12 Angry Men
And so ends a wonderfully successful weekend of home cinema-going. Alone, alas, but one day I'll get my house tidy enough to entertain (and if I'm to entertain more than one person at a time, get some more furniture, and perhaps a bigger place to put it in). In particular, it's put a significant dent in my need to catch up on the Internet Movie Database top 100 (I'll make a new post to update my effort on that front within a day or two, and once the Stalker is back online I'll link to his post that got me started), by fitting two of them into one week.
So, although it didn't begin with 12 Angry Men, my reviews will. It's absolutely brilliant. Ironically, no spoilers follow.
I can't really think of anything bad about this film. Oh, wait, if I really search for something, I didn't like the trailer. That's how much I love it.
In summary, a jury is deliberating, having seen all the evidence in a trial of murder. When a preliminary vote makes it 11-1 in favour of guilty, one man needs to have his reasonable doubt assuaged, or to plant that doubt in everyone else.
I've seen it on stage, and it was brilliant there, which is why I bought the DVD without having seen the film (something I generally don't do). As you might guess from my summary (and it really is that simple: no tricks, no gimmicks, just beautifully written, honest drama) it's got few characters, and few sets. But for a 'small' story of that kind, it has a lot of characters: all 12 are well-formed, whole people, and while some were bound to be more central to the story than others, none are what you would consider extras. Which is one of the most impressive things; it's hard to fit that many characters into an hour and a half, and it's done wonderfully.
There really isn't much I can do to sell it but to continue my random enthusing. There's no point giving plot spoilers, because there plot is pretty linear; simple, you could say. At the end of the day, it's well written, well acted, and just generally solid, and because of the lack of special effects and the integrity it shows in protraying a situation that hasn't really changed in half a century, it hasn't aged at all. Well, it's got no women in it, but you can't really hold that against it, since it was true to the time.
So, see it. But if you find the DVD, don't watch the trailer: it tries to jazz it up to make people see it, and while I'm sure it suited the kind of previewing that went on at the time, it really doesn't do the film any favours at all.
So, although it didn't begin with 12 Angry Men, my reviews will. It's absolutely brilliant. Ironically, no spoilers follow.
I can't really think of anything bad about this film. Oh, wait, if I really search for something, I didn't like the trailer. That's how much I love it.
In summary, a jury is deliberating, having seen all the evidence in a trial of murder. When a preliminary vote makes it 11-1 in favour of guilty, one man needs to have his reasonable doubt assuaged, or to plant that doubt in everyone else.
I've seen it on stage, and it was brilliant there, which is why I bought the DVD without having seen the film (something I generally don't do). As you might guess from my summary (and it really is that simple: no tricks, no gimmicks, just beautifully written, honest drama) it's got few characters, and few sets. But for a 'small' story of that kind, it has a lot of characters: all 12 are well-formed, whole people, and while some were bound to be more central to the story than others, none are what you would consider extras. Which is one of the most impressive things; it's hard to fit that many characters into an hour and a half, and it's done wonderfully.
There really isn't much I can do to sell it but to continue my random enthusing. There's no point giving plot spoilers, because there plot is pretty linear; simple, you could say. At the end of the day, it's well written, well acted, and just generally solid, and because of the lack of special effects and the integrity it shows in protraying a situation that hasn't really changed in half a century, it hasn't aged at all. Well, it's got no women in it, but you can't really hold that against it, since it was true to the time.
So, see it. But if you find the DVD, don't watch the trailer: it tries to jazz it up to make people see it, and while I'm sure it suited the kind of previewing that went on at the time, it really doesn't do the film any favours at all.
Comments