Angry Men Twelve Angry Men:

¶ … Angry Men Twelve Angry Men: Analysis of a Classic Few films have left as great an impact upon American society and culture as the 1957 classic, Twelve Angry Men. The film examines an important topic in American culture, namely jury duty and the duty of taking one's responsibilities seriously and weigh evidence in order to examine whether an accused is guilty or not.

This is a fundamental aspect upon which our country was built, and the film examines it beautifully, especially in its presentation of those who fail to carry out this duty. The paragraphs below will give a brief synopsis of the film, will analyze it through the lenses of Kohlberg's stages of moral development, which can shed new light upon this classic, and will present how an individual can identify with each juror. The synopsis of the film centers on whether or not the defendant is guilty, or the jury's deliberations.

According to a critique of the film, Twelve Angry Men is "the gripping, penetrating, and engrossing examination of a diverse group of twelve jurors (all male, mostly middle-aged, white, and generally of middle-class status) who are uncomfortably brought together to deliberate after hearing the 'facts' in a seemingly open-and-shut murder trial case." After being presented with the case, the jurors go to the jury room, where a debate ensues, which is initially caused by 1 out of 12 jurors abstaining from the guilty verdict.

The film examines the personalities of the jurors and presents the audience with the potential mistake of deliberating too quickly and sending a potentially innocent person to his death. The Jurors are all different, and it is important to examine each personality prior to linking it to Kohlberg's stages. Juror 1, who is the Foreman, is primarily concerned with the technicalities of the jury's deliberations and is not a natural leader, though he is open to compromise.

Juror 2 is an easily persuaded individual, though he does make efforts to break the tension quite a few times. The third juror is a bully, who is very opinionated, biased and overall intolerant. The fourth juror proves to be well educated and seems to treat the case like a study or a puzzle to be decoded. Juror #5 is relatively insecure as well. The sixth juror, is a 'working man' who cannot make up his mind. Juror 7 can be classified as a salesman who simply cannot wait to be elsewhere.

The eighth juror is an insightful individual, who is also patient and who constantly strives to attain the truth. Juror 9 is the eldest and is a fair individual as well. Juror 10 is much like Juror 3, in that he is opinionated, intolerant and a racist. Juror 11 is an immigrant who expresses respect for the American system and who is also quite patient. Lastly, the 12th Juror is a well dressed businessman who is quite vacillating. Kohlberg's stages can correspond to all of these individuals.

Firstly, to identify these stages, one can separate them into 3 levels: pre-conventional, conventional, and post conventional, with maturity levels for each. The first level is focused around self-centeredness, with the second focusing on accord and conformity and lastly, the third and most advance focusing upon universal principles and social contract principles. Due to the Juror description presented above one can identify Juror 3, 7 and 10 immediately as belonging in the first stage. Furthermore, jurors 4, 8, 9 and even 11 can be classified as belonging to the most mature stage.

All other jurors, namely 1, 2, 5, 6, and 12 belong to the conventional stage, which is most common and presents a majority in this aspect.