Twelve Angry Men: A Utopian Redemption

Marietta 2022-04-21 09:01:11

The central case in this film - the murder of a father by a son, reminds me of the famous work "The Outsider" in the history of Western modernist literature (モダニズム Literature) by the French writer Albert Camus. 'Étranger (Japanese "foreigner"). Among them, the male protagonist (Japanese name: ムルソー) was tried at the same time, and there was also a case in which his son killed his father. The kind of absurdity disclosed in this novel (Japanese: unorganized), alienation Alienation is an indictment of modernity and a revelation of the ruthless and inhuman alienation of the modern judicial system. In the novel, the protagonist, a law-abiding ordinary clerk, committed an accidental murder by ムルソー. I didn't cry at my mother's funeral, and I was convicted of intentional homicide when the details of my life were excavated, and finally I was sentenced to death. And one detail in the novel has always made me curious, that was considered to be the most important news in that season. Hype point How will the murder of his father be tried?

The central case in "Twelve Angry Men" is the son's murder of his father, and the trial time is similar to Camus' novel "The Outsider", which is a hot summer. This 1957 film , undoubtedly makes people aware of its potential affinity with Camus' novel "The Outsider" written in 1942.

Of course, the difference is also obvious. Camus let the protagonist ムルソー be sentenced to death in judicial silence, In "Ten", the young man who killed his father (although the judicial process in the United States does not seem to be better than that in France, and does not give the defendant a chance to appeal) was fortunate enough to meet the 8th jury's argument, and finally persuaded Eleven other members of the jury were acquitted.

"The Outsider" permeates the pessimistic atmosphere of Camus' existentialism (じつぞんしゅぎ, English: Existentialism), which is also followed by "The Myth of シーシュポスのMyth" Le Mythe de Sisyphe set the tone for the discussion of "argumentation", "human world", and "creation". It is a criticism of reason (りせい、reasion) Trust is also the reflection and questioning of rationality and science by Western thinkers who have experienced World War II, as well as the Western civilization dominated by them.

On the contrary, the sense of justice of Juror No. 8 in "Twelve Angry Men", the serious attitude towards people's life and death, and the logical analysis of Chengtang's testimony are Kant (カント, Immanuel Kant) style. In Camus's view, it is such Kantian reason as metaphysics (metaphysics (けいじじょうがく, English: Metaphysics, mono: Metaphysik)) that lays the foundation for the absurdity (incoherence) of Western modernity. Conversely, the villain in the film is either accused of being cynic or implied to be irrational. At the end of the film, people are persuaded by a series of arguments, and even the last person agrees to acquit the young man because he gave up his personal irrational attachment, which seems to be a victory of rationality over irrationality.

In contrast, the French thinkers represented by Europe did not hold much hope for rationality through reflection on the 2 World Wars, but more of the alienation and absurdity caused by the deviation of rationality to Western society. sex, and the catastrophes it brings (world wars, exploitation, colonialism, etc.). This is also the atmosphere that Camus' "The Outsider" hopes to express.

After World War II, the United States was immersed in the joy of victory, the economy grew rapidly, and the hegemony of the Western world was established. In this context, Reginald Rose, the author of the script for "Twelve Angry Men", seemed more inclined to expect a The return of the Kantian critique of reason to solve the problems caused by modernity, to correct absurdity and alienation. The subtext is that he sees this absurdity and alienation as irrational, not as a deviation from rationality. But in any case, the image of Juror No. 8 is too idealized in the real society, like the image of a Messiah who saves the darkness of modernity. Therefore, the final happy ending of this film, the final redemption, is very utopian.

"Ten" seems to begin with a continuation of existential philosophical issues, using the usual rational analysis of detective novels, emphasizing justice and human nature, but in the end it can only expect an unrealistic salvation.

View more about 12 Angry Men reviews

Extended Reading
  • Hosea 2022-03-23 09:01:09

    What is the production cost? Just this one room? Can you shoot such a tight and plump and progressive plot? respect. The first short comment is too awesome. Let’s borrow it: its meaning lies not in the result of "innocence", but in the entire debate process. It is a philosophical proposition about human beings and the world. Collective, individual and society, truth and suspicion, hierarchy and dignity, opinion and understanding, reason and emotion, persistence and blind obedience, law and conscience, passion and calmness, bold assumptions and careful verification and other propositions, exchanges and discussions are sparks The splattering collision is directed at people's hearts.

  • Kevon 2022-03-25 09:01:05

    My attitude is still neutral, but the ending of this discussion should not be a weighing point for evaluating this film. A ruling that does not involve private pros and cons is also a kind of impeccable justice. The pattern of the film and the system of performance can make China feel uncomfortable. The actors used simple language, demeanor and even sweat to create an unparalleled sense of presence ("This Man Comes From Earth" is not magical at all.)

12 Angry Men quotes

  • Juror #8: [justifying his reason for voting "not guilty"] I just think we owe him a few words, that's all.

    Juror #10: I don't mind telling you this, mister: we don't owe him a thing. He got a fair trial, didn't he? What do you think that trial cost? He's lucky he got it. Know what I mean? Now, look - we're all grown-ups in here. We heard the facts, didn't we? You're not gonna tell me that we're supposed to believe this kid, knowing what he is. Listen, I've lived among them all my life - you can't believe a word they say, you know that. I mean they're born liars.

    Juror #9: Only an ignorant man can believe that.

    Juror #10: Now, listen...

    Juror #9: [gets up] Do you think you were born with a monopoly on the truth?

    [turns to Juror #8, indicating #10]

    Juror #9: I think certain things should be pointed out to this man.

  • Juror #8: [after Juror #10 explains that he believes the boy is guilty because of the testimony of the woman across the street] I'd like to ask you something: you don't believe the boy's story. How come you believe the woman's? She's one of "them", too, isn't she?

    Juror #10: [the smile vanishes from his face] You're a pretty smart fella, aren't you?