The 1957 film “12 Angry Men” is a brilliant movie. I like old black and white movies so it was a pleasure for me to watch it. Furthermore, there isn’t a lot of action – I’m not the biggest fan of action films.
I really loved how it showed that not everything is how it seems. That one jury who, against peer pressure, did everything to prove the boy was not guilty was inspiring and brave. He didn’t conform to the group and instead, he sticked to the facts. He didn’t jump to conclusions without analyzing every detail which was admirable. I also can’t stress enough how good of a job the actors did at expressing different emotions, they played their roles very well and all were very believable. The actor playing the role of the 3rd jury, the one hesitating to admit the defendant was not guilty, Lee J. Cobb, was particularly amazing to me.
If I were to convince other people, I would probably go for both informational and normative arguments, but I would focus more on the kind of arguments that the other person’s attitude was based on. Social psychology says we should opt for emotional, normative arguments when we try to influence attitude based on emotions and for informational arguments against attitude based on information and facts. I’d have to know the other people’s point of view to adjust though. I think I would feel a bit scared to try to impact others, but I view myself as a person always ready to speak up my mind, even if it may cost me something or generate negative emotions for me and for other people.
Please select the Tab Content in the Widget Settings.