12 Angry Men compare/contrast
This essay will compare & contrast the protagonist / antagonist's relationship with each other and the other jurors in the play and in the movie versions of Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Men. There aren't any changes made to the key part of the story but yet the minor changes made in making the movie adaptation produce a different picture than what one imagines when reading the drama in the form of First off, the settings in the movie are a great deal more fleshed out. In the play, the scene begins with the jurors regarding the judge's final statements concerning the case in the courtroom and then walking out into the jury room. In the movie, the audience is placed in the role of the invisible casual observer, who for perhaps the first 5 minutes of the movie, walks throughout the court building passing other court rooms, lawyers, defendants, security officers, elevators, etc. Not able to remember much about this particular part of the movie, I believe this introductory scene's purpose was to either enhanced the realism of the setting by emphasizing the court building's efficient, business like manner or to provide a timeslot in which to roll the credits for producer, director, stars, etc. The
Invisible and distant in the play, we see in the movie the judge, bailiff, those witnessing the trial and most importantly of all- the defendant. There was one difference, a minor or major one depending how it was viewed. Concerning the characterization of the cast and their conflicts with each other, the movie holds true to the play's guidelines. Ah, now we can see where his biases stem from: past negative experiences with his son, the rebellious nature of which justifies the execution of the defendant. Yet at the very end of the movie we sympathize with Juror 3 just as we did with defendant. We see his brutish, sadistic demeanor is just a facade, and at one point he too was an innocent father who simply made wrong choices. Of final note in this summary of points concerning the differences in setting, the jurors all mention the heat wave affecting the city when they begin, and as it agitates them, it serves to heighten the tension between each other and their resentment or other feelings towards jury duty. Detached from the ending, Juror 3 being more humanely portrayed in the movie than in the play was a minor change. For the most part, each character I saw in the movie matched up with the picture my mind's eye had painted whilst I was reading the play. One thing irked me however: all the jurors seemed at least 10 years older that I had imagined them. In analyzing the differences in the antagonist's and protagonist's relationship with each other and the other jurors, it too held to the play's guidelines with the various alliances and verbal sparring making sense in light of each juror's moral alignment and personality. Finally the endings are to be discussed. settings aren't only built upon through use of scenery and extras in the movie. He tells us that Juror 3 was an abusive and uncaring father who, because he caused him to run away, has not seen his son- very similar to the defendant- in over 2 years. Seen in relation to the movie's ending, Juror 3's inner conflicts and humanness is a very a major change.
Common topics in this essay:
Reginald Rose's,
York City,
Detached Juror,
Angry Men-,
,
juror 3,
juror 3's,
play movie,
12 angry,
fleshed play,
juror 8,
conflicts movie,
relationship jurors,
play's guidelines,
|
Acceptance Essays
