History Film / TwelveAngryMen

** Choleric: Juror #3 (the unmerciful), Juror #10 (garage owner)

''Twelve Angry Men'' is a 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose (and perhaps more famously, a 1957 film directed by SidneyLumet and starring HenryFonda 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. In the deliberation room, most of the jurors push for a quick guilty verdict, but one juror holds out and insists that they examine the evidence thoroughly to make darn sure that they've got the right guy.

* 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 specifically to use in the deliberations.
** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was ''legally'' an automatic death sentence, but that ''he'' would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver). Nowadays the jurors decide what sentence the defendant should get too in capital cases after considering all the various aggravating vs. mitigating factors. Without such a recommendation for death, the judge can't sentence the defendant to it. Back when the play was written and the original film made, however, it was entirely the discretion of the judge, though the jury could ask for mercy if they wished. This arbitrariness was what led the US Supreme Court to strike down the existing capital punishment laws in 1972, to be replaced with the current standard. The judge in the 1997 version has a modified line to reflect this, stating that she will not consider pleas for leniency should the jury find the defendent guilty.

* HollywoodLaw: While the Jurors do make the correct decision on reasonable doubt, the way they reach that position (by #8 wandering around the defendant's neighborhood conducting his own investigation) is major juror misconduct.

** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was ''legally'' an automatic death sentence, but that ''he'' would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver). Nowadays the jurors decide what sentence the defendant should get too in capital cases after considering all the various aggravating vs. mitigating factors. Without such a recommendation for death, the judge can't sentence the defendant to it. Back when the play was written and the original film made, however, it was entirely the discretion of the judge, though the jury could ask for mercy if they wished. This arbitrariness was what led the US Supreme Court to strike down the existing capital punishment laws in 1972, to be replaced with the current standard.

Characters/TwelveAngryMen

** More specifically, he mentions the glasses marks, and they all spend a good bit of time bickering over the significance of whether or not she normally wears glasses and whether it makes a difference... and then #9 asks if [[ArmorPiercingQuestion they think she'd be wearing the glasses in bed at midnight.]]

** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was ''legally'' an automatic death sentence, but that ''he'' would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver). Nowadays the jurors decide what sentence the defendant should get too in capital cases after considering aggravating vs. mitigating factors. Without such a recommendation for death, the judge can't sentence the defendant to it. Back when the play was written and the original film made, however, it was entirely the discretion of the judge, though the jury could ask for mercy if they wished. This arbitrariness was what led the US Supreme Court to strike down the existing capital punishment laws in 1972, to be replaced with the current standard.

** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was ''legally'' an automatic death sentence, but that ''he'' would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver). Nowadays the jurors decide what sentence the defendant should get too in capital cases after considering various aggravating vs. mitigating factors. Without such a recommendation for death, the judge can't sentence the defendant to it. Back when the play was written and the original film made, however, it was entirely the discretion of the judge, though the jury could ask for mercy if they wished. This arbitrariness was what led the US Supreme Court to strike down the existing capital punishment laws in 1972, to be replaced with the current standard.

** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was ''legally'' an automatic death sentence, but that ''he'' would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver). Nowadays the jurors decide what sentence the defendant should get too in capital cases. Without a recommendation for death, the judge can't sentence the defendant to it.

** The judge (in the original film) didn't say it was an automatic death sentence, but that he would pass one if the jury delivered a guilty verdict. Of course, this may be an example itself, since it could unduly influence the jury (studies have shown that what sentence a defendant will get affects the verdict juries deliver).

* {{Jerkass}}: Juror #7. He doesn't care what the decision of the jury is. He's only concerned with catching a baseball game. At least the most vicious jurors voted guilty because they believed so.

* FreudianExcuse: Inverted for Juror #3 - he spends the movie continuously trying to convict a young man where there is more and more reasonable doubt for his guilt because his relationship with his son appeared to have went very sour. [[HeelRealization He realizes this at the end, though, and does not continue his stance.]]

** To make it even funnier, Juror #11 is an immigrant to America from Europe.

* ImmigrantPatriotism: Juror #11 takes a moment to gush about the Jury trial system, and how it could only happen in a Democracy like the United States. They never say where he came from, but the implication is that the country he was from as ''not'' a democracy. He also berates another juror for refusing to take the process seriously, and makes a point to make sure he is speaking English more properly than the bigoted natural-born #10.

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 (which {{race lift}}ed several characters and [[ClusterFBomb added more cussing]]). There is also a 2007 Russian Adaptation by Creator/NikitaMikhalkov called simply ''12''.

** Referring back to the [[{{ILLKILLYOU}} I'LLKILLYOU]] above, Juror #8 afterward remarks, "You don't really mean you'll kill me, do you?"

* CharacterFilibuster: Juror #10 has a particularly nasty, racism-filled rant against "the likes of him [the accused]" [[CrowningMomentOfAwesome that causes the other jurors to turn away from him one by one, until #4 shuts him up]]:

** The real kicker of the line is that #10 does exactly that - he doesn't say a word for the rest of the movie. When #8 asks him if he still thinks the boy is guilty, he simply shakes his head quietly.
*** Juror #3 has a smaller one, but in his case he [[HeelRealization breaks down all by himself]] afterwards.

* DeadpanSnarker: Juror #4.

* EmpathicEnvironment: The rainstorm.
** To a lesser extent, the fan. It finally starts up when the votes start to swing in favor of acquittal.

* FreudianExcuse: Inverted for Juror #3 - he spends the movie continuously trying to convict a young man where there is more and more reasonable doubt for his guilt...because his relationship with his son appeared to have went very sour. [[HeelRealization He realizes this at the end, though, and does not continue his stance.]]

* HeelFaceRevolvingDoor: Sort of; Juror #12 is the only one who ever changes his vote back to guilty. Juror #7 compares him to a tennis ball.
** The decision makes sense somewhat when one considers that, as an ad executive, his professional instinct is to [[TheComplainerIsAlwaysWrong go along with the group]].

* HollywoodLaw: While the Jurors do make the correct decision on reasonable doubt, the way they reach that position (by #8 wandering around the defendant's neighborhood conducting his own investigation) is major juror misconduct.

* [[{{ILLKILLYOU}} I'LL KILL YOU!]]
** [[CrowningMomentOfAwesome "You don't really mean you'll kill me, do you?"]]
* ImmigrantPatriotism: Juror #11 takes a moment to gush about the Jury trial system, and how it could only happen in a Democracy like the United States. They never say where he came from, but the implication is that the country he was from as ''not'' a democracy. He also berates another juror for refusing to take the process seriously, and makes a point to make sure he is speaking English properly than the bigoted natural-born #10.

* {{Jerkass}}: Juror #7. He didn't care what the decision of the jury was, he only wanted to end early so he could go watch a game. At least the most vicious jurors voted guilty because they believed so.

* 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 #3 and #10 ''are'' taking it seriously, but are too hung up on their own emotional baggage to approach it objectively.

* [[LockedInARoom Locked in a (Jury) Room]]

* MonochromeCasting: Perhaps unsurprisingly for a film made in TheFifties, the jury is all-white (although one is an immigrant with a noticeable accent).
** Given a RaceLift for the 1997 update, which features one Latino juror and four African-Americans. In a twist, one of the latter is a MalcolmXerox version of the bigoted Juror #10.

* RogueJuror: If not the TropeMaker, definitely the TropeCodifier.
** Unlike many examples, however, the RogueJuror in this case isn't convinced of the defendant's guilt or innocence, at least initially; he simply wants the other jurors to take things seriously and not simply vote guilty -- thus sending a potentially innocent kid to the death chamber -- without making every effort to make sure he ''is'' guilty first.

* 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 from being convicted.

* VillainousBreakdown: When Juror #10 delivers his famous rant. "Listen... listen to me...."

* WhatHappenedToTheMouse: It's never clear if the kid really did it, but that isn't the point. And many modern lawyers say that the jury made the correct decision as far as reasonable doubt goes.

* BerserkButton: Minor example with #6, who twice threatens violence (once explicitly, once by implication) over people showing disrespect to others.
** Most of the twelve have one, and most of them push someone elses at some point.

* ChromosomeCasting: All of the jurors are male (theatrical adaptations sometimes avert this).

''Twelve Angry Men'' is a 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose (and perhaps more famously, a 1957 film directed by SidneyLumet and starring HenryFonda 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.

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 Creator/NikitaMikhalkov called simply ''12''.

* HeyItsThatVoice: [[WinnieThePooh Piglet]] performs his civic duty as Juror #2.
* HeyItsThatGuy: [[TheOddCouple Oscar Madison (TV version)]] is Juror #5

This work is best known as the film that [[TropeCodifier popularized]] the RogueJuror trope. Though it was not the first work to use it, it was the first to receive widespread critical acclaim. It's a classic of American cinema and recommended watching- if only because most of the other works on the Rogue Juror page reference it either directly or indirectly.