🎦 12 Angry Men full movie HD download (Sidney Lumet) - Crime, Drama, Mystery. 🎬
12 Angry Men
Crime, Drama, Mystery
IMDB rating:
Sidney Lumet
Martin Balsam as Juror #12
John Fiedler as Juror #12
Lee J. Cobb as Juror #12
E.G. Marshall as Juror #12
Jack Klugman as Juror #12
Edward Binns as Juror #12
Jack Warden as Juror #12
Henry Fonda as Juror #12
Joseph Sweeney as Juror #12
Ed Begley as Juror #12
George Voskovec as Juror #12
Robert Webber as Juror #12
Storyline: The defense and the prosecution have rested and the jury is filing into the jury room to decide if a young man is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. What begins as an open-and-shut case of murder soon becomes a detective story that presents a succession of clues creating doubt, and a mini-drama of each of the jurors' prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, and each other. Based on the play, all of the action takes place on the stage of the jury room.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1808x1080 px 6713 Mb h264 640 Kbps mkv Download
DVD-rip 640x384 px 699 Mb mpeg4 1015 Kbps avi Download
12 Angry Men: A Classic Work of Genius
12 Angry Men is a 1957 American drama film with elements of film noir, adapted from a teleplay of the same name by Reginald Rose. Written and co-produced by Rose himself and directed by Sidney Lumet, this trial film tells the story of a jury made up of 12 men as they deliberate the guilt or acquittal of a defendant on the basis of reasonable doubt. In the United States, a verdict in most criminal trials by jury must be unanimous. The film is notable for its almost exclusive use of one set: with the exception of the film's opening, which begins outside on the steps of the courthouse followed by the judge's final instructions to the jury before retiring, two short scenes in an adjoining washroom, and a brief final scene on the courthouse steps, the entire film takes place in the jury room. The total time spent outside the jury room is three minutes out of the full 96 minutes of the film.

12 Angry Men explores many techniques of consensus-building, and the difficulties encountered in the process, among a group of men whose range of personalities adds intensity and conflict. No names are used in the film: the jury members are identified by number until two of them exchange names at the very end, the defendant is referred to as "the boy", and the witnesses as "the old man" and "the lady across the street".

In 2007, 12 Angry Men was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and is often seen as one of the greatest films ever made.
A good courtroom drama but not without problems
The interesting thing about 12 Angry Men is that you come away from it and can't honestly say if the jury were right to acquit the accused man. The film never really answers the question of whether he was guilty or not. It just simply says that it was impossible to be sure. The film is ultimately about the Not Proved verdict.

At least I certainly hope that we as an audience were not supposed to leave the film thinking that the accused man was definitely innocent. The counter-evidence brought to our attention by juror no. 8 (Henry Fonda) is often not especially convincing but seems to be taken very seriously by progressively more and more men in the room until inevitably we have a unanimous Not Guilty verdict. An example of this, is when Fonda successfully gets the others to acknowledge that the old man witness is unreliable, yet then goes on to base a major part of his own evidence on the old fellows testimony that he took fifteen seconds to get to the door to witness the murderer fleeing. Fonda clearly assumes that this man he has determined as unreliable would get his exact timings spot on in a moment of heightened emotion. It may seem like a minor point but there are just a little too many of these small inconsistent assumptions littering 12 Angry Men for me to feel it was an entirely successful exercise. I really couldn't help shake the notion that Fonda's character had his own agenda and was simply unwilling to back down. Perhaps he was the most persuasive man in the room and that was ultimately the reason that the decision was made. It's difficult to really say with any certainty that the accused was innocent at all. Did they really make the correct decision?

Setting this consideration aside, one thing the movie does have in abundance is stellar acting talent. The 12 members of the jury are well played by all. While the direction is simple but highly efficient; it is not an easy task to set a movie in one room with dialogue the only action on offer but Sidney Lumet does keep things moving along at a good pace and maintains the interest. This is certainly a good movie despite my misgivings. For me it does ultimately have a definite ambiguous quality and if that was the intention then I can hardly argue with that.
Wow, just wow.A brilliant film set in the right tone, no unnecessary scenes or waste of time. It is is a simple plot that will ultimately blow your mind. I watched this film recently and it was difficult in the beginning to adjust to it as it is in black and white. But soon the movie just caught my attention and I completely forgot about it being in black and white.

A very well written script focusing on every detail and there is almost no sign of it being fictional. It is wonderful how the entire movie was set in just one room and doesn't bore the audience or one minute. The acting was phenomenal from everyone and they knew that the movie was going to be special in their career.

A must watch for everyone.
great movie, but ...
I can't add much to the laudatory admiration for this movie -- I share it. A wonderful example of bare, minimal drama, based on plot and acting and characters. I think it was almost without exception a wonderfully performed movie -- Henry Fonda, Jack Klugman, all the jurors.

Here comes the only thing I think I disagree about with others who think as I do that this is a wonderful movie. I think they were wrong.

It may very well be an aside as to what the jurors were really talking about, but to me, it was very important. And Henry Fonda made, again to me, some pretty poor arguments that were to overcome the evidence that was pretty indicative that the boy did in fact kill his father.

Just as an objective look at the arguments being made, beyond the wonderful drama, the boy was guilty from all facts that were presented. Perhaps that may be the only flaw, but a fundamental one, in this very exceptional movie.
100% Dialogue-Driven
My dream come true: 100% dialogue-driven, and captivating!

The characters are varied enough to make the show interesting. The plot serves its purpose in providing a backdrop for the human interaction and issues to be explored. The resolution touches on how our biases originate.
12 Angry Men
One of the all time classics! The story is about 12 jury members in a room for about 90 minutes (real time) to decide the open and shut case of a young boy of 18 years killing his father. There are 11 votes confirming guilty and 1 for not-guilty. The whole movie is about how the 12 votes finally reach 11 confirming non-guilty and 1 for guilty, until the last one too gives in to an anonymous verdict that the boy is not guilty of his father's murder.

The movie was delicately presented. As audience we find that the case that was to be fought in the court-room was fought among the jurors. Each and every juror was aware of all the facts of the case and everyone was on the same page, except one – Juror no. 8 (Henry Ford). The movie explores the value of one life on looking minutely at the known events and unfolding them in better light for audience to understand and know that what seems truth often is not – if you look closely at it.

The movie is shot in a single room that is hot, humid and sweaty – and halfway through it starts raining outside. The enigma of the 12 jurors, the ding-dong dallying between guilty and not-guilty, the peeling of the case layer by layer with new discussions crossing personal experiences and relation to the case was fascinating to watch.

Henry Ford acts with such anxiousness that you are bitten by his conviction of not-guilty the moment he speaks his doubts by saying – I do not know, I am not sure. That starts the mastery roller-coaster to a finale that is hard to take the eyes off.

The Director Sidney Lumet does a fantastic job in I think (most probably) converting this stage drama into big screen canvass with eminent 12 actors. All of them have acted poignantly well in their well written characters and mannerisms. One can see their upbringings while they talk and that is marvelous.

Wonderful movie, normally I hesitate to give movies more than 8 stars, but for this I will give (Stars 8.25 out of 10)
Directorial masterpiece
The whole movie is situated in one room with 12 angry jurors. But still, it managed to be amazingly gripping. There was not a single second in which i got bored. The mystery slowly progresses with details coming out every 10 minutes. It is a punch on the judicious system and shows beautifully how a persons life is dependent on 12 random jurors who do not care at all about him. Acting is superb. Character development is astounding because by the end i knew everything about every character. Overall the mystery is not very great but the story brilliantly shows human nature which has made it one of the greatest movies ever.
Just watch the first 30 minutes of it and you'll put it far away on the very top of your list!!!
And that what I did, I friend of mine has been annoying me about seeing this film and since the film is not a long one (about 90 minutes) I said why not, and then after just 30 minutes I decided to put this film on the very top of my all time favorite film list.

The fact that the film has been shot in one room blew my mind away, seems very easy to direct huh? But with a superb script and acting Sidney Lumet created one of the greatest films ever made if not the greatest.

The dialogue is realistic and so sharp with a brilliant acting from Henry Fonda and Lee J.Cobb, I feel this film is still underrated even in IMDb rankings.

And that line "well, so long" stayed with me ever since I saw the film as on of the greatest lines ever.

This film is a symbol of simple but great film-making that suggests a man should always return to his senses every time and every where.

Simple Formula, Colossal Result
I saw this film for the first time a few months ago and i was automatically annoyed with myself for having not done so long before. To put short, this film is one of the best ever made and rightfully deserves its position on IMDBs top 250 list.

To be honest, there's not a lot that one can comment about the film. There are no special effects, dramatic monologues or defining scenes to discuss and really that's what makes this film the phenomenon that it is. It is quite easy to see where the film is going to go and how it is going to end early on but none of that really matters because excuse the sugary metaphor but it is the journey you embark on with the jurors, in particular Henry Fonda, that defines the film. The way in which each different aspect of the court case is re-evaluated is film heaven but also a hard hitter when reflecting on the seriousness that the film makes about judicial systems and the responsibility of juries to make thorough rational decisions.

If you had told me before the film that it was as near as makes no difference one scene with 12 men conversing for 100 minutes (or whatever), i would have kindly asked you if we could watch Die Hard instead, but oh what an ignorant error that would have been. 12 Angry Men is magnificent.
Definitely Deserves the Praise
This film is nothing short of perfection. I don't want to do a huge review so I'll sum up why it's so brilliant.

Great actors Great believable script Very original concept Shot cleverly (lack of close ups unless it's really necessary. Because the effect isn't used much, it is more effective) No complaints or plot holes of any kind.

I encourage anyone to watch this film!
See Also
Creed II
Creed II
USA ‘2018
USA ‘2018
📹 12 Angry Men full movie HD download 1957 - Martin Balsam, John Fiedler, Lee J. Cobb, E.G. Marshall, Jack Klugman, Edward Binns, Jack Warden, Henry Fonda, Joseph Sweeney, Ed Begley, George Voskovec, Robert Webber - USA. 📀