Click to Skip Ad
Closing in...
First Reviews: 'Hail, Caesar!' Is the Coens at Their Best First Reviews: 'Hail, Caesar!' Is the Coens at Their Best A.O. Scott and Why It's a Critic's Duty to Be Wrong A.O. Scott and Why It's a Critic's Duty to Be Wrong Kristen Wiig's 'AbracaDeborah' Is the Non-Existent Sundance Movie Everyone's Talking About Kristen Wiig's 'AbracaDeborah' Is the Non-Existent Sundance Movie Everyone's Talking About Film Writers Narrowly Escape Tragedy in Sundance Accident Film Writers Narrowly Escape Tragedy in Sundance Accident Is There More to Louis C.K.'s 'Horace and Pete' Than Its Surprise Release? Is There More to Louis C.K.'s 'Horace and Pete' Than Its Surprise Release? Natalie Portman's Doomed Western 'Jane Got a Gun' Gets Shot Down by Critics Natalie Portman's Doomed Western 'Jane Got a Gun' Gets Shot Down by Critics New Classics: Greg Mottola's 'Adventureland' New Classics: Greg Mottola's 'Adventureland' 'Manchester by the Sea,' Indiewire's Sundance Critics Poll Winner, Is Part Tragedy, Part Farce 'Manchester by the Sea,' Indiewire's Sundance Critics Poll Winner, Is Part Tragedy, Part Farce Daily Reads: Why the Disney Vault Needs to Go Away, How the Republican Primaries Have Broken 'SNL,' and More Daily Reads: Why the Disney Vault Needs to Go Away, How the Republican Primaries Have Broken 'SNL,' and More The Totally Insane Ending to 'Little Boy' Has Critics Fuming The Totally Insane Ending to 'Little Boy' Has Critics Fuming Daily Reads: The 100 Jokes That Shaped Modern Comedy, When TV Drama Cover The Iowa Caucus, and More Daily Reads: The 100 Jokes That Shaped Modern Comedy, When TV Drama Cover The Iowa Caucus, and More Daily Reads: The 'Hollywood Blackout' Controversy at the 1996 Academy Awards, Everybody's a Critic and That's How it Should Be, and More Daily Reads: The 'Hollywood Blackout' Controversy at the 1996 Academy Awards, Everybody's a Critic and That's How it Should Be, and More Adam Sandler's 'The Ridiculous 6' Is Getting Some of the Year's Most Hilariously Scathing Reviews Adam Sandler's 'The Ridiculous 6' Is Getting Some of the Year's Most Hilariously Scathing Reviews Could 'The Hateful Eight' Kill Film Instead of Saving It? Could 'The Hateful Eight' Kill Film Instead of Saving It? One of the Best Movies of 2015 Is Now Available On Demand. (Also It's 16 Minutes Long.) One of the Best Movies of 2015 Is Now Available On Demand. (Also It's 16 Minutes Long.) 'The Gift': A Great Thriller (Almost) Ruined By a Terrible Ending 'The Gift': A Great Thriller (Almost) Ruined By a Terrible Ending 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens': Why Rey's Hypercompetence Is a Feature, Not a Bug 'Star Wars: The Force Awakens': Why Rey's Hypercompetence Is a Feature, Not a Bug Is 'Horace and Pete' Worth $5? And Who's Asking, Anyway? Is 'Horace and Pete' Worth $5? And Who's Asking, Anyway? Fear of a Black Dingus: Quentin Tarantino's 'The Hateful Eight' Fear of a Black Dingus: Quentin Tarantino's 'The Hateful Eight' Daniel Radcliffe's Farting Corpse Stars in the Movie That's Tearing Sundance Apart Daniel Radcliffe's Farting Corpse Stars in the Movie That's Tearing Sundance Apart

From the Wire: Was '12 Angry Men' Guilty of the Wrong Verdict?

Criticwire By Matt Singer | Criticwire August 2, 2012 at 5:16PM

Is that great feel-good ending all wrong for the case it's about?
4

"12 Angry Men."
"12 Angry Men."
This piece contains spoilers for "12 Angry Men."

Prepare to have your eyes opened. At the A.V. Club, Mike D'Angelo has written a thinkpiece about the Sidney Lumet classic "12 Angry Men" that is at once extremely rational and extremely provocative. This film has been treasured for decades as one of the finest depictions of the American legal system, not necessarily in how it works but in how we want it to work. 11 men all believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that a teenager is guilty of the murder of his father. Little by little, the one dissenting voice (Henry Fonda) forces them to reconsider. In the end, the teen is found not guilty, and the jurors go their separate ways; the thunderstorm that has been building throughout the film passes, the clouds break, the music swells, and we turn off the film content that justice was done. 

But was it? D'Angelo mounts his own defense as a sort of counter-Fonda figure. Now that we've all been convinced the teen is innocent, he reminds us of the evidence. If O.J. Simpson was guilty of murder -- as most people believe, regardless of the jury's verdict -- then the kid in "12 Angry Men" was almost certainly guilty too.

"What ensures The Kid’s guilt for practical purposes, though neither the prosecutor nor any of the jurors ever mentions it (and Rose apparently never considered it), is the sheer improbability that all the evidence is erroneous. You’d have to be the jurisprudential inverse of a national lottery winner to face so many apparently damning coincidences and misidentifications. Or you’d have to be framed, which is what Johnnie Cochran was ultimately forced to argue -- not just because of the DNA evidence, but because there’s no other plausible explanation for why every single detail points to O.J. Simpson’s guilt. But there’s no reason offered in '12 Angry Men' for why, say, the police would be planting switchblades."

D'Angelo doesn't uncover a smoking gun; he simply points out the sheer implausibility of all of the facts in the case if the teen is innocent. He didn't kill his father right after threatening to kill him, but someone else did, with a knife identical to the one the teen owned and lost on that exact same night? D'Angelo's right; it's all circumstantial evidence, but it's a lot of circumstantial evidence.

Is there some other explanation for the events? I can envision at least one scenario, but it's equally as implausible. D'Angelo, like the jurors in the movie, makes a big deal out of the fact that the teenager's alibi at the time of the murder is incredibly flimsy; he claims he was out at the movies, but he can't remember what movie he saw or who was in it. It's possible the kid forgot what he saw. It's also possible he's lying, not because he killed his father, but because he knows who did and he's protecting the real guilty party. Maybe the son was involved in a gang or organized crime. Maybe that's why the father and the son got into such a heated argument earlier that night. Maybe the father learned about his son's activities and was ready to go to the police. And maybe to shut him up someone else in the organization killed the father. Maybe he used the son's knife to do it, or maybe everyone in the organization carries the same knife as some sort of sign of their affiliation. Or maybe I have a really overactive imagination.

Putting all that aside, what's most interesting about D'Angelo's interpretation is not the fact that the jurors in "12 Angry Men" possibly let a guilty man go free, but that within the context of the film they're heroes for doing it, while the jurors who let O.J. walk are often looked at in a much harsher light.  So why do we root for juries in movies to acquit defendants who are almost definitely guilty, while rooting against them when they do the same thing in real life? It's all a matter of perspective; Lumet aligns us with Fonda's juror -- he's the underdog, and we love underdogs. Watching the Simpson trial on cable television you never even saw the jurors -- but you saw plenty of the victims' grieving families. Beyond a reasonable doubt, that makes a difference.

Read more "Did '12 Angry Men' Get It Wrong?"

This article is related to: From the Wire, Mike D'Angelo, 12 Angry Men


E-Mail Updates