Η Ετυμηγορία

Mark Cusack1.0

12 trauma dumping men

solh2.5

You're disappearing down the yellow brick road!As twelve diverse jurors debate whether a man is guilty of murder, the set-up of this drama from Jim Sheridan is so close to 12 Angry Men that it is hard not to draw comparisons, and the film unfortunately falls short in every regard. The jurors are half men and half women this time round with some gender politics coming into play, but the biggest difference is that Sheridan does not limit his action to a single, claustrophobic room. Tension frequently dissipates as the jurors discuss the case over a meal and coffee in a different room, and as they briefly take their discussions outside to a park full of chirping birds. There are also a lot of flashbacks and shots of the accused man grimacing in between all the debating, which again interferes with the film building tension. The film's biggest plus is the acting with all concerned delivering well within the confines of their roles (including Sheridan who has cast himself as the foreman). Their roles are really confined though with most of the jurors coming off as interchangeable beyond Jurors 1, 3 and 8, and it would have been nice to know more about everyone's prejudices and personal reasons, like Lumet managed to flesh out so well in 12 Angry Men. Add in maudlin music at the start and end and the film unfortunately never hits especially hard. The fact that the film is based on an imagined trial of a real-life accused murderer who never stood trial is interesting though, particularly given that his bragging about committing the murder when not under oath is the most significant evidence against him.

🫩🫩1.0

12 podirytowanych europejczykow??