MovieChat Forums > 12 Angry Men (1957) Discussion > Two scenes that bother me

Two scenes that bother me

posted 2 years ago by ABiggerBoat75 (26)
12 replies | jump to latest

I've seen this movie probably 25 times and every time I watch it, there are two scenes that bother me, wondering if anyone feels the same.

The first is when Juror #12 starts talking about how his colleagues will introduce a topic ('let's run this up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes it.') He rambles on for about 2 whole minutes on this and it seems to serve no narrative purpose whatsoever. In a film where EVERY SINGLE line seems there for a reason, I always scratch me head at this one.

Second, when Juror #1 and #8 are standing at the window watching the rain, #1 tells a (pointless??) story about how he's a baseball coach and had to cancel a game sometime back. Why is this there? Similar to the advertising guy's side story, this does nothing to advance the plot or characterization.

The only thing I can figure is the the filmmakers put these scenes in as a juxtaposition to some of the more heated conversations that were going on at the time, but were they really necessary? Any thoughts on this would be appreciated - this has been bothering me for years.

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Can't the characters have banter every now and again? Does EVERY single LINE have to be about their jury duty? These people have LIVES outside of a jury, you know!

[–] ABiggerBoat75 (26) 2 years ago

Well, as Juror #8 was fond(a) of saying, "It's possible." ; )

And yeah, banter is fine - there was a lot of it in the movie - lines about the baseball game, the building across the street, the guy selling marmalade, but all of these were just one-off lines that never took more than a few seconds.

Why devote several MINUTES of screen time to conversations that go absolutely nowhere?

Seemed out of place in the script to me...

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

Only to you, no-one else.

[–] telegonus (736) a year ago

I think that Webber's character speaking as he did exposed his own shallowness and lack of seriousness regarding the murder case, and that his glib remarks were intended to show that. Viewed this way, I think that the actor spoke his lines well, and that this ad man guy was presented that way to show that certain kinds of people, even nice ones, as he may well have been at a personal level, have a very difficult time rising to the occasion when something very serious is under consideration. The character was in this similar to the baseball fan with the tickets burning a hole in his pocket. Unalike as these two were in disposition they were very alike in being able incapable of taking a truly moral stand in these case under consideration in the film.

[–] daveyh (623) a year ago

actually it always annoys me that he says another of those lines to introduce his own idea (think it was "let's see if the cat laps it up) but then doesn't actually say whatever he was about to. Not sure if one of the louder ones suddenly starts talking about something else and it just gets sidetracked

[–] FentonMeiks (1349) a year ago

the first one: i think juror 12 was mocking (8) fonda?
first he says something like: looks like we're hung up here... and the old man, that was unexpected, we need to break it up. in advertising you have that guy (fonda?) who wants to run an idea up a flagpole and see who salutes it.

second one: i dont know. more humanizing talk? i think it is weird
he says rain was coming down like cats and dogs. it was murder ya know?.... strange use of that word there. he was talking about how his football team should've had a come back story that got canceled due to rain? fonda was down 1-11. comeback story also?.....
we do see juror 7 looking at his watch and ripping up paper right after that scene. is it just conveying to us that 7's game was canceled like he was ripping up tickets?

[–] FentonMeiks (1349) a year ago

i thought more about the 2nd one. i never paid it much mind.
now you got me thinking :)

perhaps it was warning to fonda.
our team was behind 7-6. we started moving the ball and their line is falling apart, we were gonna win then whoosh. the rain came down, the game ended, and i cried.

fonda is moving the ball (the count was 6-6 at talking) and getting NGs. but it might coming crashing down like the rain on fonda and its going to hurt.

[–] ABiggerBoat75 (26) 9 months ago

Sorry for late reply Fenton but I really like this explanation - never noticed that connection - thanks!

[–] FentonMeiks (1349) 8 months ago

neither did i until you brought it up and i played it with subtitles. so, thank you! but you were correct that everything was written meticulously.

the advert guy character is pretty funny too. he doesnt like Fonda because he sees him as a grand stander trying to be different. a guy that rocks the boat. then later he ends up flip flopping 4 times.... literally rocking the boat, ha!

[–] cyguration (3951) 9 months ago

Similar to the advertising guy's side story, this does nothing to advance the plot or characterization.

No, none of it was pointless, it was all character framing.

The advertising guy in particular was someone who always wanted to be liked -- he told stories to try to be liked. He wanted to fit in. That was his hook. Remember, he bounced back and forth several times throughout the film based on whoever seemed to make the most sense.

His story indicates that he's very hungry for attention and to fit in; this would play a crucial part throughout the film as he was shown to be indecisive and only went with whatever the majority said.

The small banter was a short insight into how these men thought outside of how they felt about the case itself. It lent itself toward how we were to view them in relation to the information that would become divulged as the movie progressed.

[–] daveyh (623) 9 months ago

and yet Diner gets credited as being the first film in which supposedly pointless conversations and stories took place throughout. Not pointless at all though because, like here, it was all character forming and part of the experience.
But these guys were doing it over 20 years earlier!

[–] cyguration (3951) 9 months ago

I've never fully watched Diner all the way through. I love binging Mickey Rourke movies, but for some reason I have yet to see Diner from start to finish uninterrupted. I might do that someday soon.

Thanks for the reminder.