12 Angry Men

Nice effort, but doesn t stand up to the original - I really don t think a masterpiece like 12 ANGRY MEN needs a remake. This remake of the classic 1957 film makes many good efforts, but falls short in many points. First of all, I think Scott is excellent, and could stand serious comparison with Cobb in the original. (Alright, maybe his final monologue isn t quite as cyclonic as Cobb s, but perhaps Scott was wise in not trying to emulate that.) Many of the other actors are also very good. But some of the actors miss the mark on their characterizations. Olmos watchmaker is a confused mess. (Who is he? Where is he from? What is his social class?) Gandolfini s Juror # 6 is surly and disagreeable, unlike Edward Binns kindly original. The actor playing Juror # 5 is too confident and bold, in the original, this character was a scared and self-conscious young man who identified with the defendant. I admit that making Juror # 10 a former Nation of Islam member was a creative choice. But why does the judge (female in this version) not set up the atmosphere of physical discomfort and indifference, which are important themes in the movie? And why does # 10 decribe the defendant as a ",common ignorant slob",? His appearance and dress do not suggest this! In the original movie, ALL the actors were superb and perfect for their parts, there were no weak links. Another problem I have with this movie is that in some places it fastidiously modernizes, while in others it stays stubbornly in the 1950 s. Why are there two Europeans on the jury? Before I saw the movie I thought sure there would be a Hispanic, an Asian, or a Middle Easterner. Why does Juror # 7 still sell marmalade as in the original? (Danza seems more like someone who would sell sports equipment or big-screen TV s!) Why does Juror #12 still present the dated stereotype of the 50 s advertizing man? Why is the Olmos character still a watchmaker? Indeed, the screenplay was adapted by Reginald Rose, the writer for the 1957 version, and it is pretty close to the original script. I think in some instances he should have changed more than he did. The black and white and the camera work of the original do a much better job of creating the atmosphere of heat, claustrophobia, and grittiness in the jury room. And of course the central problem of updating this movie is that juries today would probably not consist entirely of men. But above all, I find that this remake lacks the depth and richness of the original. I could spend all day analyzing the 1957 version, its many telling details, its layers of meaning, the countless psychological insights which the actors lend to their portrayals. Not so here. A case in point is Lemmon. His performance is good as far as it goes, but it is straightforward and one-dimensional. He has none of the complexity and shades of self-doubt that Fonda brought to the role. He seems more like a self-assured amateur lawyer than an architect pulled from the street. To sum it all up, I think the original 1957 12 ANGRY MEN is a timeless classic that neeeds no updating. This version has some good performances and is interesting to watch, but in the end it is superfluous.

A Great Success - This movie was simply mesmerizing, I saw the first 12 angry men on AMC. But it was very tedious, and boring. My mother got summoned to jury duty a few months later and she would come home pissed off that she had to do this boring civil duty. so one night she stopped by BLOCKBUSTER VIDEO and rented the new version of 12 Angry Men and it blew us away. We still watch this video at least two times a week, Because it s hilarious, and refreshing to see the diversity in the cast (mainly due to a 40 year time time difference in the two movies) . At the same time it makes you think. I love all the performances by these fantastic actors. Especially those of Mykelti Milliamson, and George C. Scott, potraying the angriest jurors of all. I love when people can let their rage take over and show us all their real feelings towards people from other races, countries,etc.

Very good! - Excellent remake, I think this one is better than the original. George C. Scott and Jack Lemmon are at their absolute best. Highly recommended.

A Captivating Made-For-Cable Remake - Although, the original will always remain a classic, the updated version is a breath of fresh air. I especially enjoyed Tony Danza s realistic, character portrayal of a juror who, for most of the deliberation, seems to be more concerned about being late for a baseball game, later that day, than the outcome of the case, despite the fact, there s a possible death penalty involved. Jack Lemmon s character is just the opposite, a man so deeply concerned about the case, he manages to delve into the psyches of the other jurors to help them understand the concept of reasonable doubt. The script was designed, such that, each juror involved has a unique personality, be it strong or passive, and sometimes crossing the line back and forth, as varying evidence and arguments are presented. True to the title of the movie, the deliberation process oftentimes deteriorates into a heated argument with tempers boiling over. Because of legal issues, involving copyright infringement, relating back to the original version, it is very unlikely that this 1997, made-for-cable remake will ever be released on dvd, here in the US. However, if you own a all-region player that has a PAL-NTSC video converter incorporated into it, it is available on dvd from Australia, Region 4 (...). Extras include a photo gallery on the set of the movie, with directorial shots, etc.

12 Angry Men - Then and now - Dynamics, Dynamics, Dynamics! Can anyone imagine a more powerful instrument in making a great movie? After watching the original of 12 Angry Men in the theater (this really dates me!), I have enjoyed it several times over the years. So it was with scepticism that I watched the remake to this wonderful film. Great cast, directing and production, but what about the end resuslt. Success! There is no comparing the two productions. Jack Lemmon s intensity is not to be stacked up against the aloofness of Henry Fonda. All of the roles should be looked at in this light. A Lexus versus a BMW. Both get you there in style!