Twelve Angry Men (Penguin Classics)

excellent audio play... kind of like a radio drama

This is a play that needs to be seen either on TV or in the theater for the reader to grasp the full intensity behind the story of the twelve angry men. It is an intriguing study into how twelve different men with different viewpoints and motivations can finally come together to agree on one

Show More

verdict that will have in impact on another human being’s live. The play has a very minimal set, a juror’s room and the writing also offers very little direction on emotion. At times reading this drama can become confusing as the jurors are not given any names only numbers. It’s hard to differentiate the personalities of the men and place the emotion with a specific number. The audience for this drama is definitely teen and above. It would be interesting to use this play in a high school philosophy class as a study of how the men relate with each other. It could also be used to further examine the United States justice system and the effective use of juries.

Show Less

I had never heard of this play until a few weeks ago. It was brought up in conversation while I was sitting on a jury of a murder trial (I was juror twelve).

I reserved both this book and the movie from the library after the trial ended I read the book first. I truly enjoyed it. It was surprising

Show More

how similar the thought process was to a real jury. Thankfully, I will say the jury I serve with were much more accepting of different backgrounds than the jurors in this play. So, while we never had the yelling, racist comments or opinionated/offensive comments - the need to talk through the case, the idea of 'reasonable' doubt and the questioning of witnesses stories had a striking resemblance to the real world.

A very interesting read. I truly enjoyed my jury experience and this play brought back many of the intriguing aspects of serving on a jury.

Show Less

Twelve Angry Men, by Reginald Rose, is a short, fast read, three act play. It centers around 12 jurors who are deliberating whether or not a boy from Harlem murdered his father. This play can be incorporated into many different class: history when studying the judicial system/civic duties; English

Show More

when study plays; drama when studying acting, styles of plays, classics, psychology when studying human behavior, etc. There is no foul language or inappropriate scenes that teachers need to worry about when sharing this play with their students. There is also a movie based on this play, which would allow for comparison and analyzing the two media. The play could be used at either the junior high or high school level.

Show Less

Twelve men are sequestered in a stuffy room and tasked with determining the fate of a boy who was accused of murdering his father. The jurors are indentified only by their numbers (juror two, juror four), which you would think would be confusing, but it isn’t. They take a vote and realize that 11

Show More

of the 12 believe the defendant is guilty. They need a unanimous vote for a conviction and in the instant they know this won’t be as easy as they’d hoped.

It’s amazing that Rose was able to pack such a powerful story into just over 60 pages. Every line is taut with energy and irritation. You can almost smell the sweat and fuming testosterone in the room. The jurors are a diverse bunch and each one feels like someone you might know. I loved this play and its message that it takes a brave man to stand alone for what he believes in.

Usually the movie version of a book in wince-worthy, but this is an exception. Henry Fonda’s portrayal of the main juror is wonderful! I’ve also seen this one performed live (starring Richard Thomas from The Waltons) and it’s just as enthralling.

Show Less

Exquisitely written with wonderful twists and turns in plot; really makes you think about our judicial system and how the idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is paramount.

There aren't many readthroughs that are so well balanced for 12 parts. The play is a bit far fetched in places - the legal system just doesn't really work like that - but a mild suspension of disbelief is all you need, and the tension of who is right and who is wrong is maintained with great

Show More

ambiguity even to the final curtain.

Show Less

I first read this in high school. In our class reading, I played Juror Number 10 - the racist. This play is absolutely brilliantly written. Both movie versions are among my favorite movies.

You would think they would've forced us to watch Twelve Angry Men in law school, but they didn't. After reading the play and watching the movie a few weeks ago, I feel like every American should have to read Twelve Angry Men. The play centers on a jury deliberation. During several heated hours

Show More

(literally and figuratively), twelve men discuss whether the verdict they come to will exonerate a young man for the murder of his father, or condemn him to a death sentence that the judge explained he had no qualms about ordering, should the verdict be guilty. Each man plays his part, from strong prejudice to neutral to easily swayed to chaotic to apathetic. I found this play to be riveting and extremely frightening. (specifically because I cannot stop thinking about the fact that most juries probably do not have that voice of reason or pay such close attention to detail. There are so many scary aspects to both human nature and the jury process, not least of which is that juries often have the life and/or liberty of another human being in their hands) The jurors are given no names, so it can be a feat to try to follow along with an understanding of which character is which, however the overall discussions are the most important aspect of the play, and a reader can easily follow the feel of the room and see whose arguments are most persuasive. This play can be read in a mere hour or so and I recommend it to everyone, especially people who want to read more classics.

Show Less

The famous play about justice. Twelve jurors, all men as this was the fifties and apparently women didn't figure, are locked in a room to decide if a sixteen year-old boy is guilty of stabbing his abusive father to death. If they find him guilty, he gets the death penalty.

This is less than a

Show More

hundred pages, yet it covers so many topics that could bias a jury: race, economic class, parenting, immigration issues and sense of duty.

Show Less

We read this play in class. It was interesting to see what the jury goes through. I thougt it would be alot easier to decide. I always thought you just said they are guilty or not I didnt ever think about the one person who wants to talk about everything.

I think Twelve Angry Men should be required reading. The play is about twelve jurors who must decide if the boy on trial is guilty of murder. The issues that are discussed are as relevant today as they were in '55. The forward by David Mamet did add to the story. This may have to go on my "book to

Show More

read annually list".

Show Less

I think Twelve Angry Men should be required reading. The play is about twelve jurors who must decide if the boy on trial is guilty of murder. The issues that are discussed are as relevant today as they were in '55. The forward by David Mamet did add to the story. This may have to go on my "book to

Show More

read annually list".

Show Less

I think Twelve Angry Men should be required reading. The play is about twelve jurors who must decide if the boy on trial is guilty of murder. The issues that are discussed are as relevant today as they were in '55. The forward by David Mamet did add to the story. This may have to go on my "book to

Show More

read annually list".

Show Less

I think Twelve Angry Men should be required reading. The play is about twelve jurors who must decide if the boy on trial is guilty of murder. The issues that are discussed are as relevant today as they were in '55. The forward by David Mamet did add to the story. This may have to go on my "book to

Show More

read annually list".

Show Less

It’s a hot humid day when twelve jurors are led to a room to decide the fate of a sixteen year old accused of murder. The prosecution has been relentless, the court appointed defense apathetic, and eleven of the jurors are convinced that the boy is guilty. However, Juror number 8 isn’t sure.

Show More

The judge has warned them that they should only pass a guilty verdict if they are convinced of this boy’s guilt; if there is reasonable doubt they are to say he’s innocent. If they don’t have a unanimous vote, then the jury is hung and the boy will have to stand trial again. One step at a time juror number 8, and later one or two other jurors question each piece of damning evidence to see how much credence should be lent to it.
This is one of the best old movies I have ever seen (the new one wasn’t nearly as well done), and the play is magnificent (if you are accustomed to reading scripts). It’s been a number of years since I’ve seen the movie, but I’m so glad the original writer of the screenplay versions also wrote a stage play version. It’s not only well written, but it gives us keen insight on human nature, which hasn’t changed as much as we’d like to think it has since the first screen play was written in the 1950s. It also shows the American jury system working at its best in that one man refused to let a boy die without at first discussing his life and the case and examining what they have been told for themselves, away from the rhetoric of the courtroom. Moreover, we see other jurors become inspired to think and question what they had originally thought was an open and shut case.

Show Less

The 1957 film version is one of the greatest pieces of cinema ever created, and one of my favorite movies. Near as I can tell from memory (I have seen the movie a lot), this is completely identical except for slight differences in the emotional breakdowns of the two least sympathetic jurors.

Juror

Show More

number 10's breakdown is a bit tamer in the movie. He doesn't say anything about "those people" trying to "breed us out of existence," although the general idea certainly gets across. I like how much farther it goes in the play, it really shows the extent of his overwhelming fear and how it clouds his reasoning.

Juror number 3's breakdown at the very end was one of the most powerful moments to me, and I think it was slightly more effective in the movie. It felt more personal, more cathartic. You really get the sense that he's learned something he can apply to his relationship with his own son. I like to think after the movie ends he tries to reconnect with him, that he's realized his own faults that led to their falling out. The play is anticlimactic in comparison, it's not implied he's had a personal revelation about his relationship with his own son so much as he's just finally admitted not all kids are the same and he's willing to give somebody else's kid another shot at life because maybe that kid isn't as bad as his own. Still, that's no slight against this version. It more than deserves five stars. This is one of those special pieces of fiction that makes the world better simply by existing. Legit legendary status.

Show Less

A fantastic study that gives me hope about our judicial system.

What can I say about Twelve Angry Men that hasn't been said already? An expertly written play that exposes the unavoidable bias inherent in the individual as well as society, this is the play that is invariably referenced when the discussion turns to justice prevailing. A classic that should not be

Show More

missed by anyone not fortunate enough to read it as part of their education.

Show Less

What can I say about Twelve Angry Men that hasn't been said already? An expertly written play that exposes the unavoidable bias inherent in the individual as well as society, this is the play that is invariably referenced when the discussion turns to justice prevailing. A classic that should not be

Show More

missed by anyone not fortunate enough to read it as part of their education.

Show Less

LATW audio production of the classic drama. This play does particularly well in audio format, which is surprising given the cast is large, all male, and none of them are given names. Even knowing how the play ends, it manages to be suspenseful and powerful in its exploration of human nature. I also

Show More

found the casting choice of Hector Elizondo as the bigoted juror an interesting choice. Recommended.

Show Less

Interesting observations of a jury and their deliberations. Why we shouldn’t have this system??? Exactly

Very thought provoking. I’ve never had to sit on a jury and decide someone’s life. I’m not sure whatever prejudice thinking I have (because everyone has prejudice thinking) would be able to be put to the side. Kept me I engaged and interest. Short story/play but worth the read