Where can I see old movies better? Faced with this question, my previous answer was that it is better to see West Lake at best. The so-called fierce "Rashomon", the so-called gorgeous "Gone with the Wind", and the so-called classic "Budget of North Africa" all did not make me sneeze. As long as they are old movies, no matter how talented they are, they are all old men now; no matter how much they sink fish and wild gooses, they are all old women now. But "Twelve Angry Men" taught me deeply. No, it taught me deeply. Old films can also grow old and grow stronger, and reach the "astounding" level. Later, I will ask where old movies can be tough, and I will point to the moon. "Twelve Angry Men" was watched at night. After watching the whole film for an hour and a half, I was so excited that I watched it again. The second time is not skipped and watched, but a complete and continuous second time. It was two o'clock in the morning after the second time, but I still couldn't calm the flame in my heart, and couldn't sleep for a long time. Good movies delight people, and great movies transform people. "Twelve Angry Men" has transformed me to a certain extent, making me truly realize how rich the movie attracts audiences! Now after several days of calm thinking, I have initially figured out why this old black and white film from the 1950s can be so addictive, so I wrote it down, hoping to attract more fans for "12 Angry Men". The whole "Twelve Angry Men" is a scene (the court scene at the beginning and the end are negligible, it is completely decorative, and it will not have a big impact if deleted): twelve jury members discuss in a lounge Decide whether a murder case is true. The defendant in the murder was an 18-year-old child, and the deceased was his father. The 12 jury members must discuss the unanimous opinion: the child's murder was found not guilty. If so, the child will be sent to the electric chair to be executed. If it is not established, then the reason for the failure must be based on "reasonable doubts" arising from the reasoning, inquiries, evidence, testimony, or procedures of the entire trial. Since the personal and physical evidence was complete, 11 of the twelve people at the beginning categorically found the child guilty. Only the architect played by Henry Fonda found the case strange. In the end of the movie, all twelve people found the child innocent. One end and the other, the contrast is great. This seemingly "impossible task" often tests the ability of the script the most. This is like a propositional composition. It is called ability if it is easy to draw, and it is called Promise if it is sloppy. Unlike domestic blockbusters, "Twelve Angry Men" has become a model of this kind of drama full of conflicts-I just regret why I saw it so late. Let's start from the beginning, first face this proposition and composition for ourselves, see what answers can be given, and then see how "Twelve Angry Men" answers. There are several difficulties in the topic: First, the movie only takes place in one meeting room Here, this means that there are almost no major changes that make visual pleasure; second, the movie is about twelve people, and twelve people say no more, no less, no more because there is no change, and no more because We must introduce each character in place, including occupation, personality, IQ, background, political orientation, and mental history. All of these must be reflected through dialogue and actions, and make people remember it. Thinking about it, it is an incomparably vast narrative. Engineering; Three. This is about a murder trial. The murder case has a lot of witnesses, evidence, testimony, including time, place, people, and psychological analysis. This information is massive, how to make massive amounts of information The information is reasonable, planned, and step-by-step arranged in the dialogue between each person, and fully caters to the acceptance level of the broad audience. There is no need to take notes or check information. This is an even more difficult thing; fourth, the story is used In one sentence, it is "a miraculous reversal", that is, one person gradually persuades the remaining eleven people. This is the biggest difficulty of the film, because such a dramatic plot, as long as the arrangement is exaggerated, there will be deliberate suspicion. The subtle arrangement makes the audience feel unreliable, and at what pace the twelve people are persuaded one by one, it is a profound knowledge-a little carelessness, the audience will feel that it was arranged, false Once Dakong's hat is buttoned, don't even think about turning over again. This is the hardest point. So how did "Twelve Angry Men" come to life? It suddenly occurred to me that before talking about "Twelve Angry Men," I might as well talk about another movie that was very popular on the Internet last year but was very unknown in theaters-"This Men come from the earth. Regarding this movie, I have written about it before, so I won’t repeat the points I said before. In terms of narrative techniques, under the premise that the plot development is also promoted by dialogue in a closed space, "This Man Comes From Earth" has no breakthrough compared with "Twelve Angry Men" (the change from black and white to color seems weak) , And the regress is obvious. Whether it’s action scenes, music arrangement, actor performances, or line design, the appeal is poor. It’s not a story, it’s the difference between professional and amateur. This is a strange phenomenon. Now the praises of "This" by people who admire "This", "Twelve Angry Men" is very popular. If these words are posted on the public Internet, there are likely to be many fans of "This" attacking me as SB with vicious words, but I believe that after reading my analysis, these people will shut up, because obviously the editor and director of "Twelve Angry Men" The many geniuses of "This" either failed or were greatly compromised. Okay, let's go to the topic, and I won't mention "This" anymore. Although following the pace of genius is irrelevant, I will still try to analyze the techniques of "Twelve Angry Men". One, how How about remembering twelve people at once? Twelve jury members, twelve protagonists. What is the most afraid of many people? chaos. Because only Henry Fonda is a big star (in fact, for young people like us, this face is absolutely unknown), so that the audience can remember everyone in half an hour, and then look forward to them in the next hour It would take a lot of work to take turns on stage and sing the opera! I still can't imagine how much talent is needed to build such a magnificent narrative building. First of all, I would like to ask everyone, if you are asked to make a film and there are twelve different characters to be introduced, in what way would you use to make the audience remember who they are "good and fast"? Let us think about the more famous group drama movies of about ten people. "The Lord of the Rings" is distinguished by race, and "Call of Love" is distinguished by many celebrities, and they all introduce characters over a long period of time. What if the time is tight and only half an hour? What if the characters are not stars? How to do? The method of "Twelve Angry Men" is different, and only this film can use their method. The way they guide the audience to remember characters is not the name (there is no name, and the name is not important), not the number (the number has no personality differences, but will hinder people’s memory), not the occupation and personality (this takes time to strengthen the impression, It’s not a very simple and effective method), it’s not a tall, short, fat and thin appearance (it still needs to be repeatedly strengthened to make people remember), it’s not clothing (not only black and white, but everyone wears similar formal attire)...what the hell is it? Someone told me that spies can memorize a long paper in a short time, not by memorizing, but by clever memorization, that is, replacing some text code with another non-text code, such as us A certain part of the body or the location of provinces on the map of China, then the brain area it uses is not the area we usually use to memorize text, but other brain areas that are responsible for processing concrete things, so the memory efficiency will be greatly improved. According to my understanding, its core skills are equivalent to the "combination of numbers and shapes" in high school mathematics classes. Indeed, I can answer almost all types of questions by relying only on the combination of numbers and shapes. At this point, I can't help but sigh that the editor and director of "Twelve Angry Men" is a genius. Before they knew it, they turned us into a powerful Byrne, guided us to use spies to remember, let us remember these twelve people effortlessly. The first thing the editor did at the beginning was to establish a moderator; and the first thing the moderator did was to announce that everyone was seated according to the jury number. Note that this humble announcement is the cornerstone of the entire narrative! "twelve The way that "Angry Man" allows us to remember everyone in a very short time is the location of these twelve people! ! ! Let fixed people sit in fixed positions on a long table, one on one end and five on each side. Even if people walk around because of the plot, they will surely come back to their seats after a while and continue to strengthen the impression. I bet that anyone who has watched "Twelve Angry Men" basically can't name the characters, but they can all tell where everyone is! simple! efficient! It's a genius! Other movies can't do this at all, because it's impossible to keep the character from moving from beginning to end. So, the scene is single, others say it is a narrative disadvantage, but when I talk about geniuses, it is a unique advantage! "Twelve Angry Men" can only lose the shackles, but get the whole world! Second, how can each of these twelve angry men sing and sing? Well, we analyzed why we can remember these twelve people at once, but this is just the most basic and simplest first step for the choreographer to conquer us. Next, we need to analyze why they can make everyone leave us such a deep impression? It is necessary to reiterate several major difficulties here: First, it should not be too exaggerated, otherwise the audience will look stupid and hypocritical when they see your skills. It seems too utilitarian, so it has been BS until now); Second, it should not be too low-key, otherwise the effect will be ineffective, and the audience will not know your expression; Third, you cannot label the characters, a movie that relies on characters and dialogue to support the scene, labeling is suicidal; 4. Of course, everyone can’t perform at the same time, and it’s hard to grasp the overall rhythm when playing in batches. Fifth, everyone’s views and thoughts have levels and changes, because except for the first one, the other eleven people have experienced 180 There is no precedent for this kind of story. For the above six problems, "Twelve Angry Men" must overcome the top five. For the convenience of the description, I will introduce the twelve people in a clockwise direction according to the position of the twelve angry men sitting at the edge of the long table: Twelve o'clock direction: it is the host, juror No. 1, and the head of the jury. The coach of the school football team. His role is the organizer. In the story, he played a very small role; but in the film structure, only through him can the director achieve certain intentions: he is responsible for providing information and props support, responsible for formulating rules, and responsible for organizing voting on a regular basis. Although he himself had been emotional, the rules he formulated effectively kept the remaining eleven angry men in their seats. The most commendable thing is his support for this principle-as long as someone proposes, a vote will be organized. This makes both the angry guy and the audience You can see the results of the dispute after a period of arguing, and each result produces a new psychological effect for everyone, pushing the story forward. A little direction: Juror No. 2, a small man, wears glasses, a young man, unclear occupation, but it should be a job that requires a high IQ, because Juror No. 7 often satirizes his "genius". He didn't have many roles, and he participated in jury work for the first time. At first he didn't have his own opinion, but as the discussion deepened, he gradually got a stand. Although he did not stand on the cusp of the storm, he was very helpful a few times. The question of the way the murderer took the knife was raised, which indirectly contributed to such a "reasonable question". He helped No. 8 to repeat the scene for a few seconds, and he was enthusiastic and provided everyone with throat lozenges. Two directions: Juror No. 3, middle-aged, loud voice, hot temper, and opened a communications company by himself. Proud, conceited, but illogical. Because he broke up with his son, severed the father-son relationship, and looked at the father-killing case with hatred of the younger generation, he was the last and most stubborn person to stand in a "guilty" position. As an experienced juror, he made quite detailed notes during the jury, so he was also the first person to list information about the case, mainly the testimony of two witnesses, the elderly and women, so we know how disadvantaged the defendant is. : The old man not only heard his quarrel with his father, but also witnessed his son fleeing away. The women also witnessed the whole process of the murder across the street. Thanks to the information of Juror No. 3, we are basically on the "guilty" side. No. 3 doesn't know how to speak, especially when he leaked his mouth several times, his own oolong lines have highlighted the cute side of his hateful appearance. Three-point direction: Juror No. 4. If No. 3 is the most stubborn "BOSS", then No. 4 is really the most powerful "BOSS". Number 4 is my favorite character because it was so successful. As an investment broker, he has the most confident stance, the most rigorous expression, the clearest logic, the most objective position, and the most stable emotions. My best buddy, determined to be a professional like him, and the result was very similar to him, even if he was objective enough to make mistakes, he would blame himself. The last sentence "It is strange that I ignored this detail" was written by the screenwriter. The stroke of magic is simply Sherlock Holmes in the financial world! Such an extremely tough man is the most troublesome when he is an enemy, but the most reliable when he is a comrade-in-arms. As the last second person to be persuaded, he is actually the ultimate boss. If a detail is not brought up, he is likely to regain lost ground, and even come to a turnaround—in fact, he created the only one. Reversal, and rational and powerful. When he declared When Bu himself voted "not guilty" and said "because I had a reasonable question", I simply shouted long live. Listening to this person is a kind of enjoyment. To talk about his shortcomings, it may be that he is too rational. Four directions: Juror No. 5, whose career is unknown but should be considered a decent job. He came from the same slum as the defendant. He hesitated a little at first, and after the fourth vote, he stood firmly on his innocence position. The biggest contribution is his identity: not only proved that people from slums are not necessarily worthless, but also proved through his personal experience that the defendant would not assassinate people in the same way as in the case, and answered the question raised by No. 2 to complete the formation. A "reasonable question" was raised. Five-point direction: Juror No. 6, whose profession is a decoration worker. Although his profession is not decent, he is well educated and respects the old and loves the young. In the beginning, it was a firm "guilty" faction, which did not play a major role in promoting the clues of the story. However, in the toilet, he asked No. 8 a very philosophical question: "If you really convince us that we are all not guilty, But the child really killed his father, what should I do?" This sentence seems unintentional, but it actually points to the core of "Twelve Angry Men": it is not about finding out the truth, but about finding out what is reasonable. doubt. Six o'clock direction: Juror No. 7, a marmalade salesman, fans, wearing a hat, with a typical salesman character, selfish, fickle, cynical, self-righteous. He has a ticket for the football game that night and is anxious to get out to watch the game, so he is the most absent-minded and anxious person on the scene. This can explain why he insisted on being "guilty" and then changed to "not guilty," even though he did not admit it. Seven-point direction: the most core person will come, Henry Fonda played the No. 8 juror, the only one who proposed "not guilty" from the beginning, carrying the sustenance of the director, is the spokesperson of hope, but not a person The character of "Gundam All". As an architect, although he has clear thinking and raised many powerful doubts, I think his analytical ability is far worse than No. 4, and sometimes even worse than No. 9. He did not propose "not guilty" because of the clear evidence of rebuttal. In the face of powerful doubts, he would be at a loss for words. He proposed "not guilty" because of his correct understanding of "reasonable doubt" and his sage temperament of "sorrowfulness and compassion", not based on reason, but on instinct. So he just wants to talk, just want to make a splash. So we see the three sentences he said the most are: "I DON'T KNOW, LET'S TALK ABOUT IT", "MAYBE", "IT' Xiaochai, No.1 called him several times before he heard it, and said "GUITY——" impatiently. It was another magical stroke. It didn't help the story advance, but he played the character of this man in a time-saving and labor-saving way. Well, after spending so much effort to introduce the characters, you can see that everyone has a unique background and personality. This is only flat; in vertical, they are displayed in a rhythmic, hierarchical, focused, and step-by-step manner. Come out, the idea is like this: a new case analysis triggered a new character display, the new character display caused a new debate, the new dispute triggered a new vote, and the new voting result raised a new case. Doubts... the director is through character display-case information is revealed simultaneously. In the end, all the clues are clear, all the evidence is overturned, all the characters are displayed, and some people even reach the edge of exposing the collapse... to complete such complicated homework in an orderly manner. It's talented! Some comrades suggested that the paragraphs of the film are divided according to the weather conditions outside the window and other side plots that distract the audience. I think it can be much simpler. It is divided by the number of votes: The total number of votes in the whole article: the first time, 1: 11. Only No. 8 raised questions, but I noticed that No. 5 and No. 9 raised their hands quite hesitantly and lagging behind. Later, on the 8th, he proposed to look at the murder weapon and proved that the murder weapon was suspicious as an exhibit. The second time, 2:10, the 9th joined in. Subsequently, the contradictions in the testimony of the elderly and the women were raised. Analyze the mental state of the elderly witnesses. For the third time, 3:9, 5th joined. On the 11th, the question of why the defendant returned to the scene was raised. For the fourth time, 4:10, the 11th joined in. Later, by repeating the sighting scene of the elderly witness, it was proved that his testimony was implausible. This was a powerful action scene and a strong refutation. For the fifth time, 6:6, No. 2 and No. 6 joined at the same time. Afterwards, we discussed the testimony of the defendant while watching a movie. The confrontation between No. 8 and No. 4 proved that the defendant was credible. The scene made No. 4, who has never sweated, sweated. It was exceptionally exciting. Subsequently, No. 2 raised the issue of the direction of the murder weapon, and No. 5 proved that the defendant could not kill in this way. For the sixth time, 9: 3, 1st, 7th, 12th joined. Subsequently, a declaration of discrimination was issued on the 10th, and everyone dealt with it coldly, and the psychological defense line on the 10th collapsed. As the most rational person, No. 4 turned the tide and presented the most lethal evidence: direct witness evidence from women. For a time, no one can refute it. For the seventh time, 8:4, on the 12th turn. The confrontation has entered a deadlock, and everyone is discussing how to make a decision. On the 9th, he observed a detail and put forward the most exciting argument and countermeasure in the whole article. Refute, in order not to affect your interest in watching it for the first time, I refuse to disclose that this is about glasses and eyesight. At this point, all the evidences of all the people who were originally conclusive have been questioned. The eighth time, 11:1, only No. 3 insisted. No. 3 lost control of his emotions, his defense also collapsed, and finally voted for "not guilty." There were a total of 8 battles, each of which was an epic battle between the personalities and positions of certain angry men. Although it is a black and white picture, it is so informative, methodical, playful, and tense. It is not pretentious and unpretentious. You will be angry when you need to be angry. When you need to relieve it, you will draw your sword to help. It is really bold and refreshing. ! It's too late to write, and quickly brake to end. I found that I can only list the appearance of "Twelve Angry Men", but I can't tell the secrets of why the director organized the plot so wonderfully. I am ashamed, but not at all lost, because the technique is always dead, but I have experienced the living spirit of this movie: that is the respect for life and awe and the truth. "Twelve Angry Men" is not to show off the concept of "reasonable doubt", but to say, when a person's life is in your hands, are you willing to think independently, even with a little doubt? The story of "Twelve Angry Men" clearly and proudly declares that the indomitable spirit of skepticism and the attitude of respecting facts are the reasons why their country is so powerful. So why is "Twelve Angry Men" so exciting? Acting is one thing, scripting is one thing, shooting editing is one thing, in the final analysis, it is such a respectable spirit. It is this kind of spirit that excites us, makes us sigh, and makes us excited! The spirit: that is the respect for life and awe and the truth. "Twelve Angry Men" is not to show off the concept of "reasonable doubt", but to say, when a person's life is in your hands, are you willing to think independently, even with a little doubt? The story of "Twelve Angry Men" clearly and proudly declares that the indomitable spirit of skepticism and the attitude of respecting facts are the reasons why their country is so powerful. So why is "Twelve Angry Men" so exciting? Acting is one thing, scripting is one thing, shooting editing is one thing, in the final analysis, it is such a respectable spirit. It is this kind of spirit that excites us, makes us sigh, and makes us excited! The spirit: that is the respect for life and awe and the truth. "Twelve Angry Men" is not to show off the concept of "reasonable doubt", but to say, when a person's life is in your hands, are you willing to think independently, even with a little doubt? The story of "Twelve Angry Men" clearly and proudly declares that the indomitable spirit of skepticism and the attitude of respecting facts are the reasons why their country is so powerful. So why is "Twelve Angry Men" so exciting? Acting is one thing, scripting is one thing, shooting editing is one thing, in the final analysis, it is such a respectable spirit. It is this kind of spirit that excites us, makes us sigh, and makes us excited!
View more about 12 Angry Men reviews
