PLOT SUMMARY
Ek Ruka Hua Faisla is an adaptation of 12 Angry Men (1957), which was directed by Sidney
Lumet and was nominated for 3 Oscars. It also was another 13 awards and was nominated for 6.
The original movie deals with the deliberations in the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old
Latino accused of stabbing his father to death.
This is a movie about 19 year old boy who was a suspect for murder of his father. There was a committee of 12 people assigned to decide whether boy was culprit or not. The jury assembled in a room on a hot summer day. They had to reach a consensus, unanimously, regarding the boy’s fate – guilty or not guilty. When the movie begins it seems like the committee is already sure about the decision- guilty. However, once the voting takes place the plot thickens. Only one juror is unconvinced of the boy’s involvement in the crime resulting in a difference in opinion and further discussion on the case. The following discussion brings out different angles to the story along with highlighting the characteristic traits of the committee member.
1
Before moving on to discussion on personality profile of each member and its impact on their respective behavior/stand taken, I would like to specify the working conditions or …show more content…
LEARNINGS FROM THE MOVIEFirstly we learn that whenever a number of people from different background,mindset,culture come together then conflicts are bound to happen. The scenario from the movie can be extrapolated to an organisation where people from different backgrounds come together and are supposed to work in a coordinated manner, then due to difference in opinions and personality conflicts are sure to take place.
Secondly, in similar circumstances the role of power and politics comes into play when people with a dominant personality try to influence others and make them think and do things according to them. So in such cases proper attention has to be taken so that the discussion takes place in an unbiased and non influential way and everybody gets a fair chance to participate and express his/her opinion.
Thirdly whenever some decisions are taken as a team then the focus should be on taking the view points of everybody and collectively coming to a decision rather than focusing on expressing only individual viewpoints and influencing others as well.
We also learn that every decision should be based on reasonable evidence and it can
Ek Ruka Hua Faisla is an adaptation of 12 Angry Men (1957), which was directed by Sidney
Lumet and was nominated for 3 Oscars. It also was another 13 awards and was nominated for 6.
The original movie deals with the deliberations in the first-degree murder trial of an 18-year-old
Latino accused of stabbing his father to death.
This is a movie about 19 year old boy who was a suspect for murder of his father. There was a committee of 12 people assigned to decide whether boy was culprit or not. The jury assembled in a room on a hot summer day. They had to reach a consensus, unanimously, regarding the boy’s fate – guilty or not guilty. When the movie begins it seems like the committee is already sure about the decision- guilty. However, once the voting takes place the plot thickens. Only one juror is unconvinced of the boy’s involvement in the crime resulting in a difference in opinion and further discussion on the case. The following discussion brings out different angles to the story along with highlighting the characteristic traits of the committee member.
1
Before moving on to discussion on personality profile of each member and its impact on their respective behavior/stand taken, I would like to specify the working conditions or …show more content…
LEARNINGS FROM THE MOVIEFirstly we learn that whenever a number of people from different background,mindset,culture come together then conflicts are bound to happen. The scenario from the movie can be extrapolated to an organisation where people from different backgrounds come together and are supposed to work in a coordinated manner, then due to difference in opinions and personality conflicts are sure to take place.
Secondly, in similar circumstances the role of power and politics comes into play when people with a dominant personality try to influence others and make them think and do things according to them. So in such cases proper attention has to be taken so that the discussion takes place in an unbiased and non influential way and everybody gets a fair chance to participate and express his/her opinion.
Thirdly whenever some decisions are taken as a team then the focus should be on taking the view points of everybody and collectively coming to a decision rather than focusing on expressing only individual viewpoints and influencing others as well.
We also learn that every decision should be based on reasonable evidence and it can