This is probably the best Hindi remake (The original is a fantastic Sidney Lumet movie, "Twelve angry men" (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/)) I've watched. K. K. Raina is no Henry Fonda; but he's done a great job -- as has the rest of the very talented cast; and none more than the brilliant Pankaj Kapoor as the broken-hearted father/juror no 3 (played by Lee J. Cobb in the original) Ironically, what makes it work is the fact that it is such a complete plagiarism; it is guided entirely by Lumet's masterpiece in style and substance. The cast and the crew have done an excellent job with the execution; but they could have probably done it without the director. An interesting artifact of the plagiarism is that we have this movie about a hung jury -- when India doesn't have a jury system at all! Oh well! Given that Bollywood is all about plagiarism anyway; I guess we should be thankful when they occasionally do a good job of it!
29 Reviews
Best Indian adaptation and an intellectual's delight
Sachin_Chavan24 March 2017
I can't remember watching a film where every 10-15 mins I have exclaimed, "Too good, too good, too good!" or "What a film!" 12 jurors, in a single room, for two hours, no change of scenery - it still manages to keep you riveted, and much more!
A timeless film which has so many undertones - morality vs reason, fact vs opinion, sincerity vs flippancy, assumptions vs critical thinking... and more. Inner conditionings of each character are brought out so well, there's also social commentary that's relevant even today.
Each of the 12 actors (most from NSD) have put their all into the roles. The film is a remake of ''Twelve Angry Men' which I haven't seen. But Basu Chatterjee has created one of India's best film adaptations here.
Truly an intellectuals' delight.
A timeless film which has so many undertones - morality vs reason, fact vs opinion, sincerity vs flippancy, assumptions vs critical thinking... and more. Inner conditionings of each character are brought out so well, there's also social commentary that's relevant even today.
Each of the 12 actors (most from NSD) have put their all into the roles. The film is a remake of ''Twelve Angry Men' which I haven't seen. But Basu Chatterjee has created one of India's best film adaptations here.
Truly an intellectuals' delight.
Masterful Adoption.
pinak-pani7 June 2006
Twelve jurors - common people with their usual daily problems, emotional swings and their regular habit to stick to what is obvious - are selected to judge a case where very strong evidences are available against the accused. Everything was transparent and vividly clear. The case was supposed to end with common opinion against the accused within no time. But one person was against this common judgment and this is the point where story builds up. This one person make other eleven to change their decision. It is Hindi adoption of 'Twelve Angry Men (1957)' (as far as I feel.)and is equally mastered. It is acclimatized for Indian viewers. Performance of actors touches the pinnacle and it is a recommendable movie.
great adaptation
vedicsignature1 May 2006
I was watching the NAT GEO special on 100 top movies..and incidentally came to know that "Twelve angry men" was the original.
Anyway...Ek Ruka Hua Faisla ..is great movie...Considering the time period in which this movie was adapted ...
Acting was too good ....and this movie..also won the best director movie award for BASU...
All the character were very close to the real life..and that is the winning point for this movie.
All the 12 characters who played as the jury were one of the finest on screen actors and all the Door Darshan period generation know about them......
Anyway...Ek Ruka Hua Faisla ..is great movie...Considering the time period in which this movie was adapted ...
Acting was too good ....and this movie..also won the best director movie award for BASU...
All the character were very close to the real life..and that is the winning point for this movie.
All the 12 characters who played as the jury were one of the finest on screen actors and all the Door Darshan period generation know about them......
Interesting plot!
abhi00029 April 2005
This movie is great! I watched this on TV recently and it was easily one of the most interesting two hours I have spent in front of the tube in along time. One of course expects high standards from Basu Chatterjee and he doesn't disappoint. The plot revolves around a set of jurors debating on the the innocence of a boy who is accused of murdering his father. One juror stands up for the lad and ends up proving his innocence. Pankaj Kapoor delivers the best performance of the lot. It also deals with the prejudices we carry with us from our personal lives and how they can cloud our judgment. We also learn a lesson or two about the value of a human life. Engrossing fare. 12 people in a room makes for a minimalist yet unforgettable setting. Don't miss it.
How can our mind be spontaneous with the burden of all our past knowledge
sulabhjain-btech-itbhu3 January 2011
To overcome our prejudices, to think beyond what we know and to observe the real truth without any presumptions of the observer is not something easily achieved. Many scholars like J Krishnamurthy have even called this practice as the greatest form of meditation one can do. This sounds true, since most of us all are so prepossessed with our knowledge, that the reality in front of us is always shadowed by the images projected by our mind, our thoughts and our accumulated concepts.
"Ek ruka hua faisala" is a story of such 11 men, who are all biased in their decision over a legal verdict, a murder case. The twelfth person in the group was an indifferent guy who tries to convince the group by his rationale thinking. It's decided that until any consensus is reached within the sequestered jurors, they all have to sit together and listen to what others are saying.
The movie left me thinking behind, the way I view things myself, the way I take my decisions, where does this promptness to do something comes from, am I ever reached at the reality before judging the activities of mind as right and wrong. I think most of the times it never happens.
The life would be much different if we are able to observe the things without the burden of our past knowledge. I hope in that case, we may as spontaneous as a little child and might have reached more closer to the reality then.
All the performers have done their part exceptionally well, particularly Pankaj Kapur, who played a stubborn middle age man. I have watched some of his movies like "The Blue Umbrella", which left an impact of his performance on me. And this knowledge was with me all the while I was watching him again, listening to the dialogues he delivered. It seems once again I have seen what I wished to watch, I have appreciated what I was prepared to appreciate and the distinctness between the observer and the observed is lost again.
The movie is a master piece, the story and the concept behind needs to be observed.
"Ek ruka hua faisala" is a story of such 11 men, who are all biased in their decision over a legal verdict, a murder case. The twelfth person in the group was an indifferent guy who tries to convince the group by his rationale thinking. It's decided that until any consensus is reached within the sequestered jurors, they all have to sit together and listen to what others are saying.
The movie left me thinking behind, the way I view things myself, the way I take my decisions, where does this promptness to do something comes from, am I ever reached at the reality before judging the activities of mind as right and wrong. I think most of the times it never happens.
The life would be much different if we are able to observe the things without the burden of our past knowledge. I hope in that case, we may as spontaneous as a little child and might have reached more closer to the reality then.
All the performers have done their part exceptionally well, particularly Pankaj Kapur, who played a stubborn middle age man. I have watched some of his movies like "The Blue Umbrella", which left an impact of his performance on me. And this knowledge was with me all the while I was watching him again, listening to the dialogues he delivered. It seems once again I have seen what I wished to watch, I have appreciated what I was prepared to appreciate and the distinctness between the observer and the observed is lost again.
The movie is a master piece, the story and the concept behind needs to be observed.
It's one of a classic movie
dearketan8 January 2006
The 99% movie is filmed in one single room. And camera angle is set very thoughtfully. All the actors have done a really wonderful job. Which no other Indian actor has done yet. Not even Amitabh or Raj Kapoor can do it. I have seen the film 3-4 times. And every time I have seen the movie with same excitement. The way the actor gets the confidence of all the jurors is really good. The dialogues are really realistic. It seems that you yourself are one of the juror. And you too want to prove that the boy is innocent.
Really one in a million movie.
" Ek Ruka Hua Faisla " Too Good To Resist......
Really one in a million movie.
" Ek Ruka Hua Faisla " Too Good To Resist......
Excellent adaptation of the English movie - 12 angry men
sreerao19 September 2005
I remember this movie particularly, because during the days when TV was still a luxury in the town I lived, this was broadcast on the national channel (aka Doordarshan's Friday movie time). Not many among my friends appreciated it because it was not made in a typical mainstream commercial cinema style! But it caught my attention as to how can such a small subject as a jury decision be depicted so wonderfully in the form of a movie. In the 80's when the evening discussions revolved around the mundane Indian movie hero's heroics (aka bashing the bad guy and beating around the bush ;)) I remember me being involved in the appreciation discussion of this movie. After 15 years later, when I am hooked to relish the American Classics, I watched "12 Angry men" and right into 10 minutes of the movie, I readily recollected seeing this same plot in a Hindi movie ...and voilà thanks to IMDb, I was able to find the name of the movie. The only thing I remember from the movie was Pankaj Kapoor. Undoubtly, this is a great adaption of "12 Angry men" which incidentally won the Oscar for the best direction. It would be exciting to know if the Hindi version won any awards.
Great movie but not original
arjunjk16 June 2006
I saw this movie back in '98 on SONY TV. It was very engrossing. I thought it was a great one until I came across Sidney Lumet's 12 Angry Men. I'm giving it 8/10 for being true to the original and not including unnecessary song sequences or deviations as seen in other remakes. The movie has some good performances from each of the actors. The movie may be one of the few movies devoid of female actors. I don't know whether this is true or not but one of my friend told me this movie is shown at IIMs for briefing on negotiations and dealings. Also I wonder whether there is any such jury system in India as shown in the movie. Well anyway a good remake and worth watching again and again.
Still a Great Indian Movie
ashish-alexander19 September 2008
This is a great movie. Even though it is a remake of 12 Angry Men, it stands on its own because of exceptional performances by the actors. And even though we have done away with the jury system, the movie is very believable because of its theme. It hits at the very common and well-entrenched prejudices held by individuals and social classes. Basu Chatterjee deserves special praise. Yes, it's a remake of a Hollywood movie but the issues it addresses needed to be brought forward to the Indian audiences and in Indian setting, with Indian characters and in Hindi language. Even after a quarter of a century later the movie stirs you with its treatment of topics because the issues of caste, class, materialism, loopholes in judicial process and of course human prejudices and judgement still plague us. And of course, Pankaj Kapur is fantastic Watch it!!!
A insightful movie
arunksaha-216 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I recent watched this movie, 'Ek Ruka hua Faisla" by Basu Chatterjee. I very much liked it. It is a kind of movie which made me fully concentrate on it and made me *think*. It is a movie with a statement, as opposed to 3 hour song-dance-fighting-drinking-partying malodrama.
Anyway, it a movie about a situation where a dozen of men who do not know each other in advance sit together in a humid afternoon to take an unanimous decision. During the course of the meeting, the fiercely debate (sometimes quarrel) on various issues and possibilities. Few of them use arguments, others are merely shouting. These men come from different sections of society which bias their opinions.
By the way, you may also want to watch "Twelve Angry Men" from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/ or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men which is 1957 movie in Hollywood based on the same story.
Anyway, it a movie about a situation where a dozen of men who do not know each other in advance sit together in a humid afternoon to take an unanimous decision. During the course of the meeting, the fiercely debate (sometimes quarrel) on various issues and possibilities. Few of them use arguments, others are merely shouting. These men come from different sections of society which bias their opinions.
By the way, you may also want to watch "Twelve Angry Men" from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/ or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/12_Angry_Men which is 1957 movie in Hollywood based on the same story.
More than brilliant.
khayaal_e_yaar5 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
'Ek Ruka Hua Faisla' is one of the best remakes I can think of. Those who are underestimating 'Ek Ruka Hua Faisla' are only doing so to prove Sydney Lumet's original version better than the remake, but I would only praise Lumet for being original and nothing else. ERHF has the guts to qualify itself to be one of the best films ever made where veteran actors from FTII and NDS have proved their versatility in every possible way. ERHF is an ode to Indian cinema and a vibrant answer to those who think that films could be only made at a multi-million budget. Surprisingly ERHF has no special locations, picturesque places, songs, or a great budget (this in fact seems to have no budget at all). The film begins and finishes in a closed room, where on a severely hot day 12 jurors are arguing on a murder case. 11 jurors are sure that the murderer, a 19 year old boy is guilty of killing his father, but one juror differs with them and is trying to prove the boy's innocence. The special thing about ERHF is that it never lets the viewer feel confined inside the four walls, but forces his mind to meander away and puts it right at the crime scene. ERHF is great due to the characteristics of the jurors.
Juror#1 (Deepak Kejriwal): A simple man with not much experience of hosting the meeting but takes comments on his performance very personally. He doesn't seem to have an innate ability to think anything and follows the flock.
Juror#2 (Amitabh Shrivastava): A classical, timid and docile man, very homely and lacks presentation skills. He is troubled by the presence of others and goes tongue-tied at places. He finds peace in his clerical job and is good at calculations.
Juror#3 (Pankaj Kapur): An arrogant and aggressive man who was abandoned by his son and have since been hating all the young men. He is hellbent on sending the poor guy to the gallows just because he sees a reflection of his own son in him.
Juror#4 (M.S. Zaheer): A logical and brainy fellow who has sober presentation skills. He likes to talk only on the proofs and motives of the culprit. He is very serious and is one of the prime representatives of the group that considers the culprit guilty.
Juror#5 (Subhash Udghate): A man who spent his childhood in the slums but rose to good post due to his personal endeavors. He understands the burning issues that relate to slums and slum-dwellers. Overall a reformer, who wishes to stay beside justice.
Juror#6 (Hemant Mishra): A small-time employee at a house-painting firm, who has illogically favored the 'guilty' team without applying his own thoughtfulness. He is ethical and doesn't tolerate arrogance. He is open to new arguments and thoughts to fuel his own views.
Juror#7 (M.K. Raina): An indifferent unethical man, who doesn't value others lives. He lives an epicurean lifestyle and enjoys 'party, drinks, and jokes'. He gives his verdict as 'guilty' because he wants to finish off soon and watch a movie.
Juror#8 (K.K. Raina): An architect by profession. Highly tolerant, firm and logical warrior, who has the power to subdue every other member with his inherent intuition. He has the power of elaborating and detailing everything with his common sense. He alone defends the young boy and is the first man to give the verdict of 'innocent'.
Juror#9 (Anu Kapoor): A silent old man who has inculcated knowledge through years of experience. He can't tolerate injustice and is the first one to offer his support to Juror#8. He is a great observer and has a unique way of looking at things.
Juror#10 (Subbi Raj): A foul-mouthed, snobbish, arrogant and aggressive businessman, who is filled with hot air. He disdains slum-dwellers and considers that they are fit to be eradicated from this society. He is loud, hypocrite and hasty in decisions and a worshiper of supremacy.
Juror#11 (Shailendra Goel): A humble, meek and cultured man, who likes to discuss things in peace and has good analytical skills. He is a democrat and believes in the freedom of expression and has the whole constitution in his mind.
Juror#12 (Aziz Qureshi): An ad-agency owner who seems lost somewhere else. Most of the time he follows others words and is bad at decision making. He doesn't have much to do with the jury and gives his decision based on majority.
I can't discuss anything more about this film and you must watch to believe it. I give it 10/10.
Juror#1 (Deepak Kejriwal): A simple man with not much experience of hosting the meeting but takes comments on his performance very personally. He doesn't seem to have an innate ability to think anything and follows the flock.
Juror#2 (Amitabh Shrivastava): A classical, timid and docile man, very homely and lacks presentation skills. He is troubled by the presence of others and goes tongue-tied at places. He finds peace in his clerical job and is good at calculations.
Juror#3 (Pankaj Kapur): An arrogant and aggressive man who was abandoned by his son and have since been hating all the young men. He is hellbent on sending the poor guy to the gallows just because he sees a reflection of his own son in him.
Juror#4 (M.S. Zaheer): A logical and brainy fellow who has sober presentation skills. He likes to talk only on the proofs and motives of the culprit. He is very serious and is one of the prime representatives of the group that considers the culprit guilty.
Juror#5 (Subhash Udghate): A man who spent his childhood in the slums but rose to good post due to his personal endeavors. He understands the burning issues that relate to slums and slum-dwellers. Overall a reformer, who wishes to stay beside justice.
Juror#6 (Hemant Mishra): A small-time employee at a house-painting firm, who has illogically favored the 'guilty' team without applying his own thoughtfulness. He is ethical and doesn't tolerate arrogance. He is open to new arguments and thoughts to fuel his own views.
Juror#7 (M.K. Raina): An indifferent unethical man, who doesn't value others lives. He lives an epicurean lifestyle and enjoys 'party, drinks, and jokes'. He gives his verdict as 'guilty' because he wants to finish off soon and watch a movie.
Juror#8 (K.K. Raina): An architect by profession. Highly tolerant, firm and logical warrior, who has the power to subdue every other member with his inherent intuition. He has the power of elaborating and detailing everything with his common sense. He alone defends the young boy and is the first man to give the verdict of 'innocent'.
Juror#9 (Anu Kapoor): A silent old man who has inculcated knowledge through years of experience. He can't tolerate injustice and is the first one to offer his support to Juror#8. He is a great observer and has a unique way of looking at things.
Juror#10 (Subbi Raj): A foul-mouthed, snobbish, arrogant and aggressive businessman, who is filled with hot air. He disdains slum-dwellers and considers that they are fit to be eradicated from this society. He is loud, hypocrite and hasty in decisions and a worshiper of supremacy.
Juror#11 (Shailendra Goel): A humble, meek and cultured man, who likes to discuss things in peace and has good analytical skills. He is a democrat and believes in the freedom of expression and has the whole constitution in his mind.
Juror#12 (Aziz Qureshi): An ad-agency owner who seems lost somewhere else. Most of the time he follows others words and is bad at decision making. He doesn't have much to do with the jury and gives his decision based on majority.
I can't discuss anything more about this film and you must watch to believe it. I give it 10/10.
It IS Gold, But With Traces Of Copper. ♦ 58%
nairtejas1 August 2013
12 Angry Men being remade shot-to-shot isn't child's play if that's what you're thinking. The way Sidney Lumet had handled the characters is so strong, that Basu Chatterjee only imitates and fails.
The story, screenplay & writing is all the same except the dialogs. They are fine, with ample use of humor. Since there is no difference at all between the two, I'll talk about the players. Exceptional acting by almost all of the twelve jurors. Special mention for Pankaj Kapoor for his quintessential portrayal; he makes us wanna hate him throughout the movie. Annu Kapoor totally pulls it off as the oldie. It is only halfway that I realized the oldie was indeed Annu Kapoor.
Editing is poor, so is the score. If there is one thing that meets the original cinema is the dialogs and I am glad I watched the remake. A 5.8 out of 10 for this venture. Also, the potshot on "Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro" was truly unnecessary.
BOTTOM LINE: Recommended, only to people who are cinema aficionados and have already watched 12 Angry Men or to people who haven't watched the latter.
Can be watched with a typical Indian family? YES
Profanity: Mild | Nudity/Sex: No | Violence: Strong | Gore: No | Alcohol/Drugs: No | Smoking: Strong
The story, screenplay & writing is all the same except the dialogs. They are fine, with ample use of humor. Since there is no difference at all between the two, I'll talk about the players. Exceptional acting by almost all of the twelve jurors. Special mention for Pankaj Kapoor for his quintessential portrayal; he makes us wanna hate him throughout the movie. Annu Kapoor totally pulls it off as the oldie. It is only halfway that I realized the oldie was indeed Annu Kapoor.
Editing is poor, so is the score. If there is one thing that meets the original cinema is the dialogs and I am glad I watched the remake. A 5.8 out of 10 for this venture. Also, the potshot on "Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro" was truly unnecessary.
BOTTOM LINE: Recommended, only to people who are cinema aficionados and have already watched 12 Angry Men or to people who haven't watched the latter.
Can be watched with a typical Indian family? YES
Profanity: Mild | Nudity/Sex: No | Violence: Strong | Gore: No | Alcohol/Drugs: No | Smoking: Strong
What a sham!
s-sunilpal12331 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I have some grave problems with this remake of the classic- "12 Angry Men".
1. Overacting from all quarters. The original had subtle performances from each of the actors acting as jurors. But this movie had excessive had movements, tongue lapping, advancing toward one another to hit, giggles and laughs on cringeworthy jokes, and so on.
2. Departure from logic. In the original, the fact that only one of the jurors was bespectacled turned out to be a pivotal point since he was able to testify that the marks on the nose could only be a product of being bespectacled. Since he was on the guilty 'side' earlier, it proved to be a damning indication to the fact that the evidence against the defendant was lacking in substance. But in this movie, half the jury is bespectacled- which is fine. Fine if they had just omitted one bespectacled juror asking another one if people who have specs sleep with their specs on! Dude- you should know yourself- you have specs too!
3. Jury system in India. Since time immemorial, we have had the judge ruling concept; not the jury decision concept. Factually inaccurate. Copying just for the sake of copying with no customization!
1. Overacting from all quarters. The original had subtle performances from each of the actors acting as jurors. But this movie had excessive had movements, tongue lapping, advancing toward one another to hit, giggles and laughs on cringeworthy jokes, and so on.
2. Departure from logic. In the original, the fact that only one of the jurors was bespectacled turned out to be a pivotal point since he was able to testify that the marks on the nose could only be a product of being bespectacled. Since he was on the guilty 'side' earlier, it proved to be a damning indication to the fact that the evidence against the defendant was lacking in substance. But in this movie, half the jury is bespectacled- which is fine. Fine if they had just omitted one bespectacled juror asking another one if people who have specs sleep with their specs on! Dude- you should know yourself- you have specs too!
3. Jury system in India. Since time immemorial, we have had the judge ruling concept; not the jury decision concept. Factually inaccurate. Copying just for the sake of copying with no customization!
Great Movie
mulay-3369823 January 2021
Perfect copy from Hollywood movie "TWELVE ANGRY MAN"
men_0820031 February 2007
No doubt about it that the movie is so nicely presented and directed but i m sorry to say that this is the the perfect remake of Hollywood movie "TWELVE ANGRY MAN", made in 1957. The plot is same, situation is same even the dialogs are all most same (translated in Hindi). But we have to proud (or feel some same) that only todays directors are not coping master but so many years before we were same but problem was that people were not aware with the truth and now a days, what ever you do very next day it Will exposed.
Want to check my truth then click below link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0050083/ Sorry.......................... Basu da
Want to check my truth then click below link: http://imdb.com/title/tt0050083/ Sorry.......................... Basu da
Great Acting
shetra14 May 2007
"Ek Ruka Hua Faisla" is strictly watchable for good performances only. Pankaj Kapoor and Anu Kapoor are brilliant and are aptly supported by decent performances by the others.
The plot is inspired by a Hollywood movie and has a quite a few flaws... The jury system was not in practise in the 80s (in fact, the Nanavati case in the 60s was the last time the Jury system was used in an Indian court). Plus, as far as my knowledge goes, a 12-to-none verdict is not required to convict or release an accused.
However, if you disregard these flaws, this movie is a quite an interesting watch and all the 12 guys are well characterized.
The plot is inspired by a Hollywood movie and has a quite a few flaws... The jury system was not in practise in the 80s (in fact, the Nanavati case in the 60s was the last time the Jury system was used in an Indian court). Plus, as far as my knowledge goes, a 12-to-none verdict is not required to convict or release an accused.
However, if you disregard these flaws, this movie is a quite an interesting watch and all the 12 guys are well characterized.
A multiplex movie in an era of no multiplex!!
nadkarnisumeet19 July 2022
Ek Ruka Hua Faisla review :
An almost scene by scene adaptation of the Hollywood classic Twelve Angry Men (1957); director Basu Chatterjee's Ek Ruka Hua Faisla was a wonderful attempt at creating an intense drama within the four corners of a dingy room where twelve jurors argue over a murder case. Years later, Vivek Agnihotri tried a similar setup in his The Tashkent Files (2019) which was also much appreciated.
Twelve jurors assemble in a room to decide if a nineteen year old guy accused of killing his father is guilty or not. Initially, all but one declare him guilty but slowly and steadily as the discussion moves on to reveal some startling facts, the sides change...
Basu Da's direction was brilliant as ever and the performances he extracted from the cast truly deserves praise. Pankaj Kapur, K. K. Raina, S. M. Zaheer, Anu Kapoor - in fact all of them are truly outstanding. Pankaj Kapur's climactic rant is handled even better than the original movie..
I don't think Ek Ruka Hua Faisla released in theatres (in Mumbai) and was a direct to Doordarshan release in July 1986 just like Mahesh Bhatt's Janam (1985). Both the films were highly acclaimed by the critics. They were multiplex movies made in an era of no multiplex!!
Regards, Sumeet Nadkarni.
An almost scene by scene adaptation of the Hollywood classic Twelve Angry Men (1957); director Basu Chatterjee's Ek Ruka Hua Faisla was a wonderful attempt at creating an intense drama within the four corners of a dingy room where twelve jurors argue over a murder case. Years later, Vivek Agnihotri tried a similar setup in his The Tashkent Files (2019) which was also much appreciated.
Twelve jurors assemble in a room to decide if a nineteen year old guy accused of killing his father is guilty or not. Initially, all but one declare him guilty but slowly and steadily as the discussion moves on to reveal some startling facts, the sides change...
Basu Da's direction was brilliant as ever and the performances he extracted from the cast truly deserves praise. Pankaj Kapur, K. K. Raina, S. M. Zaheer, Anu Kapoor - in fact all of them are truly outstanding. Pankaj Kapur's climactic rant is handled even better than the original movie..
I don't think Ek Ruka Hua Faisla released in theatres (in Mumbai) and was a direct to Doordarshan release in July 1986 just like Mahesh Bhatt's Janam (1985). Both the films were highly acclaimed by the critics. They were multiplex movies made in an era of no multiplex!!
Regards, Sumeet Nadkarni.
Facts can be misleading because there's a fault in reality.
atul-sharma1728 July 2018
This film did justice to its adapted film 12 Angry Men. Infact, they even took the dialogues from the original film, by not making any changes I felt more relatable towards its original source. Pankaj Kapoor and Annu Kapoor's performance was truly remarkable. For those who don't watch English film due to language barrier I hope you enjoy this. Jo log English filmy bhaasha ke taur per nahi dekhte vo ye film jarur dekhe. Kyonki ye bharat ki aasadharan filmy mese ek hai.
Ek Ruka Hua Faisla
manu_tcs_kundan19 October 2013
Warning: Spoilers
The movie is a good one..But it's a line by line remake of "12 Angry Men" movie made in 1957. Every single frame/dialogues are taken from that movie. So I'd suggest to watch the original one than watching this one. Pankaj Kapur is very awesome along with other actors. The story has been kept same .A boy is accused of killing his father. It's suspected to have committed in a fit of anger.Then a jury is assigned the final task of ascertaining his case. A total of 12 men sit in a room.They debate over the issue. Initially the jury finds him guilty by majority except for one man. At last he convince all others to accept his views. Ultimately the boy is acquitted of his charges. This's the entire story.
Exceptional movie
aniljain506 May 2018
This movie is exceptionally good and all the actors have done a brilliant job. Each role fits with the person. Over all an amazing movie though its a remake. They are so many remakes in Bollywood and this one is exceptional without a doubt.
Faithful to the original
Jini-B13 February 2018
This doesn't come close to the original but it is a good piece of work nevertheless. Though a very faithful remake, it wasn't quite able to capture the nuances of 12 Angry Men. The cast did a good job overall, but some actors were slightly prone to overacting.
What I liked most about this movie was how the director was able to keep the essence of the original but contextualize the story so that the Indian audience would understand and appreciate it.
What I liked most about this movie was how the director was able to keep the essence of the original but contextualize the story so that the Indian audience would understand and appreciate it.
Avoid it
ishdeepanand12 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Unfortunately had to sit through this movie many years back. Thought it was one of the best things I'd seen then.
3 years back watched the original 12 Angry Men http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/
After watching 12 Angry Men this movie feels like a truck load of trash. All of the acting is over the top. Not a half decent effort to do any justice to the original.
Pankaj Kapoor thought he was doing a great job with the constant licking his lips. KK Raina was perhaps the worst choice to play Henry Fonda's central role. Anu Kapoor as the old man was perhaps the only saving grace.
Save your money on the rental. Go watch the original.
3 years back watched the original 12 Angry Men http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/
After watching 12 Angry Men this movie feels like a truck load of trash. All of the acting is over the top. Not a half decent effort to do any justice to the original.
Pankaj Kapoor thought he was doing a great job with the constant licking his lips. KK Raina was perhaps the worst choice to play Henry Fonda's central role. Anu Kapoor as the old man was perhaps the only saving grace.
Save your money on the rental. Go watch the original.
Simple & Superb Drama
vinay-jindal29 September 2017
Superb performances by all especially Pankaj Kapoor and Annu Kapoor!!! The super long scenes are brilliantly directed, shot and delivered perfectly by them..
Movie starts in same room and ends up there as well...superb storyline and screenplay...totally enjoyed it..
Movie starts in same room and ends up there as well...superb storyline and screenplay...totally enjoyed it..
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
