The Movie Forums Top 100 of All-Time Refresh: Countdown

12 Angry Men (Sidney Lumet, 1957)

The other jurors want Juror #3 to convince them...

I'm trying to think back to when I first watched the film and how I may have reacted. I was a teenager, but that would have been the early '70s. It was probably my introduction to how a jury might work, especially one where almost everybody sees the case as cut-and-dried. Of course, I understood it was a melodrama where everyone slightly exaggerates their words and acting for dramatic effect. It's still filmed "realistically", so it gets to have it both ways as a realistic drama and a highly-theatrical experience.

The real key to 12 Angry Men's success is Reginald Rose's tightly-wound script, which provides all the jurors [who seem to be heading, shall we say, due west] with flaws and personalities and then as it slowly reveals all of the people we've never seen in the film (those mentioned or testifying during the trial), the semblance of doubt begins to take root in more than just one juror's mind. The path seems to shift ever so subtly until near the end, the jury appears to be heading due west. It's all left to the viewer to decide how they would vote and how they may change their opinion based on the pieces of evidence being examined throughout the film. As far as I'm concerned, the strongest scene in the film the first time I watched it remains the most memorable one to me still: the scene where Juror #8 produces the knife. Besides being the centerpiece of the script, it's also Sidney Lumet's best-directed scene.

The Shining (Stanley Kubrick, 1980)


Inspired by The Phantom Carriage


To tell you the truth, I never understand why people think that The Shining is so good. I do believe that it's a good film, but when the word "best" raises its head, I become incredulous. My brother and I drove an hour to Hollywood to get in a line for another hour and watch a sneak preview of The Shining. The opening credits almost made us giddy, and there were many other impressive scenes. However, since we both loved the novel, we knew that many of the highlights were changed around and that Nicholson gave one of his earliest "over-the-top" performances. People were laughing when something ominous was happening and it cut to 4:05 PM. It's just too long in my opinion and doesn't really have to be, but Kubrick has a way of making long movies sometimes. Therefore, we were both disappointed. Kubrick eventually cut about three minutes, mostly at the end (which didn't really seem to be nearly as important as things like how Scatman Crothers has the "shining" and knows that something bad will happen, yet he has no idea it will happen to him!! Now I can accept it for the pleasures found along the way [mostly visual but some good audio/music too], and I can forgive Nicholson because he's so funny