This Blog is a resource tool for the students taking the "FACING HISTORY AND OURSELVES" elective at Westborough High School, Westborough, Massachusetts.
Tuesday, October 2, 2012
PERIOD 6 - 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.
52 comments:
Jake Yanoff
said...
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is to not judge a book by its cover. Although it's cliche, I believe its meaning is still relevant in today's world. Society must learn to approach situations with an open mind, setting aside prejudices and biased opinions, as well as pride. Mr. Davis represents the ideal individual who acts in a logical and sound manner, uncorrupted by personal influences. On the other hand, Juror #3 bases his decision purely off pride and prejudice, due to the fact that his son had run away from home. He refused to accept the doubts raised about the prosecution. Juror #3 represents society's current outlook in that he only accepted the truth once he recognized and cast aside his personal prejudice and opinions.
The most important message of "12 Angry Men" is to not jump to conclusions of something without fully investigating all the details and possibilities. Mr. Davis was the only man in the jury to follow this belief and after hours of discussion and fighting, he actually convinced the rest of the men to believe the defendent was innocent. This shows that it takes a lot of time and effort if you want to get your point across to someone but in the end it is worth it. In this case, it was worth fully investigating every detail because Mr. Davis potentially helped save this young boy's life.
I liked that Jake pointed out that Juror #3 could only accept the truth once he moved past his personal prejudice and that it is crucial to walk into situations with an open mind and push aside anything that happened in the past that might affect your current outlook. For Juror #3 it was the fact that his son ran away from home that he had a bias opinion on children like the defendent in this case.
I agree with Kensie that Mr. Davis was the only juror to look at the case with an open mind at first. The others began to vote not guilty only after Davis brought their prejudices to light.
I believe the most important message in this film is that you should not base your opinions on what people have told you. The information that others might give might not be as reasonable as you think. If you want to make a decision on something you should look further into details and not make a decision right away.Mr. Davis was a good example of this because he di not know all the facts, so he wanted to look further into this case so he knows he is making the right decision. Most of the other Jurors made their perception on what little details they got from posible witnesses and decided the tennager was guilty.
I agree with what Kensie said about not jumping to conclusions because if you jump to conclusions you could make a terrible mistake and may ruin someones life if you make a decision that will depend on someone elses life.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" is that is decide things based on the truth and not assumptions. This jury had the decision of deciding whether a man would live or die, and they were so quick to put him to death because of the situation, but once juror #8 started pointing these flaws in the prosecutors story out, everyone else started to follow. Juror #3 made a personal connection from the case to himself which clouded his judgement on whether or not the kid was actually guilty, but once he was able to let go of his problem the mist covering his prejudice against young people vanished and he was able to say he was not guilty.
I agree with Jake Yanoff saying you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover and that this kid was immediately subjected to be guilty as soon as they heard he was from the slums. It wasn't until they dived down deeper into the story and into who the kid really was that they made honest judgements about whether or not he was guilty.
“12 Angry Men” consisted of many different messages. The most important one, in my opinion, was that in order to adequately understand something you have to consider all perspectives and possibilities. There is usually more to know about something than is apparent on the surface and in order to really understand it you have to look deeper. All of the jurors, except for one, were quick to pronounce the defendant guilty based on the evidence that they had been presented with in court. None of them except for Juror #8 looked beyond the evidence that they were given. Juror #8 was presented with the same evidence as all of the other jurors, but he was the only one who considered other possibilities. Because of this, he had a much better understanding of the case in general, including all of the apparent flaws in the witnesses’ stories.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is that prejudice is not alright. It is important in todays world to not base decisions off of prejudice and bias, or as juror #3 proved, pride. Everything that Mr. Davis did in the film was admirable, although he was not acting as a hero in my opinion he was acting with a clear mind. That is something that many people lack in today's society. People need to learn that we should not judge a book by its cover and I feel that if everyone withdrew prejudices and personal biases that the world would be a better place.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is that prejudice is not alright. It is important in todays world to not base decisions off of prejudice and bias, or as juror #3 proved, pride. Everything that Mr. Davis did in the film was admirable, although he was not acting as a hero in my opinion he was acting with a clear mind. That is something that many people lack in today's society. People need to learn that we should not judge a book by its cover and I feel that if everyone withdrew prejudices and personal biases that the world would be a better place.
I agree with David's post about basing decisions on facts verses opinions and prejudices. If the jurors had based their final decisions on their own opinions of the "type" of person they believed the defendant to be, it would not be a fair conviction.
I think that the most important message of "12 Angry Men" is for people to not judge others based on where they've come from, and their past. Juror #10 based his decision on the simple little facts, like where the boy was brought up, and his past crimes instead of looking further into the case like Juror #8 did.
I agree with Kate when she says in order to fully understand something, you have to consider all the possibilities and different perspectives. There's usually a lot of having to look deeper at something that may seem obvious, but really isn't.
I think the most important message to be taken from “12 Angry Men” is not to jump to conclusions while sticking to what you believe to be true. Several men in this story were easily swayed towards one opinion or another without taking the time to truly reflect on what they believed was the truth. It may be easy at times to “go with the flow,” but if we believe there is injustice occurring, or if our opinion differs from others’, then we should develop the courage to speak out against these injustices. It took just one man’s courage and dissection of faulty facts to save a youth’s life, and although we may never find ourselves in situations as dire as these, it can take just one word of courage to influence the thinking of others.
I agree with Kensie; it took a lot of courage for Mr. Davis to follow his belief to the very end of the juror's discussion, and conversion like that does take time and effort.
I think that the most important message in "12 Angry Men" is that you shouldn't judge someone or something untill you can be sure that your presumption is fair. During the film, all of the men automatically said that the boy was guilty, just because they believed the witnesses. After further examination by Mr. Davis, he managed to make all of the evidence in the case seem improbable. Even after Mr. Davis proved almost all of the evdience wrong, a few men stil refused to admit that he was not guilty. Their main arguement was that the boy came from the slums and killing is no big deal there. This judgement by these men couild have cost a possibly innocent boy his life.
I think the most important message that this film displayed is to simply not make decisions based on prejudice and to look at things in a universal way. The man who gave in to the non guilty plead second to last refused to give up because his prejudice told him the boy had committed the murder. He went on and on about how you can never trust "them" and you cant believe anything "they" tell you.
I agree with Robert that especially in a case like this, you have to look as far into detail as you can and not make big decisions when there is room for reasonable doubt.
The most important message that I took away from "12 Angry Men" was that you have to keep an open mind. Mr. Davis displays a great job of keeping an open mind because all of the jury were read facts about the trial and that had been enough for nearly all of the jury to plea guilty but not for Mr. Davis he felt that it wasn't possible to jump to a conclusion so soon on the matter and plus the fact that the jury had the fate of this young boys' whole life in their hands. To me in dealing with such a big decision deciding on someones' life i feel that i would have to keep and open mind because i would have to be completely sure of my decision before i made it.
i agree with Robert that you have to have the ability to make your own opinion on the matter, while although being open minded but not being a push over
I thought that movie was very interesting. I think it teaches us an important lesson about prejudice and about being open to all possible ideas. I thought that Mr. Davis demonstrated this perfectly when he decided to vote not guilty. He had no clue if he was or wasn't guilty but he thought that it was possible that he could've been not guilty. I think this also shows that patience is a virtue because if Mr. Davis had voted guilty along with the other 11 men without even thinking twice about, the boy would've been killed. Instead, the 12 men sat their for many hours in order to do what they needed to do to be as accurate as possible.
I thought that this movie, 12 Angry Men, was trying to teach a life lesson on not judging and jumping to conclusions about people because of their looks or the stereotype that goes along with that race. Just because you assume you know something about someone based on false stereotyping doesn't mean that you truly know them and who that particular person is. By talking to the, and or analyzing the data like they did in this movie, to find out who they are and or what that one person did.
I think that the most important message in this movie is to be certain when convicting someone. When a group of individuals is deciding over the life or death of another, if they are not 100% certain that the individual on trial is guilty, they must vote not guilty. In the film, many characters acted under prejudice and bias, therefore their vote couldn't be valid until they were convinced by someone else. This person was Mr. Davis, if it weren't for him, the boy would have been killed.
I think that the most important message of this film is to not let your prejudice stand in the way of justice. It was clear who would not listen to reason as a result of their prejudice getting in the way, and that they were the last to give in and vote "not guilty". This is largely due to the fact that they took the matter personally, and had their own ignorant pride stand in the way of reason.
The most important message of "12 Angry Men" was to have an opinion based on fact rather than prejudice. At first, only one of the jurors wanted to examine the evidence further. Then little by little other jurors started to change their vote when they realized that evidence isn't always air tight. In the end some of the jurors, such as juror #3, realized that fact outweighs bias.
I agree with Griffin. Prejudice can lead to being blind to what actually happened. In juror #10's case, he based his decision almost solely on his prejudice against people who come from a similar background as the kid on trial.
I think the most important message in "12 Angry Men" was to research and investigate what you're doing before coming up with a conclusion. Also another big important message was to not judge people based on their past. Mr. Davis was the only one who actually cared about what the boy went through in the past and saw that no one ever gave him a chance because of it. At the end of the film, Mr. Davis convinced all of the other juror's that the boy was innocent because he actually looked at the small details and not the big picture.
I believe that the most important message in “12 Angry Men” is that you should consider all possibilities before jumping to a conclusion. In the beginning, Mr. Davis was the only man to think that there was a possibility that the boy could be innocent. The other jurors quickly came to their decisions based off of their own prejudice and that they didn't look beyond the evidence. By looking deeper at the information given, Mr. Davis was able to point out flaws in the case, which in the end lead the other jurors to change their vote. It must have taken a lot of courage for Mr. Davis to go against the majority but by doing so, he saved a young boy’s life.
I agree with Hannah that another message is to not judge people based on their past. It is important to have an open mind and not base a decision completely off of someone’s past.
I think the most important message that "12 Angry Men" sends is to not judge a person until you have hard facts to back up your reasoning. In the film, Mr. Davis voted not guilty not because he thought the boy was innocent, but that there was not enough evidence to send him to death.
I think a big message from "12 Angry Men" was that it only took one juror to persuade 11 others to hash out everything said in court instead of relying on prejudices to predetermine the guilt of the defendant. At first, Mr. Davis stood alone, wanting to go through every testimony again to make sure there was no doubt. One by one, people's predetermination of the verdict fell away and they could make an honest decision.
I agree with what Maria said, that even though eleven of the 12 jurors based their verdict off of prejudice at first, when they separated their personal convictions from the facts of the case, they were able to acquit the defendant.
I believe the most important message of the film is to keep an open mind when it comes to a subject. i chose this message for the film because every juror thought the boy was guilty based on their own opinions and the facts presented in court. if it wasn't for mr.davis then the boy would've been killed. He spoke to the rest of the jurors and gave each of them reasonable doubt and convinced them of the boys innocence.
I believe that the most important message from "12 Angry Men" is that you shouldn't always listen to what other people are saying and make your own opinion. The one guy who thought the boy was innocent at first went against the other 11 men in his decision and dind't back down. In the end he made good points and all of the men changed their minds and chose his side.
I think that "12 Angry Men" included many important messages. To choose the snigle most important message I would say that you can never jump to conclusions in life. An assumption in this court room could have led to the death of a young adult. I liked how Mr. Davis was able to prove points to his fellow jurors, based off of facts and not based off of opinions. The jurors were very stubborn and it took a herculean effort to do what Davis did.
I agree with what David said there is a different between your personal views and your judicial views. When anyone steps into a court room all bias' have top be set aside.
I think that the most important message of the film is that people come in all sorts. Every person has bias, prejudice, and other defining opinions that makes us different that each other. We need to grasp the concept that people have differnet opinions, even though they might not be what is either the social norm or acceptable, people can always justify why they feel a certain way. A minor message could be to show how easily some people can be persuaded when they feel pressured by the group.
I agree with Kensie when she says that you shouldn't jumping to conclusions without thinking of all the information. People sometimes don't really think about the decisinos they make because they just want to fit in, so they just assume things. It can have very dangerous results.
I think this movie portrayed a strong message of prejudice and it’s different consequences to how people treat and view one another. There was an obvious protagonist and antagonist and opinions in between but in the end the protagonist side won. They argued evidence over prejudice and being unbiased and fair while determining the guilt or innocence of the boy on trial. The use of a jury setting and court trial was powerful in getting across the message in an obvious way , but these scenarios can also be translated to everyday life and especially meeting new people or handling relationships with people you’ve known for a very long time. Nothing can be assumed, and you should always go into a situation with an open mind and unbiased opinion before hearing the facts.
I agree with Kensie’s point about how sometimes doing the right thing can take a lot of effort and perseverance, like in the case of Mr. Davis and the other 11 jurors. In the end it was him not giving up and his patience that saved a potentially innocent boy’s life.
52 comments:
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is to not judge a book by its cover. Although it's cliche, I believe its meaning is still relevant in today's world. Society must learn to approach situations with an open mind, setting aside prejudices and biased opinions, as well as pride. Mr. Davis represents the ideal individual who acts in a logical and sound manner, uncorrupted by personal influences. On the other hand, Juror #3 bases his decision purely off pride and prejudice, due to the fact that his son had run away from home. He refused to accept the doubts raised about the prosecution. Juror #3 represents society's current outlook in that he only accepted the truth once he recognized and cast aside his personal prejudice and opinions.
The most important message of "12 Angry Men" is to not jump to conclusions of something without fully investigating all the details and possibilities. Mr. Davis was the only man in the jury to follow this belief and after hours of discussion and fighting, he actually convinced the rest of the men to believe the defendent was innocent. This shows that it takes a lot of time and effort if you want to get your point across to someone but in the end it is worth it. In this case, it was worth fully investigating every detail because Mr. Davis potentially helped save this young boy's life.
I liked that Jake pointed out that Juror #3 could only accept the truth once he moved past his personal prejudice and that it is crucial to walk into situations with an open mind and push aside anything that happened in the past that might affect your current outlook. For Juror #3 it was the fact that his son ran away from home that he had a bias opinion on children like the defendent in this case.
I agree with Kensie that Mr. Davis was the only juror to look at the case with an open mind at first. The others began to vote not guilty only after Davis brought their prejudices to light.
I believe the most important message in this film is that you should not base your opinions on what people have told you. The information that others might give might not be as reasonable as you think. If you want to make a decision on something you should look further into details and not make a decision right away.Mr. Davis was a good example of this because he di not know all the facts, so he wanted to look further into this case so he knows he is making the right decision. Most of the other Jurors made their perception on what little details they got from posible witnesses and decided the tennager was guilty.
I agree with what Kensie said about not jumping to conclusions because if you jump to conclusions you could make a terrible mistake and may ruin someones life if you make a decision that will depend on someone elses life.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" is that is decide things based on the truth and not assumptions. This jury had the decision of deciding whether a man would live or die, and they were so quick to put him to death because of the situation, but once juror #8 started pointing these flaws in the prosecutors story out, everyone else started to follow. Juror #3 made a personal connection from the case to himself which clouded his judgement on whether or not the kid was actually guilty, but once he was able to let go of his problem the mist covering his prejudice against young people vanished and he was able to say he was not guilty.
I agree with Jake Yanoff saying you shouldn't judge a book by it's cover and that this kid was immediately subjected to be guilty as soon as they heard he was from the slums. It wasn't until they dived down deeper into the story and into who the kid really was that they made honest judgements about whether or not he was guilty.
“12 Angry Men” consisted of many different messages. The most important one, in my opinion, was that in order to adequately understand something you have to consider all perspectives and possibilities. There is usually more to know about something than is apparent on the surface and in order to really understand it you have to look deeper. All of the jurors, except for one, were quick to pronounce the defendant guilty based on the evidence that they had been presented with in court. None of them except for Juror #8 looked beyond the evidence that they were given. Juror #8 was presented with the same evidence as all of the other jurors, but he was the only one who considered other possibilities. Because of this, he had a much better understanding of the case in general, including all of the apparent flaws in the witnesses’ stories.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is that prejudice is not alright. It is important in todays world to not base decisions off of prejudice and bias, or as juror #3 proved, pride. Everything that Mr. Davis did in the film was admirable, although he was not acting as a hero in my opinion he was acting with a clear mind. That is something that many people lack in today's society. People need to learn that we should not judge a book by its cover and I feel that if everyone withdrew prejudices and personal biases that the world would be a better place.
I believe the most important message that "12 Angry Men" conveys is that prejudice is not alright. It is important in todays world to not base decisions off of prejudice and bias, or as juror #3 proved, pride. Everything that Mr. Davis did in the film was admirable, although he was not acting as a hero in my opinion he was acting with a clear mind. That is something that many people lack in today's society. People need to learn that we should not judge a book by its cover and I feel that if everyone withdrew prejudices and personal biases that the world would be a better place.
I agree with David's post about basing decisions on facts verses opinions and prejudices. If the jurors had based their final decisions on their own opinions of the "type" of person they believed the defendant to be, it would not be a fair conviction.
I agree with Jake, I feel that what we should take away from this film is that we should not judge a book by its cover.
I think that the most important message of "12 Angry Men" is for people to not judge others based on where they've come from, and their past. Juror #10 based his decision on the simple little facts, like where the boy was brought up, and his past crimes instead of looking further into the case like Juror #8 did.
I agree with Kate when she says in order to fully understand something, you have to consider all the possibilities and different perspectives. There's usually a lot of having to look deeper at something that may seem obvious, but really isn't.
I think the most important message to be taken from “12 Angry Men” is not to jump to conclusions while sticking to what you believe to be true. Several men in this story were easily swayed towards one opinion or another without taking the time to truly reflect on what they believed was the truth. It may be easy at times to “go with the flow,” but if we believe there is injustice occurring, or if our opinion differs from others’, then we should develop the courage to speak out against these injustices. It took just one man’s courage and dissection of faulty facts to save a youth’s life, and although we may never find ourselves in situations as dire as these, it can take just one word of courage to influence the thinking of others.
I agree with Kensie; it took a lot of courage for Mr. Davis to follow his belief to the very end of the juror's discussion, and conversion like that does take time and effort.
I think that the most important message in "12 Angry Men" is that you shouldn't judge someone or something untill you can be sure that your presumption is fair. During the film, all of the men automatically said that the boy was guilty, just because they believed the witnesses. After further examination by Mr. Davis, he managed to make all of the evidence in the case seem improbable. Even after Mr. Davis proved almost all of the evdience wrong, a few men stil refused to admit that he was not guilty. Their main arguement was that the boy came from the slums and killing is no big deal there. This judgement by these men couild have cost a possibly innocent boy his life.
I agree with Jake. Nearly all of the men based their decisions on prejudices, except for Mr. Davis and maybe a few others.
I think the most important message that this film displayed is to simply not make decisions based on prejudice and to look at things in a universal way. The man who gave in to the non guilty plead second to last refused to give up because his prejudice told him the boy had committed the murder. He went on and on about how you can never trust "them" and you cant believe anything "they" tell you.
I agree with Robert that especially in a case like this, you have to look as far into detail as you can and not make big decisions when there is room for reasonable doubt.
The most important message that I took away from "12 Angry Men" was that you have to keep an open mind. Mr. Davis displays a great job of keeping an open mind because all of the jury were read facts about the trial and that had been enough for nearly all of the jury to plea guilty but not for Mr. Davis he felt that it wasn't possible to jump to a conclusion so soon on the matter and plus the fact that the jury had the fate of this young boys' whole life in their hands. To me in dealing with such a big decision deciding on someones' life i feel that i would have to keep and open mind because i would have to be completely sure of my decision before i made it.
i agree with Robert that you have to have the ability to make your own opinion on the matter, while although being open minded but not being a push over
I thought that movie was very interesting. I think it teaches us an important lesson about prejudice and about being open to all possible ideas. I thought that Mr. Davis demonstrated this perfectly when he decided to vote not guilty. He had no clue if he was or wasn't guilty but he thought that it was possible that he could've been not guilty. I think this also shows that patience is a virtue because if Mr. Davis had voted guilty along with the other 11 men without even thinking twice about, the boy would've been killed. Instead, the 12 men sat their for many hours in order to do what they needed to do to be as accurate as possible.
I agree with Dan that you should also be open minded and you should jump so quick to conclusions or else you might make a mistake.
I thought that this movie, 12 Angry Men, was trying to teach a life lesson on not judging and jumping to conclusions about people because of their looks or the stereotype that goes along with that race. Just because you assume you know something about someone based on false stereotyping doesn't mean that you truly know them and who that particular person is. By talking to the, and or analyzing the data like they did in this movie, to find out who they are and or what that one person did.
I agree with Mark and how people should not judge a book by its cover and just go along with the popular idea.
I think that the most important message in this movie is to be certain when convicting someone. When a group of individuals is deciding over the life or death of another, if they are not 100% certain that the individual on trial is guilty, they must vote not guilty. In the film, many characters acted under prejudice and bias, therefore their vote couldn't be valid until they were convinced by someone else. This person was Mr. Davis, if it weren't for him, the boy would have been killed.
I agree with Mark, if everybody withdrew their prejudice and bias, the world would be a much better place.
I think that the most important message of this film is to not let your prejudice stand in the way of justice. It was clear who would not listen to reason as a result of their prejudice getting in the way, and that they were the last to give in and vote "not guilty". This is largely due to the fact that they took the matter personally, and had their own ignorant pride stand in the way of reason.
The most important message of "12 Angry Men" was to have an opinion based on fact rather than prejudice. At first, only one of the jurors wanted to examine the evidence further. Then little by little other jurors started to change their vote when they realized that evidence isn't always air tight. In the end some of the jurors, such as juror #3, realized that fact outweighs bias.
I agree with Griffin. Prejudice can lead to being blind to what actually happened. In juror #10's case, he based his decision almost solely on his prejudice against people who come from a similar background as the kid on trial.
I think the most important message in "12 Angry Men" was to research and investigate what you're doing before coming up with a conclusion. Also another big important message was to not judge people based on their past. Mr. Davis was the only one who actually cared about what the boy went through in the past and saw that no one ever gave him a chance because of it. At the end of the film, Mr. Davis convinced all of the other juror's that the boy was innocent because he actually looked at the small details and not the big picture.
I agree with Kensie that it takes a lot of time and effort if you want to get your point across to someone because in the end it will be worth it.
I believe that the most important message in “12 Angry Men” is that you should consider all possibilities before jumping to a conclusion. In the beginning, Mr. Davis was the only man to think that there was a possibility that the boy could be innocent. The other jurors quickly came to their decisions based off of their own prejudice and that they didn't look beyond the evidence. By looking deeper at the information given, Mr. Davis was able to point out flaws in the case, which in the end lead the other jurors to change their vote. It must have taken a lot of courage for Mr. Davis to go against the majority but by doing so, he saved a young boy’s life.
I agree with Hannah that another message is to not judge people based on their past. It is important to have an open mind and not base a decision completely off of someone’s past.
I think the most important message that "12 Angry Men" sends is to not judge a person until you have hard facts to back up your reasoning. In the film, Mr. Davis voted not guilty not because he thought the boy was innocent, but that there was not enough evidence to send him to death.
I like Jake's comment where he said not to judge a book by its cover. People need to approach all types of situations with an open mindset.
I think a big message from "12 Angry Men" was that it only took one juror to persuade 11 others to hash out everything said in court instead of relying on prejudices to predetermine the guilt of the defendant. At first, Mr. Davis stood alone, wanting to go through every testimony again to make sure there was no doubt. One by one, people's predetermination of the verdict fell away and they could make an honest decision.
I agree with what Maria said, that even though eleven of the 12 jurors based their verdict off of prejudice at first, when they separated their personal convictions from the facts of the case, they were able to acquit the defendant.
I believe the most important message of the film is to keep an open mind when it comes to a subject. i chose this message for the film because every juror thought the boy was guilty based on their own opinions and the facts presented in court. if it wasn't for mr.davis then the boy would've been killed. He spoke to the rest of the jurors and gave each of them reasonable doubt and convinced them of the boys innocence.
I believe that the most important message from "12 Angry Men" is that you shouldn't always listen to what other people are saying and make your own opinion. The one guy who thought the boy was innocent at first went against the other 11 men in his decision and dind't back down. In the end he made good points and all of the men changed their minds and chose his side.
I agree with what Jake said, people need to look at things without judgement or already thinking a certain way about it.
I think that "12 Angry Men" included many important messages. To choose the snigle most important message I would say that you can never jump to conclusions in life. An assumption in this court room could have led to the death of a young adult. I liked how Mr. Davis was able to prove points to his fellow jurors, based off of facts and not based off of opinions. The jurors were very stubborn and it took a herculean effort to do what Davis did.
I agree with what David said there is a different between your personal views and your judicial views. When anyone steps into a court room all bias' have top be set aside.
I think that the most important message of the film is that people come in all sorts. Every person has bias, prejudice, and other defining opinions that makes us different that each other. We need to grasp the concept that people have differnet opinions, even though they might not be what is either the social norm or acceptable, people can always justify why they feel a certain way. A minor message could be to show how easily some people can be persuaded when they feel pressured by the group.
I agree with Kensie when she says that you shouldn't jumping to conclusions without thinking of all the information. People sometimes don't really think about the decisinos they make because they just want to fit in, so they just assume things. It can have very dangerous results.
I think this movie portrayed a strong message of prejudice and it’s different consequences to how people treat and view one another. There was an obvious protagonist and antagonist and opinions in between but in the end the protagonist side won. They argued evidence over prejudice and being unbiased and fair while determining the guilt or innocence of the boy on trial. The use of a jury setting and court trial was powerful in getting across the message in an obvious way , but these scenarios can also be translated to everyday life and especially meeting new people or handling relationships with people you’ve known for a very long time. Nothing can be assumed, and you should always go into a situation with an open mind and unbiased opinion before hearing the facts.
I agree with Kensie’s point about how sometimes doing the right thing can take a lot of effort and perseverance, like in the case of Mr. Davis and the other 11 jurors. In the end it was him not giving up and his patience that saved a potentially innocent boy’s life.
I think the 12 angry men leave many important messages but the most important is not jusgar wings others.
I think this movie has given us a great message to all and to learn not to judge another person.
I was absent during the class when we watched the end of the film.
Post a Comment