*12 Angry Men* a PERFECT movie: Reaction & Commentary

#12angrymen #commentary #reaction #review #film #classic
Twitter- / twoscoopsxd
PATREON- / twoscoopsxd
Outro by ‪@JuliaRoshambo‬
A couple of black guys named Noob & Awesome watch one of the most classic films 12 Angry Men(1957). This movie holds up and is very relevant today. This is a first time blind reaction. We have never seen this before.

[@TwoScoopsXD]

12 men were indeed angry

[@iKvetch558]

Sidney Lumet made another great movie with Henry Fonda...and he used some similar filmmaking techniques...you guys should react to Fail Safe from 1964. It is the very serious counterpart to Kubrick's comical Dr Strangelove from earlier that same year.

[@Paul_Winkle]

And wrong in the end

[@TV-fv1ih]

In spite of several obvious plot holes, this has always been one of my favorite movies because of the acting and drama of a story that can be done on the stage!

[@maddwitch]

The boy in the case was Puerto Rican and there was tension at the time this movie was made, due to a couple of large waves of immigration from the island. I like that they kept the "them" vague in the deliberation though. Keeps the message relevant, because who the "them" is changes with time and place, but there is always a "them".

[@jnagarya519]

At the same time, Puerto Ricans were -- and still are -- citizens of the United States, so not "immigrants". The racism against Puerto Ricans is also reflected in the later "West Side Story".

[@braces2]

The towel in the restroom has two rollers inside. One has freshly laundered towel that you pull down to use. At the same time the second roller takes up the dirty towel. The towel is replaced every few days so you are always using clean towel.

[@AliasSchmalias]

I swear this gets explained in every reaction.

[@HassoBenSoba]

@@AliasSchmalias And it makes us older viewers stop and realize that younger people have never seen a restroom towel-roll-thing. They were very common; in fact, I'm sure I've used one somewhere within the last 5 years.

[@dionysiacosmos]

I can't EVER remember one of those things not being jammed.

[@BetterGreta13]

I remember!!

[@richardcramer1604]

@@dionysiacosmos If it was jammed it meant that it was time to change the rolls.

[@bookwoman53]

The juror with the high pitched voice and glasses was often cast as an anxious man. His name was John Fiedler. Although he is known as Winnie the Pooh’s friend Piglet he has done so much more. He was in the films True Grit and The Odd Couple. He has many tv credits. He appeared on an episode of the original Star Trek as a character who was possessed by the spirit of Jack the Ripper. I loved him as the timid patient Mr. Peterson on The Bob Newhart show. He was very funny during the group therapy sessions. His goal was to become assertive enough to stand up to his wife.

[@artbagley1406]

Other reactors have been kind enough to point out Mr. Fiedler also supplied the voice of Piglet in the Disney "Winnie the Pooh" cartoons and movies.

[@bookwoman53]

@@artbagley1406 I figured that saying it was very redundant since others have already mentioned it. As per your suggestion I have amended my original comment.

[@kenyonsgirl415]

He was also Eddie “the love machine” on Golden Girls 😅

[@user-zx9jq4pv1w]

The film was made before multicinemas were a thing. A movie theater had only one screen so it might play only one or two films over and over. In the evening, you could by a double feature ticket without ever paying attention to the names of the films. You might go just for the air-conditioning in the summer and sleep through the movies.

[@Dej24601]

Definitely! In some cases, theaters advertised that they were “Air Conditioned” along with whatever movies were playing because it was rare. The other choice to stay cool in summer was to go to a drive-in and keep your car windows open for the breeze (since very few cars had air conditioning in those years.)

[@jnagarya519]

Possessing and selling switchblades was illegal. The store owner, a witness, said the one he sold to the boy was the only one he'd seen. In view of the fact that it was illegal, and it wasn't the only one after all, the store owner's credibility is in doubt.

[@MrHarbltron]

If we never took testimony from criminals, the legal system would be in a far worse state. Appeal to Hypocrisy is a logical fallacy.

[@jnagarya519]

@@MrHarbltron Where is the appeal to hypocrisy -- in the prosecution presentation of his side of the case with the store owner as a "credible" witness? It was the defense lawyer's responsibility to expose that. Instead it was a juror who did. But in reality jurors can only rely on the evidence admitted at trial; a juror who did what was done in this film would have caused a mistrial. But it was a point of drama. I've yet to see a drama about court processes and trials that didn't violate ethics and or court rules in order to be dramatic. See "The Verdict," another great film by the same director.

[@MrHarbltron]

@@jnagarya519 spend half as much time on your own cases as you did on this comment and you might win some cases, lol

[@jnagarya519]

@@MrHarbltron Personal attack noted. I suggest you reread my comment as many times as necessary until it penetrates your facile false-confidence.

[@jnagarya519]

@@MrHarbltron This is FACT: Jurors can only rely on the evidence admitted at trial; a juror who did what was done in this film would have caused a mistrial." I have an education in law. You have an education in being a buffoon.

[@Dej24601]

The towels in the bathroom are on a big roll. You pull down a new, fresh section to use and then the next person pulls down a new section and so on. (Some fancier models had sort of springs where you could give a little tug, and the used towel would roll back up inside.) Once the entire roll had been used, no new towel would come out, and a new roll was inserted in the machine. Some machines didn’t work well, so if you saw a limp, used or dirty or wet section just hanging down, you knew it wasn’t probably going to give you a new, fresh section, so you didn’t use it. The material was kind of a thin cotton, very much like kitchen towels. Fancy hotels or restaurants in big cities occasionally had embroidered edges, or their logo on the fabric.

[@djgrant8761]

The actor who irritates you is John Fiedler. He was the voice of Piglet in Winnie the Pooh.

[@jamesmoyner7499]

Such a great and smart film. I was on a jury once thus far (back in 2020) and we ended up deadlocked. The man with the high voice was John Fiedler who was the voice of Piglet in all Disney Winnie the Pooh projects until his death. You’ll know him though as the old man thrown out the window in The Emperor’s New Groove. The lead man Henry Fonda was the father of Peter and Jane Fonda. While it pales in comparison there was 97’ tv movie version directed by William Fredkien and one stand out fact about that is Jack Lemmon who played Fonda’s role was nominated for a Golden Globe for Best Actor in a tv movie losing to Ving Rhames, but in a surprise twist Ving asked Jack to come on stage and he gave him his award. This would be great to see on stage.

[@agenttheater5]

What relation is Bridget Fonda to Henry, Peter and Jane again? Is she Peter's daughter? I forget

[@jamesmoyner7499]

@@agenttheater5 I think she is Peter’s daughter.

[@agenttheater5]

@@jamesmoyner7499 thanks :)

[@TwoScoopsXD]

I can't imagine this movie being remade

[@jamesmoyner7499]

@@TwoScoopsXD Like I said it is no where near as good as this.

[@michaelclarke5153]

No bacteria. Fresh roll....old roll...laundry....better quality of life.....ahhhh the '50s.

[@jefflampert6336]

"The whole room itself being a character in it's own right". Good point!

[@agenttheater5]

the towel that has been used scrolls back up to a different part, I'm sure. I've used those, when I was five or something.

[@user-eh8cg4bp3y]

Henry Fonda witnessed a lynching as a young man and it affected him profoundly. He became involved in activism and chose several poweful roles tackling such topics for this reason. A very bold move for those times 🤔🇬🇧

[@jnagarya519]

In the 1770s the Founders in Massachusetts disarmed everyone who didn't sign the loyalty oath in support of American independence. The age began with 16 year old males. There has always been a "teenage problem".

[@terryv2006]

When a movie only needed a script and good acting.

[@jayarr961]

When I was young, those towels ere pretty common in public bathrooms. They go from one roller to another until the whole role of towels has been used. Then it gets replace with a fresh role. The dirty roles are picked up and new roles are dropped off by some towel comany. Each part of the role is only used once, by one person.

[@Filbi]

The guy with the high-pitched voice did the voice of Piglet from Winnie-the-Pooh lol

[@funnyml3356]

He was also in tons of other stuff... Star Trek... Columbo...

[@aarrgghh]

that kid's lucky the film's called "12 ANGRY MEN". if they were "12 HANGRY MEN", he'd be ridin' the lightnin'

[@dionysiacosmos]

This movie is not ahead of its time. The screenplay is designed to have timeless personality types. It'll always be relavent.

[@TonyTigerTonyTiger]

Paul Winkle, who says the boy is definitely guilty, has been saying to me for months that the knife fight in "Rebel Without a Cause" is a crusher. But it's not, at all. Anyone can watch the "Rebel Without A Cause" knife-fight scene on KZbin. The best video is titled "Rebel Without a Cause (1955) - The Knife Fight Scene (5/10) | Movieclips" and the channel is Movieclips. 1) During the knife fight scene, at least 13 stabs/jabs/thrusts are attempted with switchblades, and *all of them* are attempted with an "underhanded" motion/grip: the way a switchblade should be used, not the way a normal knife would be. 2) From the beginning of the knife fight - from the first point where both fighters have their switchblades open (0:33) - to the end - (where the winner throws down his knife (2:02)) , it lasts for 1:29 seconds, which is 89 seconds. There are 2 fighters with their knives open through nearly all of that, so I will multiply that by 2: switchblades are open for about 178 seconds. Of that time, only 1 fighter at any point holds his switchblade the wrong way - that is, the way a person would hold a normal knife - and that lasts for only about 5 seconds (1:25 to about 1:30). 5 seconds is less than 3% of the total time. To recap: 1) 100% of the 13+ stabs/jabs/thrusts are done the correct way for a switchblade. 2) For less then 3% of the time is a switchblade held the wrong way, and no stab/jab/thrust is done with it when held the wrong way. THIS IS PAUL'S GREAT REFUTATION THAT HE'S BEEN PUSHING FOR MONTHS! LOL

[@BetterGreta13]

Henry Fonda (the lone juror) saw the theatrical version of this movie and wanted to make it into a film. He even put up some of his own money to do it. It got so so reviews at the time, but has since gone on to be considered one of the best films of all time. The actors were all stand-outs of their generation, especially Fonda and Lee J. Cobb, who gave a master class of acting in the film!

[@patrickholt2270]

Those old cloth bathroom towels were on a spool inside the metal box. So you would pull down on the towel to get to a fresh part, and the used part would get rolled up on the other spool inside the box, until the clean end ran out, and then they'd take the whole thing out to be laundered, and put a fresh one in. There was some kind of ratchet inside the box so that it wouldn't just all unroll on the floor like toilet paper. We were still using those in the 1970s and early '80s before they started being replaced by blow dryers.

[@fredklein3829]

Not enough Black actors for you? There was a remake of this movie in 1997 complete with Blacks there's even a Farrakhan sympathizers, complete with a bowtie and everything. The guy with a squeaky voice was an accomplished actor named John Fiedler who appeared in many fine productions. It was an all-star cast.

[@bad-people6510]

Absolutely correct. That is in fact how I describe this film. One of the very few perfect movies.

[@evalynnhubler5089]

ONe of hte best movies ever made!!!

[@arrow1414]

Really, despite the stereotype the 1950s had a fair number of socially conscious films, including dealing with racism head on like "No Way Out" (I would love to see you guys react to it).

[@kirkdarling4120]

Or The Defiant Ones.

[@Jeff_Lichtman]

Did you notice that none of the jurors names were revealed until the very end, when jurors 8 and 9 introduced themselves to each other on the courthouse steps? At the start of the movie, the shots were all from above eye level. As the movie progressed, the camera angles got lower and lower, increasing the sense of being in a small space. Juror 10 didn't speak a word after juror 4 told him not to open his mouth again. Even when casting his final vote, he did it by shaking his head. 12 Angry Men was director Sidney Lumet's first feature film (all of his prior work was for television). Other really good movies by him include The Pawnbroker, Fail Safe, Serpico, Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict, and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.

[@pfury67]

The light voiced man was also the voice of Piglet

[@agenttheater5]

15;49 And if it's a case of "two slaps too many" and he reached his breaking point, is that premeditated murder?

[@pirbird14]

I'm no lawyer but as I understand it, in most jurisdictions it would not be premeditated if he killed his father immediately after the slap. If he went somewhere and got a knife and then came back, it would premeditated, even if it was just a few minutes later and he still hadn't calmed down.

[@alfredroberthogan5426]

I am fully persuaded the youngster, albeit mixed up and severely abused, did not kill his father. Of course, no one ever "deserves" a death penalty, or life in prison either. In Norway, the max sentence is a severe about 20 years, as imposed on the far-right violent man who murdered 77 people in 2011 (69 of them my fellow leftists, with a gun, plus 8 killed by bomb in Oslo), and an uber-severe 30 years for cases of genocide (such as for Mr. Hitler, if convicted). Those sentences in Norway are super-harsh, but perhaps justifiable in extreme cases. Rehabilitation is the overwhelming reason to incarcerate someone for a time in a penitentiary (to foster penitence), with compassion. Many US Americans are crazy scary with their vengeful attitudes. I lost dozens of Czech Jewish relatives in the WW II Nazi Holocaust, and am decidedly leftist, but I am not devoid of compassion for Mr. Hitler. Cancel Reply

[@NoelleMar]

Wow. Nice to revisit this movie. Though scary because it’s a reminder of how bad humans are at learning lol. Also how important context and accuracy can be. Frankly, I’ve seen more and more people justify perpetuating misinformation and vitriol because “that’s how they feel.” It makes me think of how many in this movie just “knew” the boy was guilty and reasoned from there. I don’t think emotions and instincts should be ignored or even condemned. But you should not embrace every impulse, certainly not publicly. There’s a difference between slandering someone online where everyone can see and venting to your friends. It’s not on the same level, but it’s like i this where the jurists don’t seem to appreciate that this isn’t a theoretical conversation or even a run of the mill job. I also appreciate how characters don’t care about consistency, in their arguments or their bigotry. Another interesting aspect is memory. It shows that memory is unreliable, but not to a ludicrous degree which many do to justify not believing victims. It’s just that people can be completely misremember certain things but remember others with shocking clarity. It seems people often base whether they believe others’ memory based on what reinforces their worldview rather than what has actually happened in reality lol. Another good reaction!

[@jimmybobsap8729]

A classic that most people don't know about sadly

[@alfredroberthogan5426]

People must know mighty little of cinema history if that is true alas.

[@jimmybobsap8729]

@@alfredroberthogan5426 Ill bet 95% of people under 30 haven't seen a black and white film

[@martinbynion1589]

Excellent reaction! One of the great movies! I used to go to the movies with my family in the late 50s and early sixties, and the evening sessions were always double features. My god! there were some awful crap movies!! 🙂

[@michaelestabrook2018]

the towel is wound on an upper reel and feeds to an other rel-you pull it down and it winds to the lower reel.

[@richardrobinson4020]

used to be a single roll of fabric, no paper towels. The idea was that you would use a different section than the single person before you or after you. Not hygienic

[@dow311]

Each character in this movie had a angry moment, 12 Angry Men.

[@michaelestabrook2018]

the little guy is one of the voices of winie the poh pals.

[@jimmybobsap8729]

The classic answer to get out is "I can tell if someone is guilty the first time i see them"

[@stephenvincentgiles1306]

PLEASE react to the Peabody Award-winning episode of "Inside Amy Schumer" Season 3 Episode 3: "12 Angry Men Inside Amy Schumer." This is my favorite movie and they did such a great job parodying it.

[@DR-mq1vn]

This movie is so surprisingly awesome!

[@TwoScoopsXD]

I wasn't surprised. It's considered one of the best. I assumed it'd be up there with The Godfather and stuff

[@alfredroberthogan5426]

I am glad some of the cold-hearted prosecution-loving posters here were not on THAT jury and I sure hope they NEVER serve on any jury. Any quality jury should look for reasons to NOT convict, unless the defendant is a crooked cop, corporate official, or corrupt politician. Even in those cases, in sentencing I would want mercy shown (say, for right-wing Trump or his fraternal right-wing twin Biden). The verdict derives from facts, determining the truth, for history.

[@blakemcelrath54]

If you liked this one check out the modern remake from the 80s or 90s

[@jnagarya519]

The towel is a cloth ROLL.

[@TwoScoopsXD]

Disturbing

[@matttyler8331]

@@TwoScoopsXD Nah, it's great. As you pull a fresh portion down the used portion get's pulled back up on the backside, then the whole thing is taken out and washed and then put back in. You always pull a fresh portion down so what you're using has never been used.

[@jnagarya519]

@@TwoScoopsXD There is nothing disturbing about it: On the opposite side of the device is a handle or crank: turning that turns the roll to a clean area. The rolls were regularly removed and laundered.

[@MrGrifft]

Still see them in some old hotel public bathrooms as they have a dedicated laundry, pretty much everywhere else has gotten rid of them. They're a great idea imo, better than that budget paper they have everywhere now at least.

[@jnagarya519]

@@MrGrifft Yep. Young people lacking knowledge of history are wont to jump to conclusions based on unfounded certitude and get it wrong.

[@reginastogner9535]

❤❤❤❤

[@texasgunslinger8060]

I found y'all's reaction fascinating! The way y'all immediately started judging the jury members, based on your own prejudices, was no different than those 12 Angry Men who were judging that young boy based on their prejudices. And the fact, that you both said you would never serve on a jury, can only mean you are willing to let an innocent man die, rather than take a single moment out of Your life, to find the truth, and possibly save a brother's life. Absolutely fascinating! As once again, y'all's decision not to serve, is no different than the man who wanted go to a baseball game. In the end, I found y'all to be no different than those whom you hate. Hell, y'all even have the same hairlines. And are judged by your own judgment.

[@TwoScoopsXD]

Bro wrote mad paragraphs about most of the stuff we said as jokes

[@texasgunslinger8060]

@@TwoScoopsXD Oh, so you were joking about not serving on a jury? And about how you would vote "guilty" just so you could get out of there?

[@TwoScoopsXD]

@@texasgunslinger8060 Yes

[@texasgunslinger8060]

@TwoScoopsXD well cool then. And my apologies

[@filmonthemic860]

This OJ doc wild

[@victorias1227]

Knowing from the community posts that this was scheduled to premiere well in advance of today, and OJ's death being announced today...

[@Paul_Winkle]

In the Movie they said how improbable it is that someone else stabed the dad with the same or a similar knife. It is strange how this movie makes us believe that a million to one chance against the boy is enough for reasonable doubt. Even Juror No8 doesnt doubt the odds, he just says what he often says: #3 You found a knife like it. What's that? The discovery of the age? #12 You mean you are asking us to believe, that someone else did the stabbing with exactly the same kind of knife? #7 The odds are a million to one. #8 Fonda: It's possible! (Everything is possible yes, but that is of course NOT the definition of reasonable doubt)

[@TonyTigerTonyTiger]

Stop lying. There are scenarios other than the million to one. The knife could have fallen out of the boy's pocket as he was leaving the apartment to go to the movies: consistent with what is said in the movie. No need for second knife, no need for a second nearly identical knife.

[@Paul_Winkle]

@@TonyTigerTonyTiger Even No8 was talking about a second knife, not the same knife. No one talks about a second knife in the movie. And it is also very unlikely that such a big knife fell through a hole all along inside the trouser to the ground without the boy realizing it. However the eyewitness saw it all, it was stated and not opposed (!) that: She saw the killing through the last two cars. SHE REMEMBERED THE MOST INSIGNIFICANT DETAILS.

[@TonyTigerTonyTiger]

@@Paul_Winkle Yes, a second similar knife is one possibility you would have to disprove. It's not the only one. Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the knife did not fall out of the boys pocket, as he claims? Go ahead, try.

[@TonyTigerTonyTiger]

@@Paul_Winkle Those details she remembered were about the train. How many cars were on the train and how many she saw the killing through. Those are insignificant details, until juror 8 uses them in combination with other information. Details about a killers' identity would not be insignificant to a murder case, so they aren't talking about such details. TIME: 00:40:09 JUROR 4: She said she saw it through the windows of a moving elevated train. There were six cars on the train. She saw the killing through the last two cars. She remembered the most insignificant details. I don't see how you can argue with that. JUROR 8: Has anybody here any idea how long it would take an el ... [Juror 8 sees Jurors 3 and 12 playing tic-tac-toe. Juror 8 grabs their paper and crumples it up] JUROR 8: This isn't a game! JUROR 3: Did you see him? The nerve! The absolute nerve! JUROR 10(?): Forget it. It's not important, ya know what I mean? JUROR 3: This isn't a game? Who does he think he is? TIME: 00:40:54 JUROR 8: Has anybody any idea how long it takes an elevated train going at medium speed to pass a given point? JUROR 4: What has that to do with anything?

[@Paul_Winkle]

@@TonyTigerTonyTiger Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor noted that events such as Juror 8 entering a similar knife into the proceeding; performing outside research into the case matter in the first place; and ultimately the jury as a whole making broad, wide-ranging assumptions far beyond the scope of reasonable doubt (such as the inferences regarding the woman wearing glasses) would not be allowed in a real-life jury situation, and in fact would have yielded a mistrial