12: A Masterpiece of Cinema

What can be said about this film?

While I have not personally seen the original movie from which it is adapted, Twelve Angry Men, I walked away from 12 convinced that its predecessor, as good as it may be, cannot possibly be as good as this masterpiece of cinema.

Twelve men, from varying backgrounds, are the jurors for a three-day trial regarding a young Chechen man accused of murdering his retired Russian officer stepfather. What initially is predicted to be a lightning-quick decision for the jurors becomes an all-night foray in to the moral implications of voting “guilty” or “not guilty.”

As the decision must be unanimous, if one person remains stubborn, it falls to the others to establish unity and agreement. Each juror has a life to get back to, and each is eager to do so. Unfortunately for them, one man refuses to vote with the rest. He begins an explanation of his reason, which converts a few others to his rationale. This begins hours of involved rhetorical discussion, heated debate, and forensic experimentation among the twelve men.

An actor, a cab driver, a television station executive, a Jew—over the course of the story, we come to know the backgrounds of each man, though we never learn their names. They are credited only as Juror #1, Juror #2, etc, but with each beautifully crafted monologue, we learn of a pivotal moment, experience, or personal philosophy that brings colors their views on the issue at hand. At the conclusion of the film, I left the theater feeling intimately acquainted with each man; such was the power of their characters.

I also noted that the film lacks an antagonist. There is no consistently negative character. Perhaps each character could be considered a villain; they all take a turn being harsh and critical of another’s perspective.

Perhaps the outside world could be considered to be the villain; it has put them all through the proverbial ringer in the past and only causes external pressure to rush their decision.

Perhaps there was never meant to be a villain; life does not provide us with a single target for hate. There are no moustache-twirling evil masterminds plotting our personal demise. Rather, we all have dark sides that come out when the occasion warrants. We all antagonize on a frequent basis, whether we like to admit it or not.

In a very true sense, this movie is starkly realistic in its portrayal of human nature. We are greedy, selfish, self-consumed, petty, argumentative, merciless, stubborn, and require incentives to rise above our natural instincts.

Because there were no incentives, save it were the sense of having done the right thing, the ideal resolution to the case, as suggested by the head juror in the closing minutes, does not happen. Ultimately, one man decides to make sure it does, regardless of the fact that no one else offered to help him accomplish it. Too often that is the case, one man makes a difference where others failed to care.

Truly, 12 is an homage to Twelve Angry Men as well as an individually-powerful portrayal of life as it is, the side of ourselves we prefer to ignore, and the power that one voice can wield.

12. What can be said about this film? Plenty.