It was a late afternoon in January. Dusty light fell slowly onto the green rumpled bed cover.

I sat transfixed, watching men dance on the wall between life and death, shouting at each other, deciding the fate of an 18-year-old boy. As they argued about details that were overlooked in the original trial, I wondered: how often are the courts’ verdicts right? Do most jurors just choose the simplest answer?

****

The movie that provoked these questions is 12 Angry Men, a 1957 courtroom drama. The film, directed by Sidney Lumet, is about a jury's process of deciding if an 18-year-old boy has killed his father.

I used to find black and white movies boring, feeling that without color the world was monotonous. This changed a few years ago, when I became fascinated with old crime dramas and started appreciating their style and lack of blood and gore. I stumbled across 12 Angry Men because it has been hailed as a classic from the moment that it came out. Many people told me that it is an amazing, almost life-changing movie, and it piqued my interest.

On the surface, the film is deceptively simple; it is all set in a single courthouse. The themes it explores, however, are far from simple and just as relevant today as they were in 1957. The movie reveals the fact that the justice system is not impartial and that jurors are human, each one bringing his or her their own sets of preconceptions to the table. The fate of the accused can rely on just one single person’s mood or biases. Truth is not an absolute and can be bent by the will or the neglect of a juror.

In the beginning of the movie, it seems as if the boy on trial is undoubtedly guilty, but Juror #8 decides to take it upon himself to dig beneath the surface and ensure the jury is not making a hasty decision. He feels the situation is more complex than meets the eye. He doesn’t want to condemn someone to death without being absolutely certain of his guilt.

Juror #8 sets into motion a situation where the jurors get into arguments with one another. One of the main quarrels is between Juror #8 and Juror #3 and concerns the angle at which the boy supposedly killed his father. Juror #3 is wrong but refuses to admit it, and Juror #8 knows this. This scenario movie perfectly embodies the frustration felt by the participants, frustration that we all feel sometimes when we one know that someone, or something, is wrong, but no one will believe us. I could feel myself getting angry along with the characters as they bickered back and forth about different details of the case. By taking the route of greater complexity, Juror #8 makes his situation more difficult and dangerous, but he is driven to do so by his moral compass.

12 Angry Men examines many themes that are still relevant today. In the search for truth, the baggage that each juror brings greatly affects justice. One man (Juror #10) simply thinks that the boy is guilty because he has a “bad background.” The boy comes from the poorer part of the city, and therefore some of the jurors think that he must have killed his father based on that fact alone. This element of the plot reveals how the jury process is complicated by people’s preconceptions and stereotypes about others.

My favorite character is Juror #5, who notices a lot more than people ever gave him credit for. Initially he seems like a cartoon of a crazy old man, with unkempt hair and large glasses that barely stay on his nose. However, his character develops as the movie proceeds, and it becomes clear that he is more complex than he first appears. He manages to bring important points to light that sway people’s opinions, while also adding just the subtlest touch of humor to a dark situation.

I would not have been able to focus in the characters as much as I did if the cinematography had not been so perfectly fitted to the movie. Most of the movie is filmed in medium and long shots, creating a certain distance from all of the characters, enhancing the feeling of tension and uncertainty as to the outcome. The occasional close ups that occur are well timed and precisely placed to coincide with important moments. Each shot is well planned out and specific. Overall, the cinematography in the movie sets up a feeling that the situation is being examined impartially.

I would give 12 Angry Men four and a half out of five stars, because it is a timeless movie that is just as relevant today as it was in the 1950s. It is great for all ages, and I do not think that you have to be interested in the US legal system to fully enjoy it. Classism and discrimination are prevalent in any society, and this movie brings to light how they can impede the search for truth in the course of justice. The film made me think of truth as a twisted creature, never appearing in the same form twice. Every decision we make about who is the bearer of honesty is influenced in some way. Whether we do not trust the person or feel that he or she is too unlike, it is hard to ever know if someone is really telling the truth. This movie examines that theme in a way that is very accessible for most people, and I think that it is worth watching just for that fact alone.