How 12 Angry Men breaks all the screenwriting rules

I stumbled over this gem of a movie only yesterday through a random reddit post. Thank you, unnamed redditor! ❤

Another excellent analysis of one of my favorite movies. 👌

I just found your channel and I already hate it, cuz' you make me want to rewatch every movie.

I am bad with names but I can tell which character is the racist, super racist, very logical, english as second language, sports guy etc. All by their actions. That's why modern movies that does not distinct each character for their traits I would not be able to tell the difference and forget their names

sah la vidéo elle est dare bv L'équipe

This didn't last long enough. Terrific video.

Btw, I'm old: two of the men in this film were friends of mine. It's some of their finest work - work that put both of them on the map, although one became a lot more 'famous'.

It's easy to see why some of us lament the advent of FX in film, especially. The simple elements in 'Twelve Angry Men' can't be improved upon. Here's to the next generation of writers who remember what's important.

Thanks for making a channel that focuses on originality.

I first saw this movie almost 50 years ago and it instantly became my second favourite behind Gone With The Wind. I watched it as recently as a month ago and it still astonishes me with it's brilliance.

"the characters objectives are black and white"

and so is everything else. 🤡

It's the only movie I can think of I love with no women in it.

the comebacks are timeless. they feel like twitter ratios

The problem is I still think the boy was guilty as Occums razor states usually the simplest obvious answer is the truth but this reasonable doubt clause makes people scared to send anyone off to the chair if their is the slightest doubt that probably doesn't mean much anyway though. Same as the Australian movie the interview that he probably is guilty because there is no smoke without fire but because of the doubt that movie plays upon ones sense of reality as well.

Excellent breakdown, I just found your channel and I recently watched again this masterpiece, can you do the breakdown for Robocop? (The original movie) keep up the good work, greetings from Germany

Awesome movie and yes. Great screenplay. Different people have different way of living and thinking.
Even the remake is a good solid film. says it all

Inherit the Wind please

This movie before the mothers fuckers rainbows, hollywood is worse and worse from titanic and getting fucked and fucked after rainbows people

Saw this film 30 years ago and it has been my favourite film ever since. Unbeatable.

It’s a great story because you are watching fondas character slowly save the life of a kid from being murdered through changing people minds

an Extreme Exemption !

I really liked Juror number 4..

Excellent movie and one hell of a video!
Keep up the great work. 👏

#10 "he don't even speak good english"
#11 "he doesn't even speak good English "
Me: Of course you're corrected by the only foreigner in the room

27,000 USD in 1957 is equivalent to rough 286,000 USD today. That's some expensive marmalade.

Excellent video - really deep dive. Thank you a lot for this!!

I have watched this remarkable film over fifty times. At the outset, even the judge's instructions to the jury seem to telegraph his own thoughts on the guilt of the boy. Many lawyers have commented that jury selection criteria would have vetoed some of the twelve men. The bigot uppermost of all. However, for dramatic purposes, his inclusion was a fundamental aspect of the dialogue. Your clip is a marvelous dissection of screenwriting. Kudos!

How about "LOCAL HERO"?

Still think the kid's guilty.

The actors in this movie were perfect, I literally can't imagine anyone else in their roles

I’d love to see the original Teleplay!

When the jurors are listing their jobs, did you intentionally put them in order of juror number?

This is interesting and informative as far as screenwriting goes. However, one just can not think too much about some of the "brilliance" of juror #8. For example, he says the "old man" (a witness) could not have possibly heard the boy yell "I am going to kill you" to his father. And yet the boy yelling that out was the reason the old man called the police. If he had not heard anything like #8 claimed, why the heck would he call the police? He wouldn't have. #8's argument on that point made no sense whatsoever. There are quite a few things in the movie such as that. In fact, one can pick apart just about everything #8 does and says. But it is just a movie so one has to go with it. Just don't think too much about it.

If the Dark Knight is number 4, ok seems legit ...hahaah

Juror 8: what movie did you last see?
Me: harry potter and the philosopher's stone
Juror 8: who was in it?
Me: ok, here we go...

Eyewitness testimony, completely contrary to popular beliefs, is NOT reliable.

This film could not be made today as 12 actors of this stature and ability simply do not exist.

RIP Ray Liotta

Johnny Depp's judge, in her instructions to the jury, just advised them against straw polls as that tends to harden their positions. So true.

I think this film should be used when teaching character orchestration, you can easily tell who each juror is, despite their character names being so similar

This movie is one of those life changing experiences that define the magic of cinema

How about reviewing ' The Scarlet Circle '

Excellent series

This film is not one large, gigantic scene. These are called 'french scenes'. Which basically originated in theatre in which you change the scene or start a new scene by changing the blocking and staging of the characters – Some will move out of frame, some will enter the frame and some will change their positions to create a completely new composition and thus a new scene. The camera does not move much or the location is not changed at all but the scene is ended and a new one is started using the staging and blocking of the actors. This has to be written in the script and prepared in that manner.
This is one of the reasons why this film is such a brilliant masterpiece as french scenes are extremely difficult to write and execute.

juror 11 maybe the most polite among all of them but he has got some scathing comebacks

I would like you to cover the screenwriting of The Room (2003).

I have been in a juror room in Baltimore City Circuit Court - :) The same courthouse (Mitchell) is still standing practically unchanged.

Excellent video!! I’d like to add to the Engaging Audiences section that when Juror 9 admits to writing down not guilty and then asks, if you’d like him to tell you why. He says all of this while looking at the camera, so he’s literally asking the audience, if they’d like him to tell them why he did, and of course the audience would want to know.

Amazingg