george c scott's end scene is awful...he seems to be forcing the acting...lee j cobb's performance is epic compared to this shit...this version blows...maybe becaus tony banta and tony soprano are on the jury?...no comparison at all to the 1957 version which is a true classic
@SpaceTruckin55 I just watched the 1957 version the other day and it was good. Made for its time. But I personally feel this version was better in that they took the time to fix up what they lacked in 57. But, they made the ad guy an idiot in this version. And I feel Scotts' perfomance was epic compared to 57. But I may just be biased by hiswork in patton
@fatherofmy5 you really think scott's performance was better than lee j cobb's?....unreal...i still get goosebumps watching cobb's ending scene, while scott's end scene i thought was overacting and fake...forget about patton....how can you think this is better than cobb's?....well, i guess we each have our own opinions...but mine is correct...lol
@SpaceTruckin55 agree with you and disagree with fatherofmy5. Cobb was scary and Scott was pathetic--who the hell is intimidated by a 300 pound 70 year old man who looks like he is going to fall over. I really believed that Cobb COULD HAVE killed Fonda. Loved Lemmon in every movie except this one, way too paternalistic and condescending. They politically corrected this movie and killed it. Twelve angry WHITE men made the hate and prejudice believable.
@mlwoods45331 I hear ya buddy...this version is truly awful and seems forced...i dont know who won the best supporting actor oscar in 1957, but lee j cobb's performance should have received some consideration...he was completely believable and terrific
interesting to compare, but the acting, the lighting, the shot selection, 1957 blows this one away, no contest. Does better technology mean less need to develop the artistic skills?
I watched the 1957 version and this version a couple of days apart. Of course, it was natural for me to see the beginning of the this version as a bit awkward, saying lines written 40 years before. But then the cast did what great actors do: they started to become the people they were portraying and I was sucked in. I also liked Friedkin's use of camera. He was wise not to try and replicate Lumet's "lens-plot". The camerawork here gives a sense of greater urgency. Finally, Lee J. Cobb gave a gr
@jtlott See, I thought the camera angles did something special for this film, Like it was taking me inside of the jury room and I was watching first hand.
I disagree. In the 1957 film, the camerawork mostly concentrated on one juror as he was giving evidence or proposing. It was easier for me to "be in the moment" or get a good mental picture of what was occurring. This version does that too but it also moves around the room. It's sometimes unstable and it's somewhat distracting.
This movie is awesome, but I think the 1957 is somehow better than this one. Probably because I'm convinced with the cast of the 57' version more than that of this one. Another good thing about the 57' version that makes it very impressive and effective is that, it had some "pause moment", when a good argument is made, and therefore helped the audience to better understand the "reasonable doubts" that are made.
One of the more ironic parts in this movie; The most racist man was black. Only a short time (relatively) before that white people said the same about black people. You'd think he'd have learned something.
Wow. Juror No. 3 does not do Lee J. Cobb any justice. Cobb must be rolling in his grave. This was a poor remake, but thanks for uploading because I've been intrigued to see this for years. To the uploader: if you haven't seen the 1957 version, please watch it. It's magnificent.
@moonraven3 No, I haven't seen it. I have thought about it, I've eyeballed the link in the suggestions. Idk, maybe I feel like I'd be cheating on this version ;)
I will watch it as soon as I have some extra time for a full length film again. Thanks for the comment.
@JesterzPlauge Sorry, I have to disagree. I think Lee J. Cobb's performance still outshines this performance. "Everything, and I mean everything" about this film is just awkward to watch. The original is still one of my favorite American films of all time!
I just watch George C Scott at the end and, when I compare his performance with Cobb's, he (Scott) really looks to be in emotional pain where Cobb has this faint moment that just didn't seem convincing.
I also think most of the supporting cast of the newer film (especially Olmos and Gandolfini) are a notch above the old cast.
However, I thought Fonda gave a MUCH more convincing performance than Lemmon, same for Marshall over Stahl...
How many people can infere that the last man to say the boy is not guilty had nearly the same experince with his child if he had one? Or maybe his father did something bad to him, that would probly be the most impotant thing to think about in the last seven or five minutes of the movie.
@fatherofmy5 i was told this version is good. is saw the first few minutes and found it boring, i skipped forward to see if it picked up. unfortunately it didn't. not all remakes are good.
@MrShinzuzu Yeah, die hard and last action hero are on a different channel. Why don't you sit through the entire film before jumping to conclusions on the quality of it?
@MrShinzuzu That changes the comment completely. Nothing can compare with an original, but the remake brought the story to a generation that would have forgotten it. Also, people from all over the world watch this upload, so it also gives them an insight into how a jury in america is SUPPOSED to work. Which is a fractal of how the country itself was envisioned to work. I like it because it covers so many bases.
@wicked4584 I think the majority of people in this country, I mean the MAJORITY of people, Could give a fuck less about rockefeller's women's movement bullshit, as we pretty much consider everyone equal. energy is a force that goes where it is directed. If you focus your energy on dividing the people up into stupid little roles, -take gender for example- this is what the energy works to create. It's called 12 angry MEN.
@wicked4584 If you'll pardon me, I've seen many adaptations of this play, and men and women starring together makes the drama extremely unconvincing. The angry, tense atmosphere - all that uninhibited testosterone being thrown about, if you will - is largely diffused when there is even one woman present (as can be observed with most cliques in real life). Perhaps an all-women cast would work great, but not a mixed one.
That said, the version set in the 90s is awful anyhow.
I liked the '57 version better. Mainly due to Fonda having that fire in his eyes that made his character more believable. Lemon's eyes on the other hand seem a little too dull and tired.
Good film... Not as good as the original, but brilliant none the less.
Fullgore08 16 hours ago
Still old version is better
sreejithkolattu 19 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I wonder how the outcome would be if in 1957 if the defendant was BLACK by a FULL WHITE jury.......just wonderin'........
chalintje 2 days ago
The first dozen were ALL 12 angry WHITE men.
FORTY !! years later is 12 angry BLACK AND WHITE men
The NEXT version will also include WOMEN (including other ethnicites)........
PROGRESS....THANK GOD WE don't have to wait till 2037!!!
chalintje 2 days ago
Acting is great. Camera angles are complete ass. You don't get any of their emotion when they're talking when it's shot 15 feet from the speaker.
ModestDeity 4 days ago
I enjoyed the '57 version a lot more.
101limbo 4 days ago
george c scott's end scene is awful...he seems to be forcing the acting...lee j cobb's performance is epic compared to this shit...this version blows...maybe becaus tony banta and tony soprano are on the jury?...no comparison at all to the 1957 version which is a true classic
SpaceTruckin55 4 days ago
@SpaceTruckin55 I just watched the 1957 version the other day and it was good. Made for its time. But I personally feel this version was better in that they took the time to fix up what they lacked in 57. But, they made the ad guy an idiot in this version. And I feel Scotts' perfomance was epic compared to 57. But I may just be biased by hiswork in patton
fatherofmy5 4 days ago
@fatherofmy5 you really think scott's performance was better than lee j cobb's?....unreal...i still get goosebumps watching cobb's ending scene, while scott's end scene i thought was overacting and fake...forget about patton....how can you think this is better than cobb's?....well, i guess we each have our own opinions...but mine is correct...lol
SpaceTruckin55 4 days ago
@SpaceTruckin55 agree with you and disagree with fatherofmy5. Cobb was scary and Scott was pathetic--who the hell is intimidated by a 300 pound 70 year old man who looks like he is going to fall over. I really believed that Cobb COULD HAVE killed Fonda. Loved Lemmon in every movie except this one, way too paternalistic and condescending. They politically corrected this movie and killed it. Twelve angry WHITE men made the hate and prejudice believable.
mlwoods45331 2 days ago
@mlwoods45331 I hear ya buddy...this version is truly awful and seems forced...i dont know who won the best supporting actor oscar in 1957, but lee j cobb's performance should have received some consideration...he was completely believable and terrific
SpaceTruckin55 2 days ago
good film
schuriken 5 days ago
interesting to compare, but the acting, the lighting, the shot selection, 1957 blows this one away, no contest. Does better technology mean less need to develop the artistic skills?
MrAndidavenport 6 days ago
This is a greta film but the 1957 version is better
c5128 6 days ago
bsg characters ftw!
JDRhoads07 1 week ago
If it is so hot, why did Tony Danza wear a sweater?
Mountaineer3615 1 week ago
This is just a reboot of the original version.... which was tons better, with some great old actors performance. Henry Fonda was great
beckerqueiroz 1 week ago
26:55
217Gnomes 1 week ago 2
FACTS! FACTS! EWAGHWAUGHAGHAGH
Lateral0Thinking 1 week ago 2
this version does not even come close to the original...lee j cobbs climax ending is superb compared to george c scotts
SpaceTruckin55 1 week ago
@SpaceTruckin55 George C. Scott's performance is superb as well.
Sonate64 1 week ago
tony soprano on the jury....classic
SpaceTruckin55 1 week ago
"he is an old man, how can he be sure about anything?" brilliant quote
captain2ahab 2 weeks ago
@captain2ahab Yeah, that comment made me chuckle
fatherofmy5 2 weeks ago
@fatherofmy5 Juro number 8 did not have to shout or to insult anyone, he just had to wait and let all the others contradict themselves......brilliant
captain2ahab 1 week ago
@captain2ahab You are talking some deep shit that works on many many MANY levels, and I'm liking it.
fatherofmy5 1 week ago
@captain2ahab I also like this quote from the movie. "He can't hear you he never will."
ExodusPessoa 1 week ago
Has the movie industry really run out of ideas to the point that they're just recreating/re-releasing movies?
JaayyB 2 weeks ago
nooo i got sucked in lol
CantWeedThis 2 weeks ago
I watched the 1957 version and this version a couple of days apart. Of course, it was natural for me to see the beginning of the this version as a bit awkward, saying lines written 40 years before. But then the cast did what great actors do: they started to become the people they were portraying and I was sucked in. I also liked Friedkin's use of camera. He was wise not to try and replicate Lumet's "lens-plot". The camerawork here gives a sense of greater urgency. Finally, Lee J. Cobb gave a gr
jtlott 2 weeks ago
@jtlott See, I thought the camera angles did something special for this film, Like it was taking me inside of the jury room and I was watching first hand.
fatherofmy5 2 weeks ago
@fatherofmy5
I disagree. In the 1957 film, the camerawork mostly concentrated on one juror as he was giving evidence or proposing. It was easier for me to "be in the moment" or get a good mental picture of what was occurring. This version does that too but it also moves around the room. It's sometimes unstable and it's somewhat distracting.
metalisback 1 week ago
This movie is awesome, but I think the 1957 is somehow better than this one. Probably because I'm convinced with the cast of the 57' version more than that of this one. Another good thing about the 57' version that makes it very impressive and effective is that, it had some "pause moment", when a good argument is made, and therefore helped the audience to better understand the "reasonable doubts" that are made.
vuthaouyen 1 week ago
Love the original. just a updated version and still a very very good film.Jack Lemmon is great.
Seems strange watching James Gandolfini be a good person. Thanks for the upload
85hellopeople 3 weeks ago
Hey it's Gil Grissom!!!!
SYTYCDfangirl 3 weeks ago
One of the more ironic parts in this movie; The most racist man was black. Only a short time (relatively) before that white people said the same about black people. You'd think he'd have learned something.
ind0ctr1n3 3 weeks ago 2
Wow. Juror No. 3 does not do Lee J. Cobb any justice. Cobb must be rolling in his grave. This was a poor remake, but thanks for uploading because I've been intrigued to see this for years. To the uploader: if you haven't seen the 1957 version, please watch it. It's magnificent.
moonraven3 3 weeks ago
@moonraven3 No, I haven't seen it. I have thought about it, I've eyeballed the link in the suggestions. Idk, maybe I feel like I'd be cheating on this version ;)
I will watch it as soon as I have some extra time for a full length film again. Thanks for the comment.
fatherofmy5 3 weeks ago
@moonraven3 Ya I think a better choice for Juror 3 would have been Charles Grodin. just my opinion
GreenEyeCinema 3 weeks ago
@moonraven3
Watch the ending of the original and then this...
Scott gives a much more compelling and realistic performance.....
JesterzPlauge 2 weeks ago
@JesterzPlauge Sorry, I have to disagree. I think Lee J. Cobb's performance still outshines this performance. "Everything, and I mean everything" about this film is just awkward to watch. The original is still one of my favorite American films of all time!
moonraven3 2 weeks ago
@moonraven3
Everyone is entitled to theirs!
I just watch George C Scott at the end and, when I compare his performance with Cobb's, he (Scott) really looks to be in emotional pain where Cobb has this faint moment that just didn't seem convincing.
I also think most of the supporting cast of the newer film (especially Olmos and Gandolfini) are a notch above the old cast.
However, I thought Fonda gave a MUCH more convincing performance than Lemmon, same for Marshall over Stahl...
JesterzPlauge 2 weeks ago
@moonraven3 Don't you know that 1957 version IS a remake ?
Sonate64 1 week ago
How many people can infere that the last man to say the boy is not guilty had nearly the same experince with his child if he had one? Or maybe his father did something bad to him, that would probly be the most impotant thing to think about in the last seven or five minutes of the movie.
somebody662 4 weeks ago
this version is just a joke..poor acting...poor props....poor camera men
MrShinzuzu 4 weeks ago
@MrShinzuzu Then why are you here watching it?
fatherofmy5 4 weeks ago
@fatherofmy5 i was told this version is good. is saw the first few minutes and found it boring, i skipped forward to see if it picked up. unfortunately it didn't. not all remakes are good.
MrShinzuzu 4 weeks ago
@MrShinzuzu Yeah, die hard and last action hero are on a different channel. Why don't you sit through the entire film before jumping to conclusions on the quality of it?
fatherofmy5 4 weeks ago
@fatherofmy5 ok i just did. it is a dissapointment. im not saying this is an upload wasted, other people like it. i just prefer classics :S
MrShinzuzu 4 weeks ago
@MrShinzuzu That changes the comment completely. Nothing can compare with an original, but the remake brought the story to a generation that would have forgotten it. Also, people from all over the world watch this upload, so it also gives them an insight into how a jury in america is SUPPOSED to work. Which is a fractal of how the country itself was envisioned to work. I like it because it covers so many bases.
fatherofmy5 4 weeks ago
I really want to know if he was guilty or not
UrPantsDontMatch 1 month ago
1957 original way way better
MoodiNoonii 1 month ago
Would they just have men on a jury in the 90s? That made more sense in the 50s version.
wicked4584 1 month ago
@wicked4584 I think the majority of people in this country, I mean the MAJORITY of people, Could give a fuck less about rockefeller's women's movement bullshit, as we pretty much consider everyone equal. energy is a force that goes where it is directed. If you focus your energy on dividing the people up into stupid little roles, -take gender for example- this is what the energy works to create. It's called 12 angry MEN.
fatherofmy5 1 month ago
@wicked4584 If you'll pardon me, I've seen many adaptations of this play, and men and women starring together makes the drama extremely unconvincing. The angry, tense atmosphere - all that uninhibited testosterone being thrown about, if you will - is largely diffused when there is even one woman present (as can be observed with most cliques in real life). Perhaps an all-women cast would work great, but not a mixed one.
That said, the version set in the 90s is awful anyhow.
BrotherAtticus 2 weeks ago
@BrotherAtticus That was extremely well phrased
fatherofmy5 1 week ago
@fatherofmy5 If you're not being sarcastic, then thank you.
BrotherAtticus 1 week ago
@BrotherAtticus *defused, not diffused.
BrotherAtticus 1 week ago
wow so far i'm loving this movie...
ginalashay 1 month ago
I liked the '57 version better. Mainly due to Fonda having that fire in his eyes that made his character more believable. Lemon's eyes on the other hand seem a little too dull and tired.
ole9421 2 months ago
i like the 1057 version,
suzanneramdane 2 months ago
the best film,
suzanneramdane 2 months ago
THE CAST TO END ALL FILM CASTS!!!!!
spielbrick06 2 months ago
Great movie..."sit down, and don't open your filthy mouth again".....classic statement, reminds me of my boy scout days...lol
MegaShipoffools 2 months ago
this cast did a great job of a remake of a classic thanks for the upload
innocent718bk 2 months ago