Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on 12 Angry Men. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
A 3 page film review. "12 Angry Men," in its original version, is set in the late 1950s. The principal focus of the film is the guilt or innocence of a defendant, a Latino adolescent, who is accused of killing his father and the prejudice of the 12, white, male jurors. However, an interesting issue of this film is the way in which the leadership of one man, the Architect, changes the way in which the jurors handle their responsibility. This issue is interesting because, first of all, the context of the plot shows how the knee-jerk, first reaction of the jurors is just go along with the prosecution, trusting that the State would not falsely accuse anyone, and rubber-stamp the boy as guilty. Secondly, the Architect is the only juror who takes his responsibility seriously, and third, by providing leadership, rather than coercion or argument, the Architect succeeds in changing the behavior of his fellow jurors. No additional sources cited.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_kh12amen.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
prejudice of the 12, white, male jurors. However, an interesting issue of this film is the way in which the leadership of one man, the Architect, changes the way in
which the jurors handle their responsibility. This issue is interesting because, first of all, the context of the plot shows how the knee-jerk, first reaction of the jurors is just
go along with the prosecution, trusting that the State would not falsely accuse anyone, and rubber-stamp the boy as guilty. Secondly, the Architect is the only juror who takes his
responsibility seriously, and third, by providing leadership, rather than coercion or argument, the Architect succeeds in changing the behavior of his fellow jurors. As the men take their seats
in the jury room, it is clear that these men are indifferent to the fate of the defendant and are ready to take a vote and find him guilty so
they can to home. On the first vote, the Architect, juror #8, votes for acquittal, not because he is sure that the boy is innocent, but because he takes his
responsibility as a juror seriously and wants to go over the evidence before coming to a decision. The other jurors are angry at the Architect for causing what they perceive
as an unnecessary delay to the inevitable delivery of a guilty verdict. But, the Architect eventually convinces them to go over the evidence. Initially the case for the prosecution
looks strong, but as they discuss it, the Architect sees more and more discrepancies, assumptions and holes. Additionally, it becomes clear that the indifference of the jurors towards the defendant
is largely motivated by ethnic and racial prejudice. The white educated prosecutor says that the Puerto Rican kid from the slums is guilty and that is good enough for the
...