19 days.
2. How much does it cost to make an Oscar film?
US$349,000.
Twelve white people, a long table, a dozen chairs, and a room.
Coupled with a few worn-out electric fans, a wardrobe, a drinking fountain and a few hangers are all the props. You can imagine that this is a Taiwanese drama (it can only be called a one-act drama), a Broadway stage drama, or a TV sitcom today, but you would never think that it can be made into a movie based on these. Although the scene has not shifted, Friedkin noticed the use of details to remind time changes to promote the development of the plot. From the sweltering no wind in the afternoon to the rainy evening, the sky was getting dark and someone turned on the chandelier on the roof. What is shown here is not high-tech, but sophisticated techniques and unlimited creativity.
There is no need for 3D or Imax, no gorgeous background music. I only know Henry Fonda for all the actors. This mini-movie has no color but it presents the most core judicial system in the most developed legal system today. These twelve people include old men who are over the past few years, small townspeople from slums, Eastern European immigrants who speak English and unsatisfactory, and irritable big old baseball fans...people of different backgrounds, ages and different professions gather together. But it is exercising the core judicial power on behalf of the American people. Are you kidding me? Of course not, nor deliberately fabricated or exaggerated. This is a true portrayal of the contemporary American judicial system. It is also such a system that enables American citizens to share judicial power, limits the damage that public power may cause to private rights, cuts off the direct interest between the court and the inspection agency, and thereby reduces judicial corruption to a large extent. Not only has it guaranteed civil liberties and judicial justice, it has also become the most fundamental prerequisite for maintaining the belief in the law and faith in judicial justice for the vast majority of American citizens for hundreds of years.
At the end of the film, when the twelve jurors finished their duties, left the small and depressed room, and walked out of the gate of the court, the picture suddenly became bright (after watching the 50th anniversary film, I realized that the photographer switched to a wide-angle lens here). A group of people, each back to the original life track, no one knows anyone, or even the name or occupation of the other party. They gather together for a common purpose, exercising the rights granted by the constitution and fulfilling the jury as a citizen representative. obligation. Outside of the walls of the court, they are just a group of ordinary people with their own professional and social roles. Although the work of jurors is important, it is at best a part-time job. This is why at the beginning of the film, except for Henry Fonda In addition, all members of the jury in the first round of voting followed the ideas of the court trial without hesitation, and decided that the defendant was guilty, and they wanted to hurry up and go back to each house to find each mother. One of the major drawbacks of the jury system is revealed here. Many jurors called in do not fully understand what their responsibilities are, and they are also negligent in exercising the rights granted by the law, because they can only receive meagre subsidies, but not Become a stable career. No system is perfect. As long as we can see the prospects for future improvement through its good side, it is worth our time and experience to constantly make up for its shortcomings. In fact, if the filming of such a film is set in contemporary times, it may have to give some words to the democratic liberals. The jury of twelve white men is undoubtedly full of political discrimination. If it is to be remade now, it must be among the jurors. It must be mixed with people of color such as blacks and Asians, and there must be women, no matter what color she is, can this be regarded as a manifestation of progress. . .
In the 1950s, Americans were full of distrust of the government, hated corruption of judges, and were wary of the prejudice and arbitrariness of public prosecutors, but they firmly believed in the judicial system, largely because of the existence of the jury system. Twelve jurors represent the people in safeguarding judicial justice and checking the balance of power between the prosecution and the defense. Looking back at our people’s jury system, is it blue and white porcelain or embroidered pillows?
View more about 12 Angry Men reviews
