Stereotypes In Twelve Angry Men

The movie Twelve Angry Men shows off many different ways people might attempt to make an argument. Within these arguments, the jurors slowly begin revealing their personal values and prejudices. “Friedman (2007) theorizes that scapegoats and prejudicial stereotyping is psychologically” (Mandel 2). It’s takes people from many different walks of life and back grounds and displays what happens when they are forced to reach a conclusion. I wrote this last minute, so don’t judge to harshly. Some attempt to argue with the facts presented in the preceding trial alone, while others are quick to let their personal biases and prejudices bleed in to the conversation. Although there are many ways humans reveal themselves to a watching world, in the movie Twelve Angry Men, throughout the discussion, each of the twelve jurors reveal their true colors through their individual actions, backgrounds, and beliefs. …show more content…
One of the more blatant examples of this is when juror number seven changed his vote from guilty to not guilty as soon as the balance shifted towards not guilty. When questioned as to why he changed his vote he was not able to give a solid reason which helped display that he didn’t care what the verdict was. He simply wanted to end the debate so he could leave to go watch a baseball game. Another example is whenever someone changed their vote to not guilty juror number 4 would get exceptionally upset. It slowly became clear that whether or not he felt the boy was guilty he wanted to see him punished