- The great achievement of Sidney Lumet’s 12 Angry Men is that despite being based on a play, set in a total of three locations (with 98% of it coming in one room), and peppered with pages and pages of dialogue—it is absolutely cinematic—ambitiously strategized and executed
- One of the great debuts of the 1950’s— from the era obviously the guys from the French New Wave are going to blow everyone’s socks off in a few years but there aren’t many better than Lumet’s. At this point Lumet had years of television experience.
- There are many aspects to praise here. On one level it is a 96-minute brick by brick courtroom (sort of—backroom of one) procedural. The casting and performances are inspired (Henry Fonda of course, but also Jack Warden, Lee J. Cobb and others in the ensemble). It is also significant as a education—this doesn’t really factor into my evaluation but certainly every middle-school or high school kid should see this movie
- Those two factors would never get it beyond the “recommend” grade though. 12 Angry Men is artistically memorable because of Lumet’s effort behind the camera—for one, the character blocking and staging work is brilliant. From Martin Balsam’s (juror #1) view we get the rows of men each in perfect symmetry and blocking. At the 45-minute mark we get the jaw-dropper in the film with four men in a diagonal on the left. This is Kurosawa-level.

At the 45-minute mark we get the jaw-dropper in the film with four men in a diagonal on the left. This is Kurosawa-level.

precision and symmetry we’d see in Wes Anderson– or say Ari Aster’s Midsommar

staging and blocking perfection
- There’s a four-minute long-take at the 77-minute mark as the camera pulls back on Ed Begley’s racist speech. The characters slide around the room until they pose in a frozen cinematic painting. It is stunning. Without cutting Lumet then glides the camera back in closer as Fonda speaks

There’s a four-minute long-take at the 77-minute mark as the camera pulls back on Ed Begley’s racist speech. The characters slide around the room until they pose in a frozen cinematic painting. It is stunning. Without cutting Lumet then glides the camera back in closer as Fonda speaks
- Lumet is making so many stylistic choices behind the camera. His book- “Making Movies”- gives you the blueprint here but as the film progresses through the 96-minutes, he changes the lensing, the eyeline (or height of the camera) and the proximity of the characters (to the camera and each other). As the film opens he uses a wide lens, everyone is farther apart, spaced, and the camera is above their eyeline so you as the viewer are just observing them. By the end of the film the lens has shifted so the characters are on top of each other, it is claustrophobic, we’re below the eyeline so we’re right in their faces (no longer casual observers). There are so many closeups with harsh shadows at the very end. The technical detail here pays off.

There are so many closeups with harsh shadows at the very end. It is claustrophobic, we’re below the eyeline so we’re right in their faces (no longer casual observers). The technical detail here pays off.
- Lumet is clearly editorializing with every choice—from casting -a pristine handsome Fonda vs. Ed Begley as a villain—and how about the sweet face on the defendant before Lumet dissolves to the courtroom?
- Like Spike Lee’ s Do the Right Thing this is set on the “hottest day of the year”, the fan doesn’t work— playing into the atmosphere of the film—as is the rain as it pours in on the sound design later in the film
- Set in New York City —much is made of Spike, Woody, Scorsese and others and their connection to the city and rightly so—but Lumet is every bit a part of NYC as well
- The camera is playfully floating around the room—again, despite the setting and Lumet’s television background he’s able to achieve the cinematic here
- A Must-See top five of the year quality film
I distinctly remember watching this film in middle school. It really must have been the first film of such quality (and as old, needs to be said) I had actually sat through and watched at the time. Upon watching it again, you’re dead right about its cinematic qualities despite its being tailored for the stage (chamber drama sort of, endless -but sharp- dialogue). The close ups, the blocking, everything helps build up the atmosphere, a sense of suffocation and claustrophobia. The fan not working is a nice little detail I was happy to see you point out – it’s factors like these that help create the tension necessary for the film to have the impact that it does. There are so many moral questions that are raised by this film, there’s a reason it is so extensively shown at schools. I think that by old Hollywood standards, what this film tried to communicate stuck with people a great deal and is still relevant today. “Reasonable doubt” remains every bit as iconic and it opens up a whole new mode of thought that applies to nearly anything (my guess is it mainly referred to the social and political field, with the groupthink situation). Definitely an important film.
I’ve been anticipating this one for a while. I’m glad to see you’ve reclaimed the movie enough to raise it a grade. You have included great observations and shots.
Do you think Fonda may give one of 1957’s best performances? It is an incredibly loaded year. In a substantial majority of years, he’d easily fall among the top sector of actors. It’s yet another testament to the triumphant 1957-62 all-timer cinematic era that a case can be made for von Sydow, Douglas, Guinness, Holden, Fonda, and others whose 1957 film I have not yet seen as the greatest male performance of the year.
I would also like to point out that 1957 is a particularly brilliant year for great auteurs paired with great scripts. The year brings neither Kubrick’s or Bergman’s single best effort as a stylistic director, but it does provide perhaps the best narrative for each (Dr. Strangelove is a valid choice as well).
@Graham– yeah sort of unfortunate timing– I just completed the 1957 page so I’m not going to go back on the page and relitigate both the film and Fonda (I don’t think he’s in the class of von Sydow or Douglas but I think he deserves his name there) but so be it for now
I also saw this in middle haha. 8th grade Civics I believe. It actually does make for a great Civics discussion. The intense focus on just the deliberation process and nothing else works perfectly, if they tried to increase the scope beyond the deliberation process it does not work.
I like the Kurosawa mention, just watched High and Low (1963) recently with all the scenes of immaculate blocking during the 1st half of the movie with the police and Mifune’s character sitting in the high rise room around waiting around for the kidnapper to call
@James Trapp- spot on with the comparison!
I will say the best performance among the ensemble is by Lee J. Cobb.