When we first started watching the movie and i saw that it was a older black and white film i wasn't sure if i was going to like it. When the 12 men on the jury first went into the room and they took a vote to decide if the suspect was guilty or not, i predicted they were all going to say guilty. I felt this because it was 12 white men deciding if a minority should keep his life or not and it seemed like a reasonable answer. But when juror number 8 said not guilty i was very surprised. Listening to the points he made and convincing the 11 other men to think it though was a very brave thing to do. I felt he did the right thing for standing up in what he believed in.
I think the main message is that people are very quick to make desicions based on prejudice. In the beginning of the story ever man except Davis based there decision on there prejudice. But because one man was brave enough to stray from the group an innocent man's life was saved.
I was absent the day of the film
defienitly the most important message of the movie was to stand up to the group. All of the 11 men voted guilty but one man stood up for the acused. Even tho it look likes everyone is against you, you can still make a change. It only takes one person. Another message is not to just make a choice based on your feeling but on the facts and evidence.
Don't let Prejudice get in the way of fact. The only person that does this throughout the entire movie is Mr. Davis. Juror #3 has the most prejudice and everyone stares him down at the end because they know it's just his prejudice towards kids and Hispanics that makes him vote guilty until the end.
In "12 Angry Men" one juror votes not guilty going against the common opinion of guilty. I saw two main themese and lessons to take from the film. One of the lessons is that even though eleven of the twelve jurors voted guilty, Mr Davis went against his peers and was the lone one to vote not guilty. While he was not sure about the boys inoocence he felt he deserved a chance. Another lesson is that prejudice should not decide a case. All of the jurors with the exception of Mr. Davis saw a hispanic boy with a history of violence and saw there was no way he could be innocent. MR. Davis showed that he could overcome prejudice and the common opinion.
I think the important message of this film is that you shouldn't jump to conclusions about someone just because they may fit a stereotype that you believe in. You should look at all evidence before deciding if someone is guilty or not. You have to do what is right, even if it isn't always what you can easily do.
The movie 12 angry men was a very good movie, but delivered an even better message. That being, that many people when deciding who someone is, most people make pre-determined decisions based on someones race. This happens because people are not willing to look deep enough to find out the truth about someone, and instead ignore the facts because of someones race. It is terrible world we live in today, and its sad to see how naive people are to decide if someone is inocent or guilty based on their gender, race, or religion.
they had to decide whether or not an 18 year old Hispanic boy was innocent or guilty of killing his father. the main roll that most of theas charchters play is that they are predjudice and not willing to let a hispanic boy have a fair tryal. the main message is to not pre juge someone and also to go deeper into the evidence before you make a conculsion
Post a Comment