History Film / TwelveAngryMen

** Most of the twelve have one, and most of them push someone else's at some point.

* LargeHam: George C. Scott as Juror #3.

''Twelve Angry Men'' is a 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose (and perhaps more famously, a 1957 film directed by SidneyLumet and starring Henry Fonda and a veritable AllStarCast of character actors) that concerns a supposedly straightforward murder trial. An eyewitness, forensic evidence, and the accused himself all seem to clearly point to an adolescent boy murdering his father. While most of the jurors want to pack it in and call it a day, one stands up and refuses to admit to the boy's guilt- at least until they take a fine toothed comb through every shred of the evidence and make darn sure that they've got the right guy.

** The 1997 update features one Latino juror and four African-Americans. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.

* JuryDuty: [[TropeCodifier Well, yeah.]] The characters run the whole gamut of taking the duty ''very'' seriously (Juror #8's stance on this drives the whole plot, and Juror #11 later claims the responsibility to be one of the greatest things about American democracy) to being almost entirely dismissive of it (Juror #12 is more concerned with doodling and talking about his work than he is with the deliberations, and Juror #7 is mostly upset that he's missing a baseball game; both get [[WhatTheHellHero called out]] [[TheReasonYouSuckSpeech for this]]). Notably, Jurors #4 and #10 ''are'' taking it seriously, but are too hung up on their own emotional baggage to approach it objectively.

* AnAesop: Jury duty should never be taken lightly, and a man should never be convicted of a crime unless his guilt can be proven without doubt.

According to the American Film Institute, it's the second best courtroom drama movie in history, after ''ToKillAMockingbird'''s film adaptation. In 1997 it was adapted yet again, this time as a MadeForTV movie on {{Showtime}} starring Jack Lemmon and George C. Scott (the main difference in this version being the [[ClusterFBomb level of cussing]]). There is also a 2007 Russian Adaptation by NikitaMikhalkov called simply ''12''.

* ArtisticLicenseLaw: Being convicted of first-degree murder does ''not'' result in an automatic death sentence. (This isn't SocietyMarchesOn, though the length and likely outcome of the appeals process ''after'' a death sentence might indeed be very different today). Also, see HollywoodLaw below. The entire case, in real life, would have ended in a mistrial the moment it came to light that #8 had bought the exact same type of knife as used in the murder.

* ValuesDissonance: At the time this was written in the '50s, women and non-Caucasians were excluded from jury service in some parts of the country. These days, the script is often produced as ''Twelve Angry Jurors'' with a more diverse cast. [[invoked]]

* ValuesDissonance: At the time this was written in the '50s, women weren't allowed on juries in some parts of the country. These days, the script is often produced as ''Twelve Angry Jurors'' with a more diverse cast. [[invoked]]

* TheJudge: Shown issuing instructions to the jury in the opening scene. Many stage productions (and the 1997 TV version) cast a woman in the role as a way of bringing at least some token gender diversity to the play without contradicting [[ExactlyWhatItSaysOnTheTin the literal meaning of its title]].

** The 1997 update features one Latino juror and three African-Americans. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.

** The 1997 update features one Latino juror and three African-Americans while the judge is a woman. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.

* KarmaHoudini: If the kid is guilty, he gets away with killing his father. If the kid is innocent, the real killer is still at large and unsuspected. Either way, someone gets away with murder.

** The 1997 update features one Latino juror and three African-Americans. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.

* TheUnreveal: Did the boy really kill his father? If he didn't, who did? Since we only see the case from the jurors' perspective (not the police's), we never find out. All we know is that it's ''possible'' that the boy is innocent--which, under the laws of the United States, is enough to keep him out of prison.

* TheUnreveal: Did the boy really kill his father? If he didn't, who did? Since we only see the case from the jurors' perspective (not the police's), we never find out. All we know is that it's ''possible'' that the boy is innocent--which, under the laws of the United States, is enough to keep a suspected murderer out of prison.

* KarmaHoudini: If the kid is guilty, then he gets away with killing his father.
** And if the kid is innocent, the real killer is still at large and unsuspected.

* MinimalistCast: At the beginning, other people (such as the defendant and the judge) are briefly shown, but for the rest of the film, we only see the twelve jurors.
** And the guard, briefly.

** The decision makes sense somewhat when one considers, as an ad executive, his professional instinct is to [[TheComplainerIsAlwaysWrong go along with the group]].

* RetroactiveRecognition: Juror #5 will be instantly familiar to anyone who's seen an episode of {{Quincy}}. Jack Klugman even gets to do a Quincy-style deduction years before the series was conceived, by pointing out the inconsistent nature of the knife wound.