7.8/10
11,272
90 user 19 critic

12 Angry Men (1997)

PG-13 | | Crime, Drama | TV Movie 17 August 1997
Twelve men must decide the fate of one when one juror objects to the jury's decision.

Director:

Writer:

(teleplay)
Reviews
Popularity
2,061 ( 459)

Watch Now

From $2.99 (SD) on Amazon Video

Won 1 Golden Globe. Another 6 wins & 22 nominations. See more awards »

Videos

Photos

Edit

Cast

Complete credited cast:
...
Foreman
...
Juror #2
...
...
...
...
Juror #6
...
Juror #7
...
...
Juror #9
...
...
...
Juror #12
...
...
Guard
...
The Accused
Edit

Storyline

Made for cable television remake of the 1957 classic about twelve jurors quick to condemn a Latino youth on trial for murdering his father before reviewing the evidence. Juror #8 holds out with a verdict of not guilty, thus setting the stage for arguments and reasons why or why not the boy may be guilty. Written by Humberto Amador

Plot Summary | Plot Synopsis

Plot Keywords:

jury | trial | remake | guilty | not guilty | See All (69) »

Genres:

Crime | Drama

Motion Picture Rating (MPAA)

Rated PG-13 for language | See all certifications »

Parents Guide:

 »
Edit

Details

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

17 August 1997 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Douze hommes en colère  »

Company Credits

Production Co:

 »
Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

(Technicolor)

Aspect Ratio:

1.85 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

There are only two of the jurors that are identified by name; #8 as Mr. Davis and #9 as Mr. McCardle. All but one of the jurors are identified by their profession; #1 High School Football Coach, #2 Bank Teller, #3 Messenger Service Owner, #4 Stock Broker, #5 Hospital Nurse, #6 Painter, #7 Marmalade Salesman, #8 Architect, #10 Car Wash Owner, #11 Watch Maker, and #12 Advertising Agent. See more »

Goofs

When Juror #3 gets up to demonstrate the stabbing on Juror #8, he opens the blade twice. See more »

Quotes

Juror #4: Gentlemen, let me remind you this case is based on a reasonable and logical progression of facts. Please, let's keep it.
Juror #11: Facts may be coated by the personalities of the people who present them. Let's not forget that.
See more »

Connections

Referenced in Behind the Rules of Engagement (2000) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
I stumbled across this...
1 June 2004 | by See all my reviews

Last night, I attempted to rent the b&w classic at the the local video store only to find that they had switched the classic with the remake (which I realized only after I got it home). I figured I might as well give it a try. Honestly, it wasn't a bad movie, but it doesn't even begin to compare with the original (which is one of my all-time favorites). An attempt has been made update the movie by adding minorities and modernizing some of the dialog. Some of this works, some of it doesn't. Also, a few of the roles in the remake are badly miscast (Tony Danza and Ozzie Davis both come to mind).

I'd give this version 6/10 and the original gets a 10/10 from me.


29 of 48 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page