The Argument Against The Crowd In The Film 12 Angry Men

961 Words4 Pages
An individual can often more than usual doubt their own judgment when they are with a crowd of people. Conforming to what the majority believes because fear of being alone, embarrassed or rejected for how they feel even if their judgment is right. However, there are some people who will stand against the crowd though suffering the consequences or benefits of doing just that and the film 12 Angry Men is one of many examples of that type of incident taking place.
First, the plot occurs in the 1950s dealing with twelve jurors who have to decide the fate of a young teenage boy who is accused of killing his own father. Early in the movie all men, except one juror, number eight, agree that the boy is guilty without a doubt. In this case normative influencer took place which is going along with the crowd in order to be liked or accepted. Juror eight was the only person from the beginning of the deliberation to the end of it that thought the boy was innocent and he had to basically break down all the men to understand why it was true. Also some of the men did not care if the boy was a person who deserved a fair trial because in their eyes he was not like them and they knew people like his kind to be
…show more content…
Though the film took place almost sixty years ago, it really showed how majority can rule even today. That goes back to incidents like being peer pressured and though more often than not peer pressure is considered bad but many forget that it could also be a good thing. In addition to that many do not take the time to really take the time to know a person and will often prejudge a person based on race, gender, sexuality just to name a few. 12 Angry Men showed how persuasion can be a powerful thing and if individuals take the time to understand the information they can make the best decision with or without a

More about The Argument Against The Crowd In The Film 12 Angry Men

Open Document