A Rhetorical Analysis Of 12 Angry Men

Good Essays
This movie shows how groups vary in communication skills. Larger groups tend to have a more complex way of communicating. Members in larger groups usually have less opportunities to voice their thoughts and opinions. Throughout this movie I observed how a group of jurors, 12 men, communicated with each other to determine the fate of an 18 year old accused young man. This movie perfectly portrayed the different stages of group development: forming, storming, norming, and performing. In the beginning of the movie the 12 men are taken into a room where all of them must find a way to communicate with each other proficiently in order to come up with an agreement on the young man’s fate. At first the men are unsure of who should take charge and some even seem uncomfortable with each other. The men proceeded into small talk while others began to make awkward jokes while they waited for someone to take charge. Once one of the men …show more content…
Later throughout the movie groupthinking becomes less and less common as everyone else starts to make realizations and thinking outside of the box to prove the young man’s innocence. However there were some norms formed throughout this movie. One of the norms established by the group was that at first eleven out of the twelve men followed the popular belief that the accused was guilty. Another norm was how the eleven men expectedly fought Davis, because they strongly believed that they were right and he was wrong. They did not let him express his thoughts properly without insulting his way of thinking. Lastly, some of the men were being very rude, almost throughout the entire film, when trying to get their point across, which soon became expected of them; since it was always the same couple of men that were being very aggressive when expressing their

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    12 Angry Men Movie Clip (Architect) From the beginning, the Architect was the only person who believed that there was reasonable doubt, which cause him to stand along. He stated and consistently repeated throughout several scenes that he didn’t know whether or not the boy’s story is true or not which led him to be t he only person to vote not guilty. After a series of several voting attempts, the Architect continued to challenge the jurors locked in thinking which stimulated other to think outside the box and new question emerged. Slowly, other juror members begin to change their mind and vote not guilty as well. His leadership style proved to be very consistent as he confronted others however when necessary and remained very direct, honest…

    • 1384 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Men In 12 Angry Men

    • 1151 Words
    • 5 Pages

    When trying to capture everyone in the group, the questioning and tone is a crucial. (LOOK for QUOTE). The one gentleman, who votes not guilty, receives backlash from the rest of group. If the men would have set the rules in the beginning, it would have solved some of the issues of the group. The group experiences conflict resolution when they begin attacking each other’s character and it is quickly demised and refocused.…

    • 1151 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    It is not a permanent solution though, and people go back to thinking that he is innocent. As a result he only gets more angry with juror eight and makes him think that the kid is guilty. Overall, juror number three is an angry man who only believes what he’s told himself to make him feel better. He only appreciates the opinions that he has believed all his life. He yells at people a lot when someone disagrees with him.…

    • 704 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    “There were eleven votes for guilty. It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first.” (12 Angry Men). On the outside, he is a golden yellow because he gave a sense of hope for the kid that he was innocent through the middle of it all. Jurors that simply went off of their gut were repulsive to him. He didn’t understand as to why they didn’t want to make a change in the case.…

    • 1288 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This juror is well-spoken and his way of thinking more on logical. He believed the accused as guilty because he had preconceived motions about people from the slums. He avoids the emotional arguments and engages in rational discussion. He changes his vote due to the witness's testimony is discredited. As a young man, Jack Klugman is afraid of expressing his opinion to the members of the group.…

    • 1243 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Some were put under positive lighting by having good behavior while others, under negative lighting by having “bad” behavior. The nucleus of “bad” or unpleasant behavior was, undoubtedly, Juror 3. His behavior consisted of constant outbursts, profanity, and unjustified anger. One of the most famous or prominent examples of this is his rant at the end of the film. When everyone was against him, he felt he was under intense pressure and apprehension and resorts to a rant in an enraged state of mind.…

    • 648 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    The Skeptical one stayed on the not responsible side until the very last discussion day due to doubts. The Angry one yelled a lot and was very passionate. He did end up helping convince jurors but it was also hard to follow him since everyone else was wrong in his eyes. In 12 Angry Men, Juror #3 was not receptive to anyone else’s ideas. He has his opinion and is unwilling or unable to discuss with others.…

    • 1443 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He also does not have a lot of power in the room, which contributes to his guilty vote. When the foreman said, “All those voting “guilty” raise your hands,” Juror #2 immediately looks around the room and saw some hands raise and then raises his own hand (11). Because of his unassertive personality, he is vulnerable to the other juror’s opinions. Although he is extremely timid, he starts to gain his voice because he is starting to get tired of being pushed aside by Juror #3 and begins to participate…

    • 992 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    This wasn 't because he definitely thought the boy was not guilty, he said he didn 't know whether he was or not which is considered a reasonable doubt. This set a lot of the jurors off because a lot of them just wanted everything to be done so they could go home. Other jurors just couldn 't believe and got mad that juror #8 voted not guilty. Once juror #8 convinces the rest of the jury to discuss it further before they make a decision, the personal bias of some of the jurors really came out. For example juror #10 comes out and says, “I don’t mind telling you this, mister.…

    • 1003 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Why would he lie? What’s he got to gain, Nine: Attention maybe?” Eight makes a good statement when saying that the Old man’s view doesn’t make sense due to the El train blocking his view and hearing. Nine tends to agree with Eight saying that the old ma In the beginning of the play almost every Juror in the room picks “Guilty” except for Juror Eight. He believes that the boy is “Not-Guilty” saying that the evidence is somewhat false. Of course the other Jurors don’t believe it.…

    • 608 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays