This is a recurring scene in 12 Angry Men: The Great Judgment, showing Russia's "War in Chechnya." The film tells the story of the "Chechen War". The Chechnya wars took place in 1994 and 1999, respectively launched by the two presidents of Russia, Yeltsin and Putin. The two wars followed one after another, both to maintain the unity of Russia and prevent the Chechnya region from splitting off the Russian territory. Later, under Putin's iron hand, the separatist forces in Chechnya were suppressed, but after the first Chechen war, according to Russian official figures, the number of Russian troops killed 3,826 people, wounded 17,892 people, and another 1,906 people missing. In addition, the war also resulted in the death of more than 100,000 civilians and serious damage to a large number of facilities. In the second Chechen War, the Russian army killed 1,173 officers and soldiers and killed about 10,000 rebels. In the modern society not too long ago, war still made so many sacrifices. The pain of war is like the broken hand and the ring on the hand in the camera. And behind the ring, is the pain of the whole family.
Although "12 Angry Men: The Great Judgment" is a remake of the American film "12 Angry Men" in 1957, it does not see too many traces of adaptation, and the background is placed under the background of war, which makes the film even more tragic It's a lot more epic, and it shows more deeply the problems of human nature in modern society, and the problem of responsibility.
During the Chechen War, a Chechen child whose parents both died in the war was adopted by a Russian officer. Later, the adoptive parents were suddenly killed, and the Chechen adopted son was regarded as the first suspect. Physical evidence, witness evidence, and the motive for the murder seem to be all there, so the prosecutor gave evidence that the Chechen boy would be sentenced to death. A 12-person jury was assembled for a jury discussion in the small gymnasium of an operating elementary school. And this discussion will determine the ultimate fate of the Chechen lad. Just as almost everyone was prejudiced against Xinjiang people when the events in Xinjiang happened, the Russians after the Chechen war were prejudiced against Chechens. And these 12 people from all walks of life didn't even think about how to discuss at the beginning, just wanted to go through the motions, and directly and unanimously agreed to sentence the young man to guilt. When the 12 people, each with their own scheming, sat down and raised their hands to pass, they intended to pass unanimously, and then they scattered. But one engineer came forward to say whether it was too hasty, so he voted against it.
As written in "The Crowd", as long as it is a group, there will be opinion leaders, and the opinions of opinion leaders are contagious, and it can control the choices of others. And the book also specifically mentions the jury, pointing out that even the jury is still a rabble. As a result, the opinion of an engineer at first gradually gained the upper hand, and in the end, all the other votes were broken away, and a resolution of innocence was finally passed unanimously.
The whole movie is very similar to 2007's "This Man From Earth", most of the shots in the whole film are concentrated in a room. And the whole plot is almost a group of conversations in the room. It's actually quite difficult to make such a wonderful film. "This Man From Earth" is a sci-fi film packaged as an indoor drama, and a good concept makes the film look extraordinarily different, so it looks good. Another conversation-heavy film was 2008's "Fox Talking to Nixon," which featured an interview and garnered a string of Oscar nominations. The same is true for "12 Angry Men: The Great Judgment", which not only won awards in Europe, but also won both box office and awards in Russia. It was also nominated for the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film, but lost to The Counterfeit Maker.
The above is just a formality, go deep into the story. The problems revealed in "12 Angry Men: The Great Judgment" are not many at all. First of all, from the random grouping of 12 people, at first, they did not think of performing their duties at all. Almost all of them believed in professional prosecutors. They felt that since the prosecutors all identified the Chechen boy as the murderer, then it was enough to believe it. So, what they thought at the beginning was to end it quickly, go on business trips, or go home for reunion, or pick up people, or other things. destiny and its life. What is shown here is the sinking of their humanity. In modern social life, individualistic life has led to indifference to their fate, and has led to the loss of their inner humanity, intentionally or unintentionally. This point is not only in Russia, but in China at the moment, it is exactly the same, the loss of human nature manifested by food safety, trust crisis, etc. is not much at all.
One engineer, instinctively suspicious, then pulls the others into responsibility. In the course of the ensuing debate, one person after another began to really confront the case, and one by one believed that the child was innocent. In this process, everyone begins to recall their own stories, and then tries to understand the emotions and reality of others from their own stories. And let your humanity and responsibility wake up from your slumber.
But don't think that the story is a process of how the humanity and morality of 12 people are awakened. If it were only that simple, the film would not be so profound. The great thing about director Nikita Mikhalkov is that his approach is deeper. In this film, he is not only the director, but the chairman of the jury in the film. In the first half, and even most of the time, as the chairman, he was just a foil, taking a side view of the camera, and even often straying from the camera. This is deliberately set by the nature of the director. But in the end, when 11 others thought the Chechen boy was innocent, he was still the last to think the Chechen boy was guilty. Moreover, his reasons are shocking, and they also open up the main body of the story to the depths.
He said he knew from the beginning that the Chechen boy was innocent. But he had to be found guilty, because for this boy, his biological parents had died in the war, and his adoptive parents had been killed. He was given freedom, but he had nowhere to go. Moreover, his freedom will even lead to killers coming to kill him. Prison is a safe place for him now. In the current situation, the jury should intervene more, first convict the young man and put him in jail, then the jury will find the real murderer, and when the real murderer is imprisoned, then overturn the case and let the young man get complete freedom. This idea is bold and has the supreme righteous tendencies.
Moreover, after this idea was thrown out, the jury members who had just woken up from their humanity fell into a trap again. Is it their duty to rescue a free but desperate child. In the end, they agreed that the little boy was innocent, and the life of the court was left to the little boy himself. Human nature and responsibility, sinking again after seemingly being redeemed. This is a paradox and tragedy of human nature. And only Nikita Mikhalkov, the chairman of the jury, stepped forward to rescue the child, but can he actually do it? This is unknown.
This is a thrilling trial. It is not only the fate of an innocent child, but also the responsibility and responsibility of the rabble society. It is not only the few people on the jury who need to be redeemed, but also the entire current society.
View more about 12 reviews
