#Review.
This movie review is instantaneous and I am expressing my direct review and watching it as well.3 minutes gone-The movie seems relatively old as the picture is in black-white. And it seem to be related to judiciary and courtroom drama. lets see how it goes on.
Okay 13 minutes into the movie- Jury members gathered into a private room. They chitchat about the whether, building, hot temperature and common cold. Yes acting seems real, I don't recognize any overacting anywhere and it seem realistic as well. People seem to have problem gathering. There is one character odd and silent one. Through their discussion it came to me that they are discussing the case of an eighteen year old youngster who have been convicted of stabbing and murdering his own father with the knife at the chest. During vote out, 11 of the jury member voted for the youngster as guilty, with that one silent man voting for not guilty. Okay, seems interesting.
25 minutes into it... The argument going pretty hot right now. Some people feel things getting personal. The youngster prosecuted for murder seem to be raised in the environment full of bullying, raging and brutality, so the person supporting not guilty for the boy says that can be just the outburst or accident or anything and they need to discuss through fully. One by one all the members place points on why the boy should be guilty. Some say they have some eye witness as well but that seems irrelevant and not clearly convincing. The boy seems to have pretty rough childhood, Jury members are getting bored and moving here and there. One man tries to organize the people in the discussion but others seem to avoid him. Okay, what we got now,....
Now 45 minutes gone, and here comes another turning point. Since others don't seem to convince that silent and opposing man, this man offers another secret ballet voting, and he agrees if anyone hasn't change their mind, he would go with the rest of others decision. But here another man votes on not guilty. Now here we have 10 vs 2. Others tries to convince the two that the older man just below the apartment of the boy said he heard boy saying," I am going to kill you" to his father and just after that he heard body falling into the floor and an woman, living just across that apartment, saw the boy stabbing his father through the passing train. But the silent man presents a point pretty convincing. If the train was passing just through the apartment so closely, how come the old man heard the boy saying those killing word in such a noise.
Hait !!! Its getting really hot in 1 hour and 15 minutes into the movie
Initially started with one voting not guilty, now we have 6 members voting not guilty. And people getting very upset about jury members changing their votes following one member's explanation. It starts to rain outside and they seem to go nowhere with the continuous argument. Things sometime gets personal as well. The silent man along with others in support of him argues about the boy returning to home 3 hours later. Why he need to comeback if he had killed his father without getting nervous at all? Others say he came just to hide the knife, but "why three hours??" Argues the silent young man. Another man points out" if he really been to movies, why he couldn't remember the name of the movie?" Silent man says" Place yourself in his position, can you remember it when you return out of movies and you see bunch of police officers come and grab you, you see your dad killed just in front of you. Place yourself in such emotional stress." some people seem to like his explanation while some people feeling really irritated about it.
And finally, finished with the movie. Really awesome one. They do countless number of voting. With reasonable facts the voting reaches up to three to nine. With topic switching into women witnessing the boy stabbing his father made by one fellow member, an old man seems really interested in the dark patch in the side of his nose,near his eyes that's irritating him and says that he had observed that sort of patches in that woman as well. That means she must be wearing glass at the sleeping hours which is illogical as well. Who wears glass during sleep? That makes the whole difference. Final voting makes 11 to 1. The single man goes on shouting until he bursts into tears. He seems to be influenced by his own life. And finally the jury came to decision of not guilty for the boy.
Its really breath taking during last argument. Heated up conversations and facts linking up together. Our Nepali films should also make such interesting movies as well. Awesome one.
0 Comments