wow! So cool! Twelve Angry Men is about a jury composed of twelve people from different professions, analyzing the case of a teenager who killed his father with a folding knife based on the available evidence, and finally came to a unanimous conclusion, which must be an opinion. Reach an agreement, if all agree that the juvenile is innocent, the juvenile will be released; otherwise, he will be sent to the electric chair at the age of 18.
The logic is meticulous and the plot is gripping. A huge leap from 11:1 to 0:12, listening to the 12 jury members analyze the case, it feels like you are in the scene. Only after watching the movie in 1957 can I truly say that I have seen the movie. This is what an old movie should look like. It is worth rewatching many times. suspicious, so as to make the case clear.
The father of an 18-year-old gangster who was stabbed to death with a folding knife has also been arrested. The current evidence supporting juvenile guilt is as follows:
(1) The old man downstairs heard the child upstairs say: I'm going to kill you. A second later, he heard someone fall to the ground, and then the young man ran downstairs and ran out. According to the old man, he went from getting up to walking. It only took 15s to get to the end of the corridor to unlock the lock. (2) The woman who lived opposite also said in court that she saw someone on the opposite side stab another person with a knife at 3:00 in the middle of the night, a 6-car long tram?, She saw the whole process of the crime from the last two trams. (3) On the day of the incident, the child just bought a folding knife that was exactly the same as the incident. The boss who sold the knife said that this knife was very special because it was carved with beautiful patterns, and there was only one in the store. It was such a coincidence that I discovered this knife just after the murder was over! (4) According to the child, after buying the knife at about 8:15 p.m., I ran into a friend, chatted for about an hour, and left. Then the old man downstairs heard the voice upstairs, and the young man ran out. After that, the child went to the movie and asked him the name of the movie and the actors, but he couldn't tell the name of the movie, but asked him where is the folding knife? All he said was that it fell out of his pocket.
Looking at the above evidence, there seems to be no flaws. At the beginning of the film, 12 people raised their hands to vote. Everyone said that the evidence was obvious, and there was no need to discuss it. It was estimated that it would be solved in five minutes. Some people even think about going to the ball game after the end and so on. Voting began, with 11 people raising their hands to show the juvenile was guilty and one innocent. Immediately afterwards, a shocking reversal occurred: the vote that considered the juvenile guilty: innocent 11:1 became 10:2, 9:3, 6:6, 3:9, and finally 0:12!
The film is very exciting and the logic is very strict. In fact, at the beginning, I also thought that this young man was guilty, because he experienced 18 years of fear and fear, and was cursed and beaten by his father every day. He had sufficient reasons to kill his father, and The evidence mentioned above is also sufficient to prove that he is not innocent and should be punished by the law! And the wonderful thing about this drama is that the mystery is solved little by little, the strangeness slowly emerges, and the number of votes supporting the innocence of young people is increasing!
As the case unfolds step by step, the following doubts arise:
(1) First of all, everyone who lives next to the tram knows that when the tram passes by, the sound is very loud, and how can the old man hear what the young man said: I'm going to kill you?
(2) The old man walks with a limp, but he is trying his best to hide his lameness in court. How can a lame old man get up from the bed and walk through the long corridor to open the door after only 15 seconds to support the jury of the juvenile's innocence After the group members recovered the scene, they also found that their suspicions were correct. The actual measurement took a full 41s! Incredible!
(3) According to the recollection of the woman living opposite in the courtroom, what she saw was the boy stabbing his father downward with a knife, and one of the members said that the folding knife was used with the edge of the knife facing upwards, and only specially trained people To stab an adult to death, this is obviously a big question.
(4) During the voting recall case, one of them was wearing glasses. When he took off the glasses, he kept pinching his nose, and there was a mark on his nose because he had been wearing glasses all the year round. Coincidentally, that woman also had a mark on her nose, and pinched her nose many times in court? (Although she didn't wear glasses in court, and that misled a lot of people because of this.) So! ! ! This is enough to prove that what she saw at three in the middle of the night was a vague figure and not necessarily the boy himself.
(5) The young man said that he came back from watching a movie at 3:00 in the middle of the night, but when he asked her the name of the movie and some details, he couldn't remember at all. The actual situation was that when he asked this question, he asked him in front of his father's body, and he was killed that night. His father beat him up, what can you think of under such pressure?
(6) The child comes back at three in the middle of the night, try if you kill someone else, will you come back? Moreover, the woman screamed after seeing the murder case. If the old man downstairs heard the voice of the young man before, then the young man could hear the woman's voice, which means that he knew that someone saw him kill him. won't be back!
Until all the evidence is turned out, no one will say that the juvenile is guilty again! So, what you see and hear is not necessarily true, and what you see is not necessarily true?
View more about 12 Angry Men reviews
