This blog is a memory nudge of sorts – for those planning on attending our Sunday March 22nd screening of 12 but without sufficient time to rent the dvd of the film classic, 12 Angry Men. A movie maven somewhere in Ulan Bator may not have seen Sidney Lumet’s trenchant 12 Angry Men juryroom drama, but for this blog, I’m taking as given, that all my-pov.ca readers know this story and won’t be disturbed by my indiscretions. [ATTENTION: This blog reveals content of the movie.]
Rescreening 12 Angry Men last week, I was once again in thrall with Sydney Lumet’s galaxy of all-white-ordinary-good-guy movie stars from my delinquent teens: So many went on to become major Hollywood stars. In 12 Angry Men, they are 50s archetypes: Fonda (Liberal voice of reason), Ed Begley (the bigot), E.G. Marshall (the Corporate Counsellor), Martin Balsam (the conciliator), Jack Klugman (Oscar from The Odd Couple), Lee J. Cobb (self-made capitalist), Jack Warden (ghetto kid), John Fiedler (who went on to become Piglet in the Winnie the Pooh cartoons). One juror is Eastern European. None seem Jewish.
Lumet in his career made over 50 well-acted, tightly written, sliceoflife movies, a lot of them very fine: Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976) and The Verdict (1982), all of which, except for Serpico (1973), earned him Academy Award nominations.
Looking at 12 Angry Men with 2009 eyes, I had no longer remembered that the Lumet’s accused was Puerto Rican, that indeed puertoricanness was a significant issue in the Fonda jury initially presuming the accused guilty. 12 Angry Men turns on one juror (Fonda), sowing a seed of reasonable doubt, discrediting faulty courtroom evidence.
But today, 12 Angry Men decodes differently to my eyes: a loose regard for truth within the courtroom evolves into home truths amongst the twelve Fonda jurists: their reckless willingness to categorize people unlike themselves as objects they hate or fear most, blinds them to court facts; they reassure one another that of course they are nothing like the accused. Indeed, given 12 Angry Men was released midst the 1950’s Red Scare, the accused’s puertoricanness could well have been code for Jew or Commie bastard (both Lumet and Rose were Jewish). In the end, the happy-ever-after ending determines America is safe for democracy, thanks to the Henry Fonda WASPs of this world.
Still Lumet's 12 Angry Men is a classic, and made the viewing of Nikita Mikhalkov's 12 this morning that much more enjoyable. Mikhalkov's 12 is not Lumet's 12 Angry Men. Nor is Mikhalkov's Moscow, 2008 Lumet's New York, 1956. Two vastly different worlds. Yet Mikhalkov's homage to Lumet is clear: he superimposes on the opening frame of his movie: Seek the truth not in the mundane details of daily life but in the essence of life itself. A foundation Sidney Lumet used to build a distinguished career.
Rescreening 12 Angry Men last week, I was once again in thrall with Sydney Lumet’s galaxy of all-white-ordinary-good-guy movie stars from my delinquent teens: So many went on to become major Hollywood stars. In 12 Angry Men, they are 50s archetypes: Fonda (Liberal voice of reason), Ed Begley (the bigot), E.G. Marshall (the Corporate Counsellor), Martin Balsam (the conciliator), Jack Klugman (Oscar from The Odd Couple), Lee J. Cobb (self-made capitalist), Jack Warden (ghetto kid), John Fiedler (who went on to become Piglet in the Winnie the Pooh cartoons). One juror is Eastern European. None seem Jewish.
Lumet in his career made over 50 well-acted, tightly written, sliceoflife movies, a lot of them very fine: Serpico (1973), Dog Day Afternoon (1975), Network (1976) and The Verdict (1982), all of which, except for Serpico (1973), earned him Academy Award nominations.
Looking at 12 Angry Men with 2009 eyes, I had no longer remembered that the Lumet’s accused was Puerto Rican, that indeed puertoricanness was a significant issue in the Fonda jury initially presuming the accused guilty. 12 Angry Men turns on one juror (Fonda), sowing a seed of reasonable doubt, discrediting faulty courtroom evidence.
But today, 12 Angry Men decodes differently to my eyes: a loose regard for truth within the courtroom evolves into home truths amongst the twelve Fonda jurists: their reckless willingness to categorize people unlike themselves as objects they hate or fear most, blinds them to court facts; they reassure one another that of course they are nothing like the accused. Indeed, given 12 Angry Men was released midst the 1950’s Red Scare, the accused’s puertoricanness could well have been code for Jew or Commie bastard (both Lumet and Rose were Jewish). In the end, the happy-ever-after ending determines America is safe for democracy, thanks to the Henry Fonda WASPs of this world.
Still Lumet's 12 Angry Men is a classic, and made the viewing of Nikita Mikhalkov's 12 this morning that much more enjoyable. Mikhalkov's 12 is not Lumet's 12 Angry Men. Nor is Mikhalkov's Moscow, 2008 Lumet's New York, 1956. Two vastly different worlds. Yet Mikhalkov's homage to Lumet is clear: he superimposes on the opening frame of his movie: Seek the truth not in the mundane details of daily life but in the essence of life itself. A foundation Sidney Lumet used to build a distinguished career.
No comments:
Post a Comment