ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 17 ก.ค. 2023
- Enjoy my reaction as I watch 12 Angry Men for the first time!
NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT INTENDED ❤️
____________________
LET'S PLAY GAMES AND TALK MOVIES ON TWITCH:
♡ Twitch: / bisscute
♡ Discord: / discord
____________________
IF YOU'D LIKE TO SHOW SOME EXTRA LOVE:
♡ Patreon: / bisscutereacts2
♡ Merch: streamlabs.com/bisscute/merch
♡ Donate on PayPal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/bisscute
____________________
FOLLOW MY OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA :
♡ Music reaction Channel: / @bisscutereacts
♡ Instagram: / bisscute__
♡ TikTok: / bisscute
♡ Twitter: / bisscute
If you would like to see more reaction videos, Let me know in the comments below!
And don't forget to Like and Subscribe!
____________________
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.
#12angrymen #moviereaction #classicmovies #moviereview - บันเทิง
What Juror gets on Your nerve the most ? For me is Number 7 .
The guy who is in advertising annoys me the most, he is the ultimate sheep, no spine. I like the Swiss guy best, because he knows how important this experience is, but I also like the glasses guy, he seems like a principled and strict man, but still able to change his mind when confronted with new perspectives.
Nr. 7 was the most annoying, on the other hand, Nr. 10 (?) was a disgusting racist. So I vote for both of them ;)
No. 7 He was briming with hate.
I'll give the "mean man of the year award" to number 3. (Lee J. Cobb-That was his style, he 'd play guys ya loved to hate) Baseball Juror (Jack Warden) did a lot of funny comedy in the 70's 80's. But how about Fonda? The guy's screen persona--Men of dignity, intelligence, courage, and compassion..His forte and he did it for 50 years, Two awards for stage, and 3 Movie Oscars. Loved your summation/reaction to this AFI top 100 classic!
I'd like to change my vote to No. 3
One reason this movie is so good is that all the actors were top tier movie, TV or stage actors of their time.
Yes, they had success as main stars, supporting roles, character actors. I recognize them all. Pure acting talent. Simple, but powerful.
They also did a very long rehearsal period like stage production. So everyone had a good sense of their lines and the different beats of the production ahead of filming.
Some of them continued on with long careers after this.
Yes, even Quincy was a juror!
to be honest what good movie needs is good actors and good script, rest is fixable by edits and other tricks behind screen, today we either had good actors with bad scripts or good scripts with bad actors
Director Lumet wrote: "I shot the first third of the movie above eye level, shot the second third at eye level, and the last third from below eye level. In that way, toward the end, the ceiling began to appear. Not only were the walls closing in, the ceiling was as well. The sense of increasing claustrophobia did a lot to raise the tension of the last part of the movie."
This room is full of some of the greatest actors to stand in front of a camera. Sadly all gone now, They don't make too many like this anymore. Wow, "you and your ancestors should be ashamed!" What a great phrase! I love it! Thank you Bisscute!!
My favourite character is Juror number 3 played by the great Lee J Cobb, who comes across as a bad man but is revealed to be a broken man. He gives a phenominal performance.
Incredible acting. I loved the end scene seeing his emotional frustration ripping up the photo as his self realization begins to kick in.
He was the detective in The Exorcist.
The cinematography, shot composition and blocking in this film is some of the greatest in cinema. Sidney Lumet made some of the boldest and most well made and researched films over the course of several decades, for sure. Dog Day Afternoon, Prince of the City, Q&A, Serpico, Deathtrap, Night Falls on Manhattan.. so many masterpieces.
I especially like how the camera angle in general goes down as the film progresses. It starts off with some very high shots, ceiling level even, and by the time we're at the end we're looking up at the characters and they're larger than life. It gets tight as it goes.
@@MrGadfly772For me, it's the low-medium shots of the jurors when they announce their individual verdicts with that stark lighting in their faces, the remarkably creative positioning of any given character in any given shot, the subtle pans and zooms.. there's so much on a visual level to appreciate that you almost forget Lumet was a theater and TV director for years and pretty much had that specificity down pat before he moved to feature films.
"dog day afternoon" and "serpico" are excellent. two of my favorite pacino films. pacino looks so cool in "serpico" with a beard and long hair as an undercover cop.
two other great henry fonda films along the same theme as "12 angry men" are "the ox-bow incident" (1943) about vigilantism in the old west, and "the wrong man" (1956), directed by hitchcock. the title is self explanatory.
I agree. I saw the 97 version first (great cast headed up by Jack Lemmon as 8) and thought it was amazing, but, watching it again after the original, Yep, it's all about the blocking. 97 doesn't come close.
I agree ,this is Sydney Lumet's masterpiece, amazing cinematography, look at long shots, this is really magical cinema, one word "Reasonable doubt ", I would say top 10 of all time for sure
This is not a movie, it's a monument
Sidney Lumet was a god damn brilliant filmmaker. His work is foundational.
@@reservoirdude92 absolutely
I played Juror #6 in a "play" (a dramatic script reading in my 7th grade english class, but you get the point), so I always have a lot of empathy for his character. The dialogue he has with Juror #8 is one of my favorite bits of the movie, when he asks what happens if #8 talks everyone into believing the kid is innocent when he was actually guilty. The pained expression on Fonda's face shows this comment is the one that probably got to him the most. It really seems to make him question what he's doing. I like this scene because it isn't one of the adversarial jurors (#3, #4, #10) who says this to him but a juror who's more neutral in his actions and statements over the course of the deliberation.
You table-read _Twelve Angry Men_ in your 7th grade class? Wow. That's a great English class. I don't remember anything about English but I'm sure we didn't do anything that interesting. I wonder how many middle school English classes today read plays
We had this one and other interesting plays in junior high school through maybe 9th grade English....of course, this was the 1970s.
@@andrewpetik2034I attended Jr. High School in the early 90s and we were still doing high end play reads like this at the time, my Junior year at high school we did Gilbert & Sullivan’s The Pirates Of Penzance for our musical theater event during spring semester. Somewhere after the end of Gen X (my generation, some argue it cuts off in 80, 82 or 85 depending on the outlet measuring such things) and the threshold of The Millennials all the culture just left the public school system.
Some say it was Bush’s “No Child Left Behind” initiative that killed the budgets for arts departments in schools nationwide, others point to Obama’s stupid “Common Core” schemes that dumbed down an entire generation, and still others are that Bill Clinton’s original push for political correctness got it all started. Personally, I think it was a combination of all 3, along with Jimmy Carter’s woefully corrupt Federal Department of Education and few other dumb ideas both inside and outside of federal politics.
"... what happens if #8 talks everyone into believing the kid is innocent when he was actually guilty."
That's a good question - but it has a fairly easy answer. I'm surprised it was never mentioned in "12 Angry Men" or even (I think) in the other famous play published around this time, "The Crucible."
The acting by all the "bad" jurors, especially Lee J. Cobb, is outstanding!
He truly did his job right
The old man on the jury knows what it's like to be an old man. The younger men are rejecting what he says because he's old.
The pawn shop owner didnt lie. The juror didnt buy it from the pawn shop. He said he bought it in the boys neighborhood, he didnt say at what store.
The reason you've never seen anything from the jury's prespective is because this movie basically says it all. Any new jury movie would just be a repeat of something covered here.
and we dont talk about the remake. how can you beat the perfection of this one
I view this one as way too idealistic. Every juror was of high enough intellect to be able to follow the logic of every argument. When in reality they are much more often not that bright and are easily influenced by theatrics and charisma of the prosecution and defense attorney. Otherwise the best attorneys wouldn't be the ones focusing on those aspects, but the ones who could represent facts the best way. I would love to see a movie about a jury, where maybe around half would never be able to grasp more complicated trains of thought and just voted on their feelings. And someone innocent get convicted just because the prosecutor was more eloquent and charismatic than the defense. Especially if the evidence was really flimsy and the theatrics of the court room were the deciding factor. Would paint people a lot more realistic picture of than this one.
Or even worse, a politically charged well publicized case, where media has manipulated people to be certain of defendants guilt and jurors would be voting guilty despite being fairly sure that the person was not so, to save their own behinds from hate mob.
You really lack imagination if you can't see a jury movie with a different twist being feasible. I just came up with those two at the spot, without any prior thought on the matter.
Juror 8 the k drama film is pretty good
@Greenwood4727 the remake is still great. It's not as masterful as this, but it's still a well made remake full of incredibly talented actors.
@@system0fadowner251 the remake is good, but as i said the first is perfect. compared to the first
I've watched this several times over the decades of my life. It's not one to binge-watch over and over again, but once every 5 to 10 years. It holds up well.
Anyone who has ever been a witness before court knows how difficult it can be to actually "tell the truth and nothing but the truth" especially when it is the first time, when one is nervous or when one is the victim of the crime. You can be absolutely sure of what happened until questions are asked you don't expect, then you find out how much you really remember or how much of your own bias is put in to colour the case in a certain way. In hindsight I am very glad that the defendent I was put up against as a witness had a very good lawyer, but you have to do your part and admit if you are mistaken before someone else does that for you.
Honestly, when I first found this channel I didn't expect the author to have such a great taste in choosing and evaluating movies, in addition to entertaining reactions
Madalina, the rude juror who had a problem with his son was the police detective in "The Exorcist." He's pretty convincing in both roles.
Juror #1 (the jury foreman) was the detective in _Psycho_ (1960).
@@rickardroach9075 True - Arbogast. See juror #8, Davis, play an evil gunman in "Once Upon a Time in the West."
Lee J Cobb, Juror #3, was also the union boss in "On the Waterfront".
I like how, by watching this movie, you became a juror as well - shows the quality of the story and its delivery
Although the movie doesn't say so, I think the defendant was supposed to be Puerto Rican.
Did you notice that we don't know any of the characters' names until the end, when two of the jurors speak on the steps?
Sidney Lumet directed 12 Angry Men. He directed a lot of other really good movies, including The Pawnbroker, Fail Safe, Serpico, Murder on the Orient Express, Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Wiz, The Verdict, Gloria, and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead. Dog Day Afternoon is a favorite of mine.
You said this was only the second black and white movie you've seen. There are many other really great ones, for instance, Casablanca, The Third Man, Psycho, Dr. Strangelove, The Hustler, Some Like It Hot, The Apartment, All About Eve, The Treasure of the Sierra Madre, and It's a Wonderful Life. You'd do well to react to any of these. It's a Wonderful Life is a beloved Christmas movie, so maybe you could react to it then.
Yeah, the movies from back in the day when all (or almost all) movies were black and white don't have the kind of visual spectacle so common in movies today, but they tended to be much more thoughtful than your average modern blockbuster. The dialog is generally a little more old fashioned which can maybe be a little off-putting to some but once you get used to that it's usually very good. You gave a pretty good list, but there are many others that could also be mentioned. I agree with putting Casablanca first on the list. Another couple of my favorites that you didn't mention are It Happened One Night and The Maltese Falcon.
@@hkpew Thanks. I wasn't trying to give an exhaustive list. There are too many good ones for that.
The writer purposely left the kid's ethnicity, race, or nationality ambiguous, partly because it doesn't matter to the play & partly to emphasize, that it doesn't matter!
Truly a classic movie. About half of the actors were well known, with the actor who was the first not guilty vote was Henry Fonda. He was a big star.
Thank you Bliss for reacting this verision!!! :) B & W just add's something to the character's thats lost with color. :)
This is one of the most influential movies of my life. 😊 My Dad LOVED black and white movies and I picked it up from him. :)
I watched this for the first time in 8th grade Social Studies class :) When Juror 10 started ranting I would have SWORE that I had seen it before. It was B & W so maybe my Dad and I had watched it together ... after a minute it hit me. I hadnt watched it before, but I had heard that EXACT rant my entire life.
The worst day of a little boys life is the day his father ceases to be his hero ... 😢
I read this play when I was in high school; I was Juror #4. I also saw it on stage a few years ago. It absolutely holds up!
Thank you for reacting to one of my all-time favorite movies. Probably the best movie ever made that was filmed mostly in just one room.
Thank you so much
you are fool if you think this is better than remake...
This movie is a timeless classic ...Glad you got the chance to watch it
All of the 12 Angry men of this 1957 movie have since passed away with the last of these actors passing away in 2012- Jack Klugman..at age 90
in the 50s air conditioning was a rarity. Large public buildings were the places to find it. Movie Theaters were a place to go and cool off in a cool place. Sometimes going to a movie wasnt about seeing a show it was a chance to stop melting
Also, US movie theaters didn't have multiple screens, only one screen back in the 50s and earlier. So a theater might have only one movie or two movies that cycle through each other. You bought a ticket for one of them or both films if you wanted to see a double feature. The kid could easily have asked for a double feature ticket and stewed in his seat over the argument with his father for the length of the films never knowing what was played.
I used to go to the liquor store to stand in the walk-in refrigerator. 🥵
A wonderful reaction, Bisscute. You were right there in the jury room with them. Too many reactors ignore films earlier than the 1980s, so now they're running out of good films to watch. Watch more old, thought-provoking films: Judgement at Nuremberg, The Grapes of Wrath, To Kill a Mockingbird, just to name three of my favorites.
Great suggestions 🙂
More than anything, this is a timeless human drama. One of the best films ever made with some of the best actors of the day and excellent lighting, camera work and direction, all built upon a superb script!
28:20 "You're guilty of way worse". Biss cracks me up!
Runaway Jury is a John Grissham novel. The movie starring John Cusack is good. Part courtroom drama, part psychological thriller.
The book was better. The movie "Runaway Jury" had a longer jury case than the book. lol
Henry Fonda is one of the greats of his generation.
This film is used in law schools.
If that is true, great.
The defendant is Puerto Rican. The woman "witness," being "one of them," was Puerto Rican.
The "second feature" refers to the days when most movie theaters showed two movies at each showing for the price of a ticket.
Wow. You are watching a CLASSIC. I've seen this performed on stage and easily dozens of times on TV. It never gets old. My favorite courtroom drama.
It's a wonderful film I've loved it for years. Unfortunately many people have gone to prison, or death, for things they didn't do because of jury's bring their personal baggage into that room with them. This movie was to show to not do that and to take the thing seriously. I've been on a jury and it's one of the most stressful things you can imagine. You have only what is presented to you by prosecution and defense. But also the judge instructs you on what you can and can't consider. I didn't know that was part of it until I got there. Even if you do the best you can there's always a feeling, "what if I was wrong."
10% of death penalty convictions are later found to have been incorrect. Either after the execution or beforehand. The system is justice in the US is supposed to be essentially summarized as "Better 9 guilty men go free than even one innocent be imprisoned."
Lee J Cobb’s turn as Juror 3 is my favorite portrayal of any role, by any actor, ever. I first saw this when I was 14, and I remember thinking that I finally understood what people meant by saying that a supporting actor "stole the show".
"The second feature?" Yes, in the "olden days" we had double features.
I saw this movie at school back in the 60s. It was required viewing back then.
How far we have fallen.
Good job once again. Actually, I'm surprised how many younger viewers react positively to this movie. There is a tendency for younger viewers to disregard older movies but when you see a movie like this, your attitude can change a little. The writing is superior, the story is compelling and the actors (all of whom were well-regarded in their time, especially Henry Fonda) engage the viewer with their performances. Really, what more do you want from a movie?
Second feature was a second movie shown after the main movie. When this was made, theaters would show newsreels, cartoons, and two movies for a single ticket. The movies were shorter, so it wasn't a horribly long night. It went out of style for theaters, but when I was a kid drive-in movies still had two movies a night for a single ticket.
Classic films like this one can come from any era. A strong story, a strong script and strong performances make a film great. It’s the same with great music. The era in which it was created doesn’t matter. Greatness is eternal.
Absolutely true , younger people often seem surprised when an old movie in black and white is actually excellent . The truth is that each era of movie making has it's classics , even silent movies . Younger people have grown to have very short attention spans , because they are spoon fed 'action' from the start of the movie on through to the end , If you don't grab them at the onset , you lose them . ( Not all young people , but the majority )
Yes, movies are an art form like great novels or paintings. There's been over 100 years of cinema history. For people who only watch recent movies, they are missing the majority of the artform. Movies become classics for a reason... great story, acting, camera moves, innovative effects, etc. They serve as influences for artists that see them and create work of their own. You can watch a current movie and see what inspiration it took from others... it's all a rich tapestry of interconnected works.
Sidney Lumet directed some really classic films, among them "Dog Day Afternoon" with Al Pacino and "The Verdict" with Paul Newman (giving probably one of his best performances ever). They are must sees. The acting is amazing and they are really gripping dramas.
The Verdict is an engaging courtroom drama
Hey, just because a film is old, doesn't mean it is bad. This is a classic film, a standout even. Smart people and great actors made some incredible films long before even my parents were born. I really like this one. There are many other old films that are just as enjoyable.
They are commonly referred to as “Classics” for a reason.
Cheers 🍺
I totally agree with Abraham. Suppose we alter his first sentence? "Just because the Mona Lisa is old, doesn't mean it's a bad painting." "Just because the Taj Mahal is old, doesn't mean its a bad building." "Just because Beethoven's 5th symphony is old, doesn't mean it's bad music." There is no age with art: new or old, it is either good art or bad art.
Good old movies are few and far between. Actually in a lot of old movies, people behave completely unnatural. With dialogue that makes no sense very often. People throw away every critical thinking when it comes to classic movies, or movies they grew up with. They reserve that critic for remakes and new movies. For example, Alfred Hitchcock is praised, but in a lot of his movies, people are just plain stupid. There is no natural behaving, no natural dialogue
I have been on 2 Jurys ... it was a sad indictment on society .... full of racism, ignorance and indifference. This movie captured that beautifully and the sad thing is that not much has changed in 60 years since this movie was made.
Your living in a sad world of your own making. Racism was laughed at in the 1970's and on. People like you live in La La Land, and see racism in everything.
Always wonder why anyone would want trial by jury. I wouldn't for sure.
@2727rogers, judges can be just as prejudiced as the common person. I've witnessed that firsthand repeatedly.
@@randybass8842 You must be an American. Judges in my country are not political appointments but hired based on merit. Also even if you get a conservative judge they are not extreme like American judges seem to be.
I like this old Hollywood golden studio era classic production of "Twelve Angry Men" (jury). This is a story, unlike those of today, that has a message and a morale. I miss the good old days when Hollyweird wasn't so whacked out. The crap they push out today is what we used to study in our comic books in elementary school. Been there done that. Got the t-shirt. Hollyweird today has most of the young people thinking that stuff is entertainment. In fact they have no concept of what real storytelling and good entertainment even look like. Thank you very much, Madalina, for delving into this picture. Still watchin ya and diggin it. You keep on slaying me with that super sexy accent and killer smile. Big shoutout to you from your guy in the States. LOVE YOU every day and in every way. Always catch your movie/music reactions. Bless you and yours. Go with God. Much peace and lots of love, Bisscute. Later, babe.
You hit the nails right on the head about Hollyweird, that's for damn sure. No care for the general audience, just a tiny, select demographic that are the reason movies now are making less and less money. People are tired of being lectured and having leftist propaganda shoved in their face like a dog who shit the carpet.
"I brought you into this world and I'll take you out of it." is a pretty common saying. I've heard it growing up here in the states. The baseball guy annoys me. I get it and can relate: Getting picked for jury duty sucks. It makes you miss work or takes one of your days off, but you just do it, so you should take it seriously if you're there. I am on call for it now. I have to call in every Monday, just to see if they pick me for that Tuesday over the next 3 months.
Been called several times but never selected, not even for a very significant murder trial here years ago that you'd think they'd want to call from a very wide pool of juror candidates. Got a notice to call in a couple weeks, we'll see if my streak holds or if my time has come.
@@ArtamStudio This is my 3rd time. I got selected once, but cut in the process and sent home. I hope your streak stands.
In Australia you are paid an allowance for going to court each day or part-day. You'll be paid more if you're empanelled as a juror on a trial, and more again per day if the trial goes more than 10 days. You also receive a meal allowance where lunch isn't provided and an allowance for your travel to the courthouse. You do not lose any of your leave entitlements. This results in jurors being more able to devote time to their deliberations if necessary. A far more just system.
Cheers!
My favorite juror was the thoughtful old man with 20/20 vision
He seems very cerebral, the way he gets inside the witnesses heads and thinks about their motivations and replaying their faces in his head
And the way he asks pointed questions I find so funny, it seems like he’d be a little scamp playing jokes on you or making witty wordplay at you if he were your grandpa
One of the classics! Great court drama! Legendary actors!
Thank you for mentioning that they didn't prove the kid was not guilty, they proved that there was reasonable doubt. Too many reactions to this movie kept talking how the kid was proven innocent at the end and there's a really huge difference.
You're distorting the basis of our judicial system. A persons charged with a crime are presumed innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is on the prosecution to prove beyond a reasonable doubt the accused guilt. There is no such burden nor obligation on the accused to prove their innocence because they are guaranteed the presumption of innocence. You don't have to prove something that is, by law, established until proven otherwise. That is why the accused can't be compelled to testify during their trial. So, the boy walked into the court the same way he walked out, an innocent person. The movie proved the jurors followed the oath they took to to rule only on the facts of the case and to find a person guilty on if that guilt has been established by the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt.
Except we don't know if the boy actually was innocent, just that the jury was convinced he is from a previous assumed guilty verdict. For all we know he was guilty and did kill his father, the evidence provided however wasn't sufficient to prove that to be the case within a reasonable doubt. It is better to let 10 guilty men free than punish 1 innocent, so a verdict leaning towards innocence is preferred though not objectively correct all the time.
Got shown this movie as a freshman in high school. The whole class was ooing and ah-ing as the case unraveled. I walked away with a newfound appreciation for cinematic storytelling.
in other words you are just too lazy to learn russian and watch a superior remake of it...
One of the greatest films ever made. Your anger is exactly what the writer wanted you to feel - because it's the right reaction.
They do have a process of jury selection in the US, but maybe not at this time. However, when you start selecting juries you open the process to bias in the selection process. (The book Runaway Jury covers that well, the movie less so.) Surely it's better to have a random selection with no built-in bias?
But the whole thing is problematic - unfortunately it's the best system we have.
The amazing thing is that, with all its imperfections, juries usually get it right.
From my understanding, the people who are summoned to report for jury duty are chosen at random. Since I've never been past that phase (I was dropped without needing to go to the courthouse), I don't know how the process goes from there.
The essentials for any good film are characters and story.
This film knocks them both out of the park!
Everyone writes quite nice because this generation spent hours on circular patterns to make all letters uniform during their elementary years. Colleges had classes called penmanship on just how to write. It was a different time.
One of the best films ever made, a wonderful cast that couldn't be any better for this film, as well as the fact that we don't really know if the boy was guilty or not just that there was sufficient doubt.
30:36 They used to make these cone cups for water coolers so that you couldn't put the cup down and forget it.
So many great old movies Biss here's some must sees To Kill a Mockingbird / Bridge Over the River Kwai / Casablanca/ and if its Xmas time then White Christmas is a classic must. Enjoy!!
I recommend "To Kill a Mockingbird". Also "Casablanca" (good taste Zzrydr!) and alos "A Tree grows in Brooklyn".
To kill a Mockingbird has a very important trial.
This classic is timeless and should be on everyone's must watch list. 2 great military courtroom movies (but they don't focus on the jury) are "The Caine Mutiny" (1954) and "A Few Good Men" (1992).
Scent of a woman, can also be added to the list.
I just wanted to say: you are brilliant. Very quick and sharp analysis. I am in awe of you observational skills. And memory.
Congratulations, you did a great reaction! ❤❤❤
movie is shown in MBA business and marketing courses. ways of thinking, many types of prejudices, group think, variances in perceptions, types of emotions, importance of attention to detail, powers of persuasion, the list goes on...this movie captures staggering amount of concepts...audience is always completely drawn in
You have to watch “Casablanca “ considered one of the best movies ever, it’s old, but really holds up
I kinda like the old guy who first changed to not guilty. When he explained how he understood the old man that testified. It was a touching moment, almost an explanation of himself. Empathy of someone who is not much different than, many other old men.
You have an Excellent Approach to Watching/Reacting to Films... Keep-On Going!!!
The 2 things this movie has are great characters and a story that pulls you in. Hard to find that in current tV and film
The most powerful scene is when the bigot starts to spew his hatred, and yet every other person in the room tries their best to get as far away from him as possible. A completely amazing case of staging the camera to capture a situation of using "physical distance" to represent "emotional distance".
My wife played Juror #3 in a college production. To this day I am glad that my mother met her before seeing the show.
You have great insight, my dear! You called out a lot of things that happened before the movie showed you! BRAVO!
A very small point on rewatch. There was the juror who angrily defended the old man. At the very beginning of the movie, that juror helped the old man take a seat at the table.
For another periodic court case classic, try "To Kill a Mockingbird."
But for another excellent classic, often cited as one of the best movies of all time, try "Casablanca."
Wow a classic film, excelent choice Miss Bisscute💓love your reaction as usual.
I am glad you are watching old movies, most reactors don't, but they are some of the best stories.
For a while after women were given the vote in 1920, it was optional for them to serve on juries. Many would decline service.
You'll will note that the jury room has a ladies room as well as a men's.
@@GarthKlein I _had_ noted. The question is, will anyone else note.
*Cruel Intentions* (1999) _/starring _*_Sarah Michelle Gellar_*_ & _*_Reese Witherspoon_*
*De4th Becomes Her* (1992) _/starring _*_Meryl Streep_*_ & _*_Bruce Willis_*
*W¡ld Things* (1998) _/starring _*_Matt Dillon_*_ , _*_Kevin Bacon_*_ , _*_Neve Campbell_*_ & _*_Denise Richards_*
*Eyes Wide Shut* (1999) _/starring _*_Tom Cruise_*_ , _*_Nicole Kidman_*
I appreciated your reaction. Please continue to watch classic films! :)
My favourite Courtroom Drama is "Inherit the Wind" about a famous Trial. The two main stars both won the Academy Award for Best Actor Twice! Fredric March and Spencer Tracy!
31:40 Back in the "old days" it was customary to show two movies at a time. More commonly referred to as a "Double Feature". In general .. you'd start with a preview of coming attractions then one or two cartoons then the main feature ... a short intermission to use the restroom or get more popcorn ... then the second feature. All for less than a buck if I remember correctly.
The well-dressed actor with the glasses, E.G. Marshall, was more famous during my childhood as the voice and host for the National Geographic Hour on TV every week.
All trained veteran actors all bringing their “A” game , every role played perfectly, brilliant director and screenplay, thanks
This is one of my favorite movies of all time. Love it.
Paul Winkle, who says the boy is definitely guilty, has been saying to me for months that the knife fight in "Rebel Without a Cause" is a crusher for the defense. But it's not, at all.
Anyone can watch the "Rebel Without A Cause" knife-fight scene on TH-cam. The best video is titled "Rebel Without a Cause (1955) - The Knife Fight Scene (5/10) | Movieclips" and the channel is Movieclips.
1) During the knife fight scene, at least 13 stabs/jabs/thrusts are attempted with switchblades, and *all of them* are attempted with an "underhanded" motion/grip: that is, the way a switchblade knife should be used, not the way a normal knife would be.
2) From the beginning of the knife fight - from the first point where both fighters have their switchblades open (0:33) - to the end - (where the winner throws down his knife (2:02)), it lasts for 1:29 seconds, which is 89 seconds. There are 2 fighters with their knives open through nearly all of that, so I will multiply that by 2: switchblades are open for about 178 seconds. Of that time, only 1 fighter at any point holds his switchblade the wrong way - that is, the way a person would hold a normal knife - and that lasts for only about 5 seconds (1:25 to about 1:30). 5 seconds is less than 3% of the total time.
To recap:
1) 100% of the 13+ stabs/jabs/thrusts are done the correct way for a switchblade.
2) For less then 3% of the time is a switchblade held the wrong way (i.e., the way a normal knife would be held), and no stab/jab/thrust is done with it when held the wrong way.
THIS IS PAUL'S CRUSHING EVIDENCE, THAT OBLITERATES THE DEFENSE!! PROOF THAT THE BOY IS GUILTY!! THE CRUSHER THAT HE'S BEEN YELLING ABOUT FOR MONTHS!! LOL!!!
I sat on a jury with eleven other random people who were strangers. It wasn't murder, it was wreckless endangerment. Yet looking into the other's eyes knowing that I had the course of another human's life in my hands it was a responsibility I no longer wish to repeat.
One of my most favourite movies ever! A masterpiece with an amazing cast.
Henry Fonda wa a human rights campaigner in his actual life.
Cheers and thanks sweet Biss!!
29:27 - there’s a similar saying in English that goes something like “I brought you into this world, and I’ll take you out if I have to!” 😂
Back in the day they they would show a second feature. The second feature would sometimes be a movie that came out the week before. You would watch the first film at a prime time and then they would show the second film. That would be the same format at a drive-in. The first movie would be the bigger movie and the 2nd movie would be a smaller budgeted film.
Bill Cosby used to have a saying, "I brought you in to this world and I can take you out! I can make another one that looks just like you..." Henry Fonda (the 1st not guilty) was a great actor along with Jack Klugman and many of the other 10 were well known Character actors, a phenomenal cast.
It is so perfect when the guy goes on a tirade "you know these people what they are like..." and the 11 other jurors just turn their backs to him.
Yeah , that scene really had a big impact
My parents kind of said the same thing.... "I brought you into this world, I can take you out just as easily".
Hope you enjoyed it. Can't wait to watch the reaction.
It's a study in human nature, the jury room is just a backdrop to showcase the behaviors.
As a kid when i was being a menace to calm me down my Father used to say: "I brought you into this world and I can also take you out." haha
A second feature is a second movie. In those days, movies were often shorter and there would be two movies, the first being the main attraction (the movie people went to see) and the second feature would be a lesser known movie. They also showed a newsreel and cartoons. I am old enough to remember those days!
Great Reaction to this Classic......
I saw this Presented Muliple Times as a play in High School (Early 1980's).......
Shout out to the Legends in this Movie...... Henry Fonda, Lee J. Cobb, Jack Klugman, Martin Balsam, E.G. Marshall, Jack Warden, Ed Begley
I have this movie on DVD. When my daughter was in high school, she actually watched it with me. She was studying courtroom specifics in Government class and the teacher talked in great detail about this movie (at least I THINK it was this specific movie. they reshot this movie in the 80's starring Jack Lemmon. it came from a pretty successful stage play).
The two that got on my nerves the most would be (I'm ashamed to admit I can't remember the jurist numbers) was A) the guy with the "hot weather cold" whose prejudice and personal bias was his ONLY opinion (can't stand people like that), and B) the last guy who SO regretted his personal relationship with his own son that he allowed his own bitterness make him hate anything and everything. Absolutely incredible actors, all.
I knew you would greatly enjoy the digs the European gentleman got in : "He don't even speak good English!" "DOESN'T speak good English."; "Why are you so polite all the time?!?" "For the same reason you are NOT! It is how I was raised!" Excellent lines excellently delivered.
I love this movie. There are many great classic films that I hope you watch. Thanks!
Today there's no mandatory death penalty, no all male jury and no smoking. But you can have all the air conditioning that's available.
Progress.
You bring a unique perspective to these movies.
I've only watched a few of your reactions as I've only recently discovered your channel. You may have already watched these two recommendations, both older movies:
"Cool Hand Luke" - this is another prison movie.
"One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" - this movie actually led to changes in how mental health hospitals were run in the USA.
A movie that can take place in one room and keep you on edge for over a hour is really something.
You have trouble concentrating on a story for more than 1 hour???
this is pretty terrible compared to superior remake...
Decades ago, you could pay and see a double feature, two movies in a row on the same screen. That is what Henry Fonda (juror #8) is referring to when he asks E.G. Marshall (juror #4) what was the second feature. BTW Lee J. Cobb (juror #3) gives a Academy Award winning performance imho.
This was shown to me in school! It's an amazing movie. My favorite part of this movie is juror 8 helping juror 2 with his sport coat after all their disagreement, as they depart.
31:39 In those days, cinemas often showed "double features" - two movies for the price of one, played back to back (but probably with an intermission in between - to stretch your legs, go to the bathroom, get snacks from the concession, etc).
Considering what they charge for admission these days, you'd think you'd get not only a double-feature, but perhaps an entire saga marathon.
Double Features are pretty rare now, which is not surprising, considering how many films have expanded from the old 60-90 minute format, to running a minimum of 90 minutes and running as long as 2-3 hrs - epics like Titanic, LOTR, etc.
One of the last times I heard about a double-feature happening, was back in the 80s when The Empire Strikes Back was first released, and they reprised the original Star Wars with it.
I once served on a jury and we heard the case of a young man who was caught in a drug sting by cops and they accused him of buying drugs from an undercover cop. Some of the people on the jury reminded me of the men in this movie. One juror did not want to be there because he owned a business and wanted to just get back to his business as soon as possible. Another person was not in a rush to go back to work so she was fine just taking as much time as possible because she was still getting paid (plus the court allocates a daily stipend for every juror). I was the lone person who wanted a not guilty, because I felt there were extenuating circumstances in the case. The guy who sold the drugs to the undercover cop testified that he was forced to do so by a bully that lived in the homeless encampment, so he was afraid for his life to say no to the bigger bully.
The speech Ed Begley gave the movement of the other actors moving away and ignoring him was a ballet, they moved away slowly, the came back slowly, very well planned. 👍✔️