十二怒汉观后感英文版
十二怒汉观后感英文
十二怒汉观后感英文After watching the classic film "12 Angry Men," I am left with profound thoughts and emotions. The movie, directed by Sidney Lumet, takes place in a single room where twelve jurors deliberate the fate of a young man accused of murder. The gripping storyline, masterful acting, and thought-provoking themes have all left an indelible impression on me.One of the most remarkable aspects of "12 Angry Men" is its powerful portrayal of the human psyche and the complex dynamics that emerge in a confined space. The twelve jurors, each with their own biases, beliefs, and personalities, are forced to confront their deepest prejudices and rethink their initial judgments.The film beautifully captures the tension and conflicts that arise during deliberations. The initial vote reveals that eleven jurors are convinced of the young man's guilt, while one, played by Henry Fonda, has reasonable doubt. What ensues is a battle of wills and a clash of ideologies as Fonda's character challenges the group's consensus and demands a thorough examination of the evidence.As the jurors engage in heated discussions, their personal baggage and unresolved issues come to the fore. Their biases towards race, social class, and personal experiences heavily influence their perceptions of the accused. Lumet masterfully exposes the flaws in the justice system, highlighting how preconceived notions and personal prejudices can influence the outcome of a trial.Furthermore, "12 Angry Men" serves as a powerful critique of conformity and the dangers of a mob mentality. As Fonda's character persists in his quest for justice, he faces resistance from those who are more interested in a quick verdict rather than a fair one. The film raises the question of individual responsibility and the importance of critically examining evidence, even when it goes against the majority opinion.The performances in "12 Angry Men" are nothing short of brilliant. Each actor brings depth and nuance to their respective characters, further enhancing the film's impact. Henry Fonda's restrained and resolute portrayal of Juror 8 is particularly noteworthy. He embodies calm rationality in the face of overwhelming opposition, effectively challenging the other jurors' biases and forcing them to question their assumptions.The film's direction deserves high praise. Lumet expertly utilizes the confined space of the jury room to intensify the dramatic tension. Through carefully crafted shots and camera angles, he captures the jurors' emotions and reactions, allowing the audience to engage fully with the unfolding drama.In the end, "12 Angry Men" offers a powerful message about the importance of empathy, critical thinking, and the pursuit of justice. It reminds us that everyone is entitled to a fair trial, regardless of their background or circumstances. The film encourages us to question our own biases, challenge the status quo, and advocate for a more just society.It is worth noting that "12 Angry Men" was made over six decades ago, yet its themes remain relevant today. In a world plagued by social and political divisiveness, the film serves as a stark reminder of the necessity toovercome our differences and work towards common understanding and justice.In conclusion, "12 Angry Men" is an extraordinary film that explores the complexities of the human psyche, the dangers of conformity, and the pursuit of justice. Its timeless themes, compelling performances, and expert direction make it a cinematic masterpiece that continues to resonate with audiences. After watching this film, one cannot help but reflect on the fragility of justice and the power of individual conviction.。
十二怒汉观后感英文版
十二怒汉观后感英文版Twelve Angry Men - My ThoughtsI recently had the opportunity to watch the classic American film, "Twelve Angry Men," and I must say it left a deep impression on me. The movie, directed by Sidney Lumet, was released in 1957 and remains relevant even today. This gripping courtroom drama explores themes of justice, prejudice, and the power dynamics within a deliberation room.The film begins in a claustrophobic setting, a jury room, where twelve men are assigned the task of deciding the fate of a young man on trial for murder. The accused is from a disadvantaged background and faces the death penalty if found guilty. The plot unfolds as the jury initially votes overwhelmingly in favor of a guilty verdict, with only one juror, played by Henry Fonda, holding a dissenting opinion. What follows is a captivating journey of persuasion, introspection, and personal growth.One aspect that struck me about the film was the portrayal of human nature and the flaws within the justice system. Each juror brings their own biases, experiences, and preconceived notions into the room, which greatly influences their judgement. As the movie progresses, we witness how these biases manifest in different forms of prejudice, such as racial profiling and socio-economic discrimination.It becomes clear that the majority of the jurors' decision to convict the accused is not based on concrete evidence, but rather on their preconceived notions and personal prejudices. This raises pertinent questions about the flaws in the justice system and the importance of fair and impartialdeliberation. The film serves as a strong reminder that justice can be fragile, easily swayed by human emotions and biases.What makes this movie truly captivating is the character development and the power dynamics within the jury room. As the deliberations continue, we witness the transformation of the jurors, particularly those who initially held strong beliefs about the accused's guilt. Through open dialogue and critical thinking, these characters evolve from narrow-mindedness to empathy and understanding.One memorable scene involves Juror Number Eight, played by Henry Fonda, as he challenges the group's assumptions, urging them to re-evaluate the evidence presented. Despite facing immense opposition, Juror Eight remains calm and persistent, encouraging his fellow jurors to question their own biases and reconsider their initial verdict. This scene showcases the power of individual conviction and the importance of standing up for what is right, even in the face of opposition.As the film progresses, the audience is reminded of the significance of empathy and understanding in creating a fair and just society. Through the diverse backgrounds and perspectives of the jurors, we witness the human capacity for change and the potential for personal growth. The courtroom setting serves as a microcosm of society, highlighting the need for dialogue and deliberation rather than hasty judgments.In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" is a thought-provoking and emotionally charged film that highlights the complexities of the justice system. Through its compelling storyline and well-developed characters, the film explores the importance of unbiased deliberation and the need toquestion our own prejudices. It serves as a timeless reminder of the power of civic responsibility, critical thinking, and empathy. Despite being released over six decades ago, its themes remain relevant in today's society. I highly recommend watching this film as it offers valuable insights into the human condition and the pursuit of justice.。
十二怒汉 观后感 英文
十二怒汉观后感英文I recently watched the classic film "Twelve Angry Men," which left a deep impression on me. 这部影片让我印象深刻,它讲述了一个陪审团在审判一桩谋杀案件时的故事。
The film revolves around a jury of twelve men who are tasked with deliberating the guilt or innocence of a young man accused of murder. 影片围绕着一个由十二名男士组成的陪审团,他们的任务是审议一个年轻人被指控犯有谋杀罪的有罪或无罪。
The setting of the film primarily takes place in a single room where the jury deliberates, and it showcases the intense dynamics and personal conflicts among the jurors. 这部电影的主要场景发生在一个房间里,陪审团在这里进行审议,展现了陪审员之间激烈的动态和个人冲突。
The film is a thought-provoking exploration of the American judicial system and the human nature of prejudice, bias, and the concept of reasonable doubt. 这部影片是对美国司法制度以及人类偏见、偏见和合理怀疑概念的深入思考。
One of the most striking aspects of the film is how it delves into the complexities of human psychology and social dynamics. 电影最引人注目的一个方面是它深入探讨了人类心理和社会动态的复杂性。
十二怒汉观后感英语
十二怒汉观后感英语《十二怒汉》主要讲述12个陌生的普通人组成了一个陪审团,决定一个贫民窟的男孩的生死。
下面是英语的《十二怒汉》观后感,欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感英语Before see comments, said that in 2007 the Russian remake version beyond the original, so I look at the Russian version, look after the feeling is more general, it is necessary to have a look at the original beauty. In a word: the 1957 edition is the peak!The 57 edition of 100 minute, 07 edition 160 min.. More than one hour to come, mainly the personal story of each juror. Yes, the 07 edition of the jury to make every judgment is based on personal experience, and the 57 version of the sentence according to the clues itself, so the 07 version looks more tired, the content is more verbose.But the 07 version will focus on domestic people's livelihood, many domestic situation or projections of each section of history, and personal experience about the lines of the film full of flesh and blood, very full, this is very great. Unfortunately, I'm not a Russian and I'm not too cold about these things. In contrast, the 57 edition of the rhythm of a lot faster, at very good.One thing is very rare, two versions have successfully created a different image of the 12 jurors, character, no soy sauce characters. But the 07 version did not copy the 57 version of the character set, the two sides clash also appeared different moves (07 edition of "guilty" leaders of hypnosis is really good! Impressive. I want to point out the special field this section [analog], version 07 using multi camera editing and more messy sharp props, well made a tense atmosphere, very appetizing, this period of more than 57 more attractive.In the shooting intention, the 57 edition is only to restore the truth of the incident, to defend the law and justice, the 07 version is more humane and law who is more advanced thinking, giving the audience more room for reflection. Turn the film, can keep the original taste too difficult, can be improved to adapt to today's mass is more difficult, the 07 edition did great.On the reasonableness of narrative, version 57 or more. The 57edition of a list of the various court testimony and exhibits, audience and jury information synchronization. The 07 edition of each clue appears, you have to wait for a gentleman to finish the story, thedebate is not the next one, then how do you explain the xxxxx it, completely put the audience in a passive position.Good suspense novel, should put all the clues are listed, the last time the secret, the audience should say "ah! This is so! We saw theclue! Can not be inferred!" And should not be what clues do not give you, secret, the audience said, "I do not know this thing!" And then the author retorted, "I didn't say nothing about it"In the story of fluency, the 57 edition is also more outstanding,the film successfully put all the camera frame died in a room. While the 07 version of the continuous growth of the Chechen juvenile fragments, continue to play back flash. Although it has enriched the content of the film, they have distracted me. Fortunately, the jury's personal story is dictated not shoot out with location, otherwise I really fell asleep.Let's get back to the score. For so many years and 57 years, MGM should be very mature, but the film's music is the greatest degree of narrowing the score, the total length of not more than five minutes. The five minute soundtrack is an understatement, symbolically set the mood, although not abrupt, not redundant, but also no color, no touching. I think the score can be taken away, and the rest.By the way of acting. But I first talk about another point: 57edition and 07 edition of the jury have no names, the 57 edition of the 12 jurors is sitting by serial number, I can recognize, but the 07 version of the seat is a mess, I don't know who is who...... Well,that's not the point. Well, let's talk about acting.The head of the innocent - juror number 8 (Henry Fonda) is very upright, sitting posture stance is also very firm, giving a sense of stability. When the guilty leaders - juror number 3 (no - name) to demonstrate he assassination moves very calm, do not move a mountain. Have good gas. 3, the performance is also very good, he is the most stubborn, portrayed every word and action is in place, and finally he as a father, standing in his father's position changed his mind, but also touching. And the brother asked in glasses, when a huge forehead oozing sweat, the acting is terrific. By the way, the 07 version of theinnocent leader looks like Henry, but the expression of a lot of kindness, the tone is very soft and soft, from the beginning of the beginning of decent tough.I personally love the 57 version, in my heart it is the peak.十二怒汉观后感英语Russian version has a strong sense of subtlety.I never love political overtones, did not think this movie was involved in a war of national social factors and so on, more than two hours of film has let me unable to stop procrastinating, do something else, watch more than 8 hours, it was very.The story is a Chechen boy killed stepfather was brought to court, 12 jurors in a small room from only one person that he was innocent, the people put forward all kinds of evidence of doubt, finally everyone voted innocent boy. Almost everyone's background, ideas, opinions, etc..I do not say this movie is good or not, anyway, for political white ethnic confrontation problem has always been an insulator. It is said that after the first vote, there was a man who was not guilty, because he thought he could not be so hasty to send the child to the guillotine, so he proposed to carry out second anonymous voting, a person has also been acquitted.In this section I can not understand, though it should be the expression of real name and anonymous can change a person's decisions, do not blindly follow the crowd, but after the voting, the people immediately stand out is their own investment, which will soon be exposed "defection", also really can. In particular, the argument is not to take the child's life away.Heard that the black and white version 1957 better, so the next day is the turning point of view.From the rhythm, indeed very good grasp. Pinch out all kinds of unnecessary plot, is completely 12 people for each child to put forward their own justifications.Everything is at the center: if the child is likely to be innocent, he should not be convicted of the crime.The United States Justice, I have seen in the description of Linda to be truly understand, this movie is very perfect to show the American judicial philosophy: I would rather let one thousand, not kill the wrong one.In this story, every juror has no name, did not find out who is the real murderer, (because the Russian version of the real estate business, demolitions) discrimination the boy's identity is a slum origin, rather than racial conflicts......Until the last we walked out of the court, there are only two of the most important to insist on the innocent boy reported the name of each other, no phone, no address, there will be no intersection. From the people, back to the people.Space seems to be better.十二怒汉观后感英语Read the drama "12 people", and came back to review the United States under the old film of the year twelve, "the anger of the 57 Han".The story is very simple, a child, the film is colored, the drama did not appear, was accused of murdering his father. The family lived in the slums, in the eyes of some people from generation to generation are criminals and bad ass villain, natural. And all the evidence points to the child as the murderer. The draw for the 12 jurors, all staff have what occupation, 11 people think children guilty, only Henry Fonda architects think of doubt, although he is not very sure. As a result, an increasing number of jurors saw the suspect in the case and voted to pass.The result is not important, the process can glimpse the essence of Democracy: defend everyone's right to freedom of speech (Note: should be everybody's birthright, rather than the gifts of others, power) this person is either young or old, poor or rich, or who is ru. Democracy is the freedom to give everyone the full expression of their views. Of course, from this story can also be seen, small people, muddle along without any aim of moral justice or a sense of super guard unknown to the ordinary people are likely to be the representation of fudge, may also be in the democratic system under control. So, I agree, in the overall quality of the public is not high, the democracy is likely tofail, because many people vote not worth several Steamed Buns, or a lot of people do not know what is the election of a large number ofindividual shares, so after the collapse of the Soviet Union to thepublic ownership of private ownership by capitalists acquisition the situation may also occur in the family who have an ulterior motive power.After the liberation of China, there have been grassroots democracy experiment, which is Liu Shaoji pushed, but because of the resistance of the hair, did not push down. Now the community election, there are a lot of people say it is a formality, but from a positive point of view, this is not a democratic education, at least let everyone know how is the process of election. After a few years of your community appeared in a car with the big horn canvassing, do propaganda scenes, is very likely. At this time, democracy really into the lives of ordinary people, that is, democratic life. I met several people, without exception, and they talk of democracy in Taiwan, elected, they are not interested in, it is said that the Taiwan few young people are interested in politics; but in the mainland, in the premise of not achieve universal suffrage, politics seems to often is a topic of gossip for you talk about the. This is not because, people naturally than Taiwanese people interested in politics, just like to put you in the Qinghai Tibet Plateau, you think too little oxygen, need oxygen, but in the plain here, you will not care about what the air is. This is a scarce resource in economics. After the democratic life, everyone has become commonplace, It is quite common for a part of life, so everyone's interest naturally low, rather than talk about the star's private life is stimulated.Look at the handling of drama and movies, including the plot lines are exactly the same, but in the scene of the atmosphere, it reflectsthe different understanding of democracy under the two kinds of social systems. The drama is full of black background, spacious and solemn, express a kind of democracy and the divine worship, understanding of democracy from the mouth of a jury in the mouth, with the obvious meaning of religion. The scene is a small room with a narrow, is asultry fidgety summer afternoon, twelve men crowded in a small space, discuss a majority of people think a foregone conclusion, nature is not love. And one of the twelve fans, boss, advertisers are logical to have these occupation identity of a life of the background. Their tone of voice is also relatively soft and casual, although there are arguments, confrontation, but to give the feeling that this is a real life scene, their argument is part of their lives. On the stage of the jury isclearly an ideal space, let the audience start to think, in such asolemn place, the nature is a heavy topic, 12 people take is also sacred and arduous responsibility. This is a religious scene. I do not deny the 12 jurors responsibility is sacred and arduous, but in a democratic society, this responsibility has been a part of their lives, without the need for a special ceremony to worship.I think I should make it clear that the issue of democratic life, the next time to discuss the issue of democratization of life.。
12怒汉观后感英文版
12怒汉观后感英文版Introduction:"12 Angry Men" is a classic American courtroom drama film released in 1957. Directed by Sidney Lumet, the film revolves around the jury deliberations of a murder trial. The film explores themes of prejudice, justice, and the power of persuasion. After watching this thought-provoking film, I was compelled to reflect on the various aspects that made it such a significant piece of cinema.Body:1. Plot Overview:The film takes place almost entirely in a jury room, where twelve jurors deliberate the fate of a young man accused of murdering his own father. Initially, it seems like an open-and-shut case, but as the deliberations progress, diverse opinions and biases emerge among the jurors. The plot follows their intense discussions, examination of evidence, and interpersonal conflicts.2. Character Analysis:One of the remarkable aspects of the film is the depth of the characters. Each juror has a unique personality, with their prejudices and preconceived notions affecting their judgment. Juror 8, played by Henry Fonda, stands out as the protagonist who challenges the assumptions and prejudices of his fellow jurors. His calm demeanor, rational thinking, and unwavering beliefin justice make him a central figure.3. Themes Explored:a. Prejudice: One of the dominant themes explored in the film is prejudice. Through the jurors' deliberations, it becomes evident how personal biases and stereotypes can cloud judgment and hinder the pursuit of justice. The film highlights the importance of looking beyond one's preconceptions in making fair and unbiased decisions.b. Justice: The concept of justice is at the core of the film. As the jurors deliberate, they grapple with their responsibility to ensure a fair trial for the accused. The film raises questions about the reliability of the legal system and the role of individuals in upholding justice. It prompts the audience to consider the moral and ethical dilemmas associated with delivering a verdict.c. Power of Persuasion: Another significant theme in the film is the power of persuasion. As the jurors engage in heated discussions, they employ various strategies to convince their peers. Each argument, presented with conviction, has the potential to sway the opinion of others. This exploration of persuasive techniques offers insights into human psychology and decision-making processes.4. Cinematic Techniques:The film's director skillfully utilizes various cinematic techniques to heighten the tension and create a sense of claustrophobia. The confined space of the jury room intensifies the emotional atmosphere, with the camera angles emphasizing the characters' reactions and interactions. The use of close-ups showcases the jurors' facial expressions, highlighting their inner conflicts and changing attitudes.5. Impact on Society:"12 Angry Men" had a significant impact on society, generating discussions about the flaws in the legal system and the need for objective judgment. Moreover, it sparked conversations around race, social inequality, and the dangers of prejudice. The film serves as a powerful reminder that justice should not be influenced by personal biases, as it has the potential to change lives and shape society.Conclusion:"12 Angry Men" is a timeless classic that transcends cultural and temporal boundaries. Its exploration of prejudice, justice, and the power of persuasion remains relevant today. The thoughtful character development, compelling themes, and skillful cinematography contribute to its enduring legacy. The film serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of open-mindedness, critical thinking, and fair judgment in the pursuit of justice.Note: The word count of the above response is 480 words. To achieve the desired word count, additional analysis, examples, and reflections could be included.。
十二怒汉观后感英文
十二怒汉观后感英文在《十二怒汉》里,由12普通民众组成的陪审团中,仅有一个8号的建筑师,凭借陪审团12位成员必须达成一致方可定罪原则,第一次投票便投了无罪一票,致使大部分陪审员只想走完程序给被告定罪的想法落空。
下面是英文的《十二怒汉》观后感,欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感英文Back to the room, slumped in a chair, all of a sudden no fighting spirit. Turn over the film, to avoid the destruction of negative emotions.This is a classic old piece called "Twelve Angry Chinese". The story is a jury of twelve members, in a small conference room to discuss whether a juvenile murderer is guilty, the process of ups and downs, the outcome of great. It is a classic, in my view is that: shooting the film in the more distant, black and white, but I very smoothly finished it; and after reading without a tired feeling, but a kind of scattered emotions, it is difficult to name. Want to know my only two live watch 3D blockbuster (Pirates of the Caribbean and Pacific rim of the Pacific Ocean), are watching the sleep of the 4. As a blind dull viewing fans, meet the"Twelve Angry Han" such a film, the top of your lungs are also top ah.The film explores the justice of the law and the freedom of the individual. The whole discussion is done in one scene. The reason in a narrow monotonous stuffy room shooting, but also let the audience watching the breath, the key is in one word: MAYBE.MAYBE, that is, that is, a hypothesis. If Xu Xian by Lady White Umbrella, there is no "White Snake" hypothesis; these twelve individuals began to agree with all the youth guilty, there is no next twelve angry men. The twelve person is not a judge or a lawyer, they did not need to prove that young guilty, they think, so the boy could sit chair; they think that no, they just need to find out the possibility of the juvenile is not a murderer.So the focus of controversy, are around a possibility. One may be denied, and the next may be raised.If we can tolerate the possibility that there is no such a possibility, then our personality, and perhaps will be more sound. You want to, the childrencame home from school late, parents immediately decidedto go, so he hit the plane delayed whiplash; passengers, decided that some officials with the right gasser, lifeto wait for the plane. There is no such a possibility: children encounter love girls, to go; do not fly the aircraft, because the captain constipation but not said.In the film, an angry mouth said: this boy is a slum grew up, where the child was born barbaric, fighting and killing no human nature, the boy must be guilty. While he was speaking, all the members of the jury have got up and left, turned back, except one, who also can't endure the angry man said: please sit down and shut up.In other words, to judge a person, who can not be based on personal bias. Once stubborn prejudice, it will kill all the precious possibilities, it will be fair and far away, to despise. Americans are proud of their laws because they tolerate all kinds of possibilities and give each person the freedom to make every choice possible.MAYBE, a chance, a chance. Many lovers break up, because they do not believe it is possible, do not giveeach other the opportunity. In some countries, good people are not happy cause bad, do not give the opportunity, but because of the justice of law with the lack of personality, more and more far away from the people, leaving only a false balance, at this time for the opportunity, but also desperate.At the end of the film, two angry men in the court gate shookhis hand, each name. And then return to the house, as if the previous argument is just a lazy rain in the evening. However, I do not know how many viewers in their back to see, is the dignity of personality independence and justice hope.十二怒汉观后感英文But think about it, or only gave three stars.Why?Because the movie is not pure. It is the theme of too much, the amount of information you want to convey is too large, although not so difficult to understand and accept, but the actual shot out of the situation is much more confusing: the jury system questioned the original Lumet preserved, influence to the Russian Chechen War mentality is he stressed, then through toRussia's dissatisfaction with the status quo of the beginning ("streets are Mercedes BMW Audi, only three minutes walk to the theatre of the road eight"), the narrative part involved everyone when mixed with too much of everyone's personal feelings, almost everyone said a case may not have with their the relationship between the piece, and then to the case itself (because of a surge in interest related to ethnic issues ah) increased the number of suspense drama elements, and finally to a strange man fancy...... Wang Yi think that this version than the conception of Lumet high, oh, maybe, but was not everything, although Kharkov has never let his film meters out of control, but still seem messy, and the strength is a scattered, feeling no matter which themes are focused on not just skimming over the surface like this in the past. No matter - I hate conception conception is not in the way of literature to discuss the film, the film quality, whether it is the rhythm, focus, or narrative control, this is a lot less than the old version.Then talk about technology. Whether new or old version, is a technology very good film, but thedifference is that the old version of the technology, with the integration of narrative is very good, whetherit is the opening track length mirror beautiful, or to enter the space after the precise positioning, had a sudden feeling, and the new version, most of the time,let the people think it is a virtuoso technique -- trya decorative. For example, 4 ed in dog holding hands through the lens, in a sense, can reduce at least once, always repeat, even the flashing lights of suspense,to finally will make people feel flat and uninteresting.Watch this movie shows a sense, not the seafood cooked together, called sea food and poultry, or a hodgepodge.By the way of Mikhalkov, the Slavophilism heavy director, is now famous Russian director in one of the largest, but I am not very love, because that kind of Slavic tastes! Sometimes, in order to render this complex, he is willing to destroy the whole structureof the film (Siberia barber), so that the mood itself has become an independent part of the film. When it comes to artistic conception, with the same Slavic complex than Sokolov, far worse.十二怒汉观后感英文I don't know when to start, when upset or depressed, I used to find old movies, especially in black and white, from which get quiet and elegant is important to me. When the movie is the movie, every word, every shot, a seamless heavenly robe.If not a summer night, in front of the 12 inch TV "murder in the Orient Express", I am afraid I will not engage in the occupation, so Sidney Lumet on my film concept that enlightenment can be formed. Not only is my occupation, Lumet outlook on life enlightenment, than the so-called supernatural forces of evil, I fear more complex. So far, I do not dare to read the murder of the Orient Express, the original, even if I have read most of Agatha's works, for fear that the text will destroy my heart on the film version of the feelings."Twelve Angry Men" is a kind of courage to cash, Henry Fonda against eleven companions of courage, personal subjective experience and attitude against the truth of courage, fairness and justice against self courage, American judicial system and social harmony of confrontation, and of course Lv Mei will have the courage.If I in twelve, I will think what what language, I am afraid that I am going with Ning Wang Zong not paranoid, or just because the bad boy will affect the society and others, so he will be charged to preach. This is not only my own narrow, I believe this is the so-called "good man" narrow.He is good at a single space, refining and performance in depth at mining and play on the event. "Twelve Angry Men", "summer afternoon", "Murder on the Orient Express" is a single main space, single and multi scene, closed interior, rich images may have been the maximum limit, but these films are undoubtedly good. Hitchcock was regarded as a master, he is often neglected, comparison of production, the style is fixed, is probably Lumet's limitations, but I still Lumet grievance. Who bought a home on film creation works in the United States, it is a pity that English, lazy I still will put on the shelf.I love those who do not show off the lens of the director, even if I teach audio-visual, but do not think that audio-visual should be placed above the film, the film is still moving me those characters and stories.So I love Billy Wilde, I love Sidney lumet. Most of the enclosed space is the scene of studio Lumet's studio, but he always prefers to use even short focus wide-angle lens, especially the "Orient Express", if not considering the light, three foot position and space depth background that really makes people think a real. So is the "Twelve Angry Men", using live scene very well, but he is not very restrained, the excessive use of "impossible shots", get consensus only at the end of twelve jurors picked up one by one, hung in the closet coat slowly out of the lens with dressing cabinet a few suits the prospect of jury they are leaving, finally leaving Henry Fonda picked up is still lying in the last like a stubborn choked the suit on the table, put him on, this is the understanding and support between men.He was restrained, even if the opening second is through the lens space and the atmosphere design of long lens typical account court, until out of the case is still the core of the film court. But as the openingis very suitable for the era, which has no feelings of infatuation to mirror director long, compared with Ocean Wells's "touch of evil", this scene actually hasbeen quite restrained.He was restrained, he did not because the single space added in the trial court, witnesses the flashback or reproduce the scene. For most of the directors, sucha structure is always inevitable, even though I, although we all understand the interest and charm ofa single space, but no confidence or ability to truly achieve such a perfect.He was restrained, he did not take Henry Fonda design into absolute hero, he is just a lot of sanity, the testimony of witnesses of the confusion is gradually put forward by other jurors, everyone to put forward their own personal experience and observation questions, such as poor background, people questioned the holding spring knife method, the old man questioned the witness of vision. Throughout the discussion, a juror number is outside the role of internal organizer, Fonda organizer, only this.He was restrained, even his warmth. At the end of the jurors out of court, the rain has stopped, summer evening and the sky, as the first man to supporters Fonda, two people for each name, then separated from.He was restrained, he did not go to revisit the superfluous case is non truth, that has nothing to do with the story of the core, the core of the story is just a boy of guilty or not guilty.A building is successful, the development of drama is successful, but the control in restraint extremely in the home.Study and drama director, "Twelve Angry Men" is absolutely worth repeatedly fine works.Once again, he to me movie ideas and life beliefs are deeply influenced, but the master.I love this summer, you can see a good movie, you can write, you can look at their own rational and restrained.。
十二怒汉观后感中英版
十二怒汉观后感中英版《十二怒汉》整个故事发生在一间陪审团休息室里。
一个在贫民窟长大的18岁少年因为杀害自己的父亲被告上法庭,证人言之凿凿,各方面的证据都对他极为不利。
十二个不同职业的人组成了这个案件的陪审团,他们要在休息室达成一致的意见,裁定少年是否有罪,如果罪名成立,少年将会被判处死刑。
十二个陪审团成员各有不同,除了8号陪审员之外,其他人对这个犯罪事实如此清晰的案子不屑一顾,还没有开始讨论就认定了少年有罪。
8号陪审员提出了自己的“合理疑点”,耐心地说服其他的陪审员,在这个过程中,他们每个人不同的人生观也在冲突和较量。
下面是中英版的《十二怒汉》观后感,欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感中英版第一次看西德尼.美特的《十二怒》,想到是我看的最好的影片,本片于1957年,得了第7柏林影金熊以及其他影多提名和,一部女座作品就能得如此多,可演西德尼.美特定成一名影大。
除了和尾的境交代,全片就是在一小室的景拍完成的,能在一“枯燥”的境下故事不失精彩,度是相大的,一是得力于精彩的本,二是得力于出色的演,三是得力于精密的和度。
本本身的就非常具有可性,一人孤到最後所有人的倒戈相向,程看上去是一“不可能完成的任”,但因主角亨利.方生命的尊重、真相密的剖析、法律公平公正的持、“怒”之人的容和醒等等秀的品,最後征服了所有反他的人,并使各行各麻木之人得到了正的醒。
通一的景就明多哲理,且的相互交不失密、人物定具有典型的代表性,不能不在是高明。
影片非常具有性,甚至可以修改就能成一部舞本,已有人做了。
因景的固定所以演的表演要求甚高,而了原性,保持演於角色和的新感,很多都是用了超的一呵成,就要求演不能出差,但是12人的和度免出差,可以看得出很多是精心排的,尤其是影度的配合需要更加精和密,如果有一人出差可能就致全重,所以演的表演既要高度又要保持弛和自然,度一不於真的舞表演。
於人物性格的把握各有千秋,老和方的表演最出色。
本片有一更加突出的特色便是演於把控,面用了多分的,是很的,有一失就影整部的奏并耗大量拍源,所以在拍前演做了大量的排,互相“”,如影走到哪哪演始到哪,演道或者行到哪影怎的曲到哪,而之光音又要怎配合等等。
十二怒汉 观后感 英文
十二怒汉观后感英文A Reflection" with over 1000 words, written in English:The iconic film "Twelve Angry Men" is a masterpiece that has captivated audiences for generations. Directed by Sidney Lumet and released in 1957, this gripping courtroom drama delves into the complexities of the American justice system and the power of reasonable doubt. The film's enduring relevance and its ability to provoke deep contemplation make it a must-watch for anyone interested in the intricacies of human nature and the pursuit of justice.At the heart of the story is a young man on trial for the murder of his father. As the jurors retire to the deliberation room, the audience is introduced to a diverse group of individuals, each with their own biases, preconceptions, and personal experiences. The film's strength lies in its ability to showcase the nuanced and often conflicting perspectives that can arise within a jury room, where twelve strangers are tasked with determining the fate of a life.One of the most striking aspects of the film is the way it delves into the complex dynamics of group decision-making. As the jurors beginto discuss the case, it becomes clear that their initial unanimity in voting "guilty" is quickly challenged by the dissenting voice of Juror 8, played masterfully by Henry Fonda. Juror 8's unwavering commitment to examining the evidence objectively and his refusal to simply go along with the majority sets the stage for a gripping and thought-provoking exploration of the deliberation process.The film's exploration of the power of reasonable doubt is particularly captivating. As Juror 8 methodically dismantles the prosecution's case, the other jurors are forced to confront their own biases and preconceptions. The gradual shift in the jury's dynamics, as more and more jurors begin to question the certainty of the guilty verdict, serves as a powerful commentary on the importance of critical thinking and the need to challenge our own assumptions.One of the most compelling aspects of the film is the way it delves into the personal stories and motivations of the individual jurors. From Juror 3's deep-seated resentment towards his own estranged son to Juror 4's unwavering belief in the infallibility of the justice system, the film paints a nuanced portrait of the diverse perspectives and life experiences that shape each juror's decision-making process.The film's exploration of prejudice and the impact of personal biases on the judicial process is particularly poignant. As the jurors grapple with their own preconceptions and stereotypes, the audience isforced to confront the ways in which our own biases can influence our perceptions and decision-making. The film's ability to tackle these sensitive issues with sensitivity and nuance is a testament to its enduring relevance and its ability to spark important conversations.One of the most powerful moments in the film comes when Juror 3, played by Lee J. Cobb, is forced to confront the depth of his own prejudices. As he breaks down in tears, the audience is reminded of the profound emotional toll that the deliberation process can take on the individuals involved. The film's ability to humanize the jurors and to explore the personal struggles and conflicts that shape their decisions is a testament to its depth and complexity.The film's technical prowess is also worthy of note. The claustrophobic setting of the jury room, with its oppressive heat and the ever-present ticking of the clock, creates a palpable sense of tension and urgency. The film's use of tight framing and limited camera movement further heightens the sense of confinement and the pressure of the decision-making process.Overall, "Twelve Angry Men" is a masterful work of cinema that continues to resonate with audiences decades after its release. Its exploration of the complexities of the American justice system, the power of reasonable doubt, and the impact of personal biases on decision-making is a testament to the enduring relevance of thistimeless classic. Whether you are a seasoned cinephile or a casual viewer, this film is sure to leave a lasting impression and to spark important conversations about the nature of justice and the human condition.。
十二怒汉英语观后感
十二怒汉英语观后感The film "12 Angry Men" is a profound exploration of the human condition and the power of reason. It's a testament to the importance of deliberation and the potential for change within each of us.Each juror in the film represents a facet of society, highlighting the diversity of thought and the inherent biases we all carry. The tension between them is palpable, a microcosm of the larger societal conflicts that often go unaddressed.The transformation of the initially prejudiced jurors is nothing short of remarkable. It's a reminder that empathy and understanding can transcend the most entrenched of beliefs, given the right circumstances and the willingness to listen.The film's dialogue is sharp and incisive, driving home the point that truth is not always black and white. It challenges the viewer to question their own assumptions and to consider the weight of the decisions we make.The minimalist setting of the jury room serves to focus the audience's attention on the characters and their interactions. It's a masterclass in storytelling, provingthat less can indeed be more.In conclusion, "12 Angry Men" is a timeless classic thatresonates with audiences of all ages. It's a powerful reminder of the responsibility we bear as individuals and as a collective to seek the truth and to treat each other with fairness and respect.。
十二怒汉观后感英语
十二怒汉观后感英语Title: Reflection on "12 Angry Men""12 Angry Men" is a classic film that leaves a profound impact on its viewers. Directed by Sidney Lumet, this gripping courtroom drama takes place predominantly in one room, where twelve diverse jurors deliberate the fate of a young man accused of murdering his father. The film delves into the complexities of human nature, presenting a thought-provoking exploration of justice, prejudice, and the power of individual conviction.One of the most striking aspects of "12 Angry Men" is its masterful character development. Each juror is a unique individual who brings their own biases and preconceived notions into the room. Throughout the film, we witness their transformation as they confront their own prejudices and confront the evidence that challenges their initial beliefs. For instance, Juror No. 3 initially holds a personal grudge against the accused due to his strained relationship with his own son. As the deliberations progress, he gradually lets go of his prejudice and places his responsibility as a juror above his personal biases.Furthermore, the film highlights the importance of critical thinking and the courage to challenge the status quo. The main protagonist, Juror No. 8, played by Henry Fonda, stands alone at first in his belief of the accused's innocence. Despite facing intense opposition and ridicule from his fellow jurors, he calmly and rationally presents doubt about the evidence presented in court. As the deliberations unfold, Juror No. 8's ability to reason and his unwavering commitment to justice shine through, ultimately influencing the minds of other jurors."12 Angry Men" also underscores the significance of deliberation and open-mindedness in the pursuit of truth. The film portrays a jury system where the jurors are encouraged to share their thoughts and engage in dialogue. It emphasizes the importance of carefully examining the evidence, cross-examining witness testimonies, and questioning assumptions. By fostering an environment where every voice is heard, the film demonstrates the power of collective reasoning and the ability to challenge mere surface-level observations.Moreover, "12 Angry Men" exemplifies the strength and potential of the individual to make a difference. Despite initially being strangers with diverse backgrounds, the twelve jurors gradually develop a sense of common purpose and forge a collective identity. Through the film's portrayal of the transformation of individual perspectives within the group, it becomes evident that the actions and commitment of a single person can alter the outcome and the course of justice.The visually captivating cinematography plays a crucial role in creating a claustrophobic atmosphere, reflecting the tension and intensity of the deliberation room. The majority of the film takes place within the confined space of the jury room, capturing the emotional dynamics between the jurors as they navigate conflicting opinions. The close-up shots of the jurors' faces effectively convey their individual emotions and reactions, allowing the audience to connect with the characters on a deeper level.In conclusion, "12 Angry Men" is a captivating and thought-provoking film that navigates the complexities of justice, prejudice, and the power of conviction. Through its carefully crafted character development, emphasison critical thinking, and exploration of collective reasoning, the film encourages us to challenge our own biases and beliefs. It serves as a reminder of the importance of collaboration, open-mindedness, and the strength of the individual in the pursuit of truth and justice.。
12怒汉的英文观后感
12怒汉的英文观后感12怒汉是一部以法庭为背景的经典电影,通过展现12位陪审团成员之间的辩论和思维碰撞,揭示了人性的复杂性和法律正义的主题。
观后感是对影片的思考和感悟,以下是我对12怒汉的英文观后感。
The movie "12 Angry Men" is a timeless classic that explores the dynamics within a jury room during a court trial. Through intense discussions and clashes of opinions, the film delves into the complexity of human nature and raises questions about the nature of justice. After watching this thought-provoking film, I was left with a myriad of emotions and reflections.First and foremost, the film reminds us of the essential importance of critical thinking and open-mindedness. The twelve jurors enter the room with their own biases and preconceived notions about the accused. As the deliberations progress, we witness how some jurors allow their personal emotions or prejudices to cloud their judgment, while others carefully examine the evidence and challenge the established consensus.The film also raises questions about the flaws in the justice system. It highlights how easily a person's fate can be determined by the subjective opinions of a group of individuals, each with their own personal baggage. The power dynamics within the jury room become apparent as the lone dissenting juror fights against the initial majority. It serves as a reminder that justice can sometimes be swayed by personal motivations and external pressures, leaving room for potential miscarriages of justice.What struck me the most about the film is its exploration of human nature. Each character represents a different facet of society, demonstrating the complexities of human behavior and the various factors that shape our perspectives. From the strength of personal conviction to the vulnerability of conformity, the film portrays a fascinating spectrum of human emotions and motivations.The film also shines a light on the power of persuasion and effective communication. As the jurors engage in heated debates, we witness the power of compelling arguments, as well as the importance of presenting evidence and fostering an environment conducive to dialogue. It is a testament to the influence that one individual can have on a group, conveying the significance of logical reasoning and persuasive skills.Furthermore, "12 Angry Men" explores themes of empathy and compassion. As the jurors reevaluate the evidence presented during the trial, they begin to understand the significance of the accused's background and the potential biases that may have been at play. This realization prompts a shift in their perspectives and a deeper understanding of the impact their decisions will have on the accused's life. The film serves as a reminder to look beyond surface-level judgments and consider the broader implications of our actions.In terms of the film's structure, its confined setting within the jury room enhances the sense of tension and emotional intensity. The cinematography brilliantly captures the dynamics between the jurors, with close-ups highlighting their facial expressions and body language, revealing the inner turmoil and conflicts they face. The gradual change in lighting and use ofvisual cues subtly mirror the evolving emotions and shifting power dynamics.Overall, "12 Angry Men" is a masterpiece that continues to captivate audiences with its timeless themes and thought-provoking storytelling. The film's exploration of human nature and the flaws within the justice system offer valuable insights into the complexities of society. It serves as a reminder to question our own biases and to approach critical decision-making with an open mind. Ultimately, "12 Angry Men" is a powerful reminder of the importance of justice, empathy, and the potential for individual transformation.。
十二怒汉英语观后感简单
十二怒汉英语观后感简单"Twelve Angry Men" is a cinematic masterpiece that dives deep into the essence of justice and the human psyche. From the moment the film begins, the audience is thrust into the heated deliberations of a jury deciding the fate of a young man accused of murder. The claustrophobic setting of the jury room serves as a microcosm of society, where each of the twelve jurors represents a different facet of the human experience.The film's brilliance lies in its ability to explore the complexities of human nature and the biases that can cloud judgment. As the jurors debate, we witness a transformationin their perspectives, driven by the relentless pursuit of truth by one juror, played by Henry Fonda. His character's unwavering belief in reasonable doubt challenges the preconceived notions of his peers, leading to a riveting intellectual and emotional journey.The dialogue is sharp, the performances are riveting, and the tension builds masterfully, leaving viewers on the edge of their seats. "Twelve Angry Men" is not just a film about a trial; it's a profound commentary on the power of empathy, the weight of responsibility, and the importance of questioning the status quo. It's a timeless classic that resonates with audiences, reminding us that justice is not a foregone conclusion but a delicate balance that must be carefully weighed.。
十二怒汉英文观后感200字
十二怒汉英文观后感200字Twelve Angry Men: A Deep Dive into the Nuances of Justice."Twelve Angry Men" is a timeless testament to the intricate dance of justice, morality, and the human mind. Directed by Sidney Lumet, the film captures the intense debate and emotional conflicts within a jury room, where eleven men initially vote to convict a young man of murdering his father. Enter Henry Fonda's character, an outsider among them, who challenges the verdict and slowly but surely turns the tide.The film's narrative is a testament to the power of persuasion and the role of doubt in the judicial process. Each juror represents a different facet of society, from the angry and bigoted to the rational and empathetic. Their exchanges are not just about the facts of the case but also about the values they hold dear. The film highlights how easily people can be swayed by emotions and how difficultit is to maintain objectivity in the face of such passions.What makes "Twelve Angry Men" so engaging is its realistic portrayal of human psychology. The jurors are not just characters in a play; they are real people with their own biases, prejudices, and fears. Their arguments are often emotional and passionate, reflecting the complexities of real-life debates. And yet, it is this emotionality that makes the film so compelling.The film also raises questions about the role of responsibility in society. The young man on trial is poor and from a broken home. His situation is not uncommon, and the film forces the jurors to consider if the system is set up to fail people like him. Is his fate sealed by the cards he was dealt, or is he responsible for his actions? This question is at the heart of many legal debates and the film presents it in a thought-provoking manner.The acting in "Twelve Angry Men" is superb, with each actor delivering a powerful performance. Henry Fonda, in particular, is exceptional as the voice of reason, calmlyand passionately arguing for the accused's innocence. His performance is a masterclass in subtlety and persuasion, showing how a single individual can make a difference.The film's cinematography and direction are also noteworthy. Lumet's camera work captures the紧张氛围 inthe jury room, from the tense exchanges to the quiet moments of reflection. The film's pacing is perfect,building tension and releasing it in a series of explosive arguments.In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" is not just a film about a court case; it is a film about humanity, morality, and the complexities of justice. It forces us to question our own biases and prejudices and reminds us of the importance of doubt and objectivity in the judicial process. The film is a must-watch for anyone interested in law, psychology, or simply in understanding the intricacies of human nature.。
十二怒汉英语观后感
十二怒汉英语观后感As the final curtain drew to a close on the timeless drama "Twelve Angry Men," I found myself sitting in silence, digesting the profound impact the play had made on my understanding of justice, persuasion, and the remarkable power of a single voice. Directed by Sidney Lumet and adapted from a 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose, the filmtells the story of a jury of twelve men, each with theirown prejudices and biases, as they deliberate the fate ofan eighteen-year-old boy accused of murdering his father.What initially appears to be a straightforward case of guilt turns into a grueling battle of wills and minds asone juror, number 8 (played brilliantly by Henry Fonda), challenges the verdict of "guilty" that seems inevitable. His arguments are not based on technical legal knowledge or forensic evidence but on common sense, morality, and the basic humanity that each of us possesses. His unwavering belief in the boy's innocence, coupled with his refusal to accept the majority's verdict without a thoroughexamination of all the facts, slowly but surely begins to sway the other jurors.The film is a masterclass in persuasion, demonstrating how one man can turn the tide of opinion by using logic, empathy, and a relentless quest for truth. Juror 8's approach is both methodical and emotional, appealing to the rational and emotional sides of his fellow jurors. He doesn't shout or become angry; instead, he speaks calmly and confidently, allowing his words to sink in gradually. His arguments are not just about the boy's innocence or guilt but about the very nature of justice and the responsibility each of us has in ensuring that justice is not only done but seen to be done.The film also highlights the importance of critical thinking and the dangers of groupthink. In the initial stages of the deliberation, the jury is almost unanimous in its verdict of "guilty." It's only when Juror 8 starts to question the evidence and the witnesses that cracks begin to appear in the consensus. This reluctance to question the majority's verdict is a powerful reminder of how easy it is for us to fall into the trap of groupthink, accepting the prevailing opinion without questioning its validity.Moreover, the film underscores the importance of listening to dissenting voices. Juror 8's persistence in pointing out the flaws in the prosecution's case and the inconsistencies in the evidence forces his fellow jurors to reevaluate their own beliefs and prejudices. This process of critical reevaluation is crucial in any democratic society where the pursuit of truth and justice must always trump majority rule.In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" is not just a film about a jury deliberation; it's a profound exploration of human nature, the role of justice in society, and the remarkable power of persuasion. It reminds us that justice is not just about laws and regulations but about the moral and ethical choices we make as individuals. It teaches us the value of listening to dissenting voices and the importance of critically examining the evidence before making decisions that can profoundly impact the lives of others. Finally, it reminds us that one person, with the right arguments and perseverance, can make a difference and change the course of justice.**《十二怒汉》:关于正义、说服力和个体声音力量的反思性随笔**当《十二怒汉》这部永恒戏剧的终幕缓缓落下时,我发现自己陷入了沉思,这部作品深刻影响了我对正义、说服力和个体声音力量的理解。
十二怒汉英语观后感
十二怒汉英语观后感English:Watching "12 Angry Men" was a powerful and thought-provoking experience. The film successfully captured the tension and drama of a jury deliberating over a seemingly open-and-shut case. Each character brought their own biases and prejudices to the table, making for compelling conflicts and moments of introspection. The gradual unraveling of the truth and the eventual realization of the jurors' duty to seek justice rather than expedience was both gripping and inspiring. The film's simple setting and focus on dialogue highlighted the importance of critical thinking and empathy in decision-making, urging viewers to question their assumptions and consider multiple perspectives. Overall, "12 Angry Men" serves as a timeless exploration of justice, human nature, and the power of a single voice to make a difference.中文翻译:观看《十二怒汉》是一次强大而发人深省的经历。
十二怒汉观后感英语作文200词
十二怒汉观后感英语作文200词全文共6篇示例,供读者参考篇112 Angry Men Movie ReviewWow, the movie 12 Angry Men was really good! It was kind of long but I liked how it showed what happened with the jury. At first, I thought it would be boring since it mostly just shows the jurors arguing in one room. But it turned out to be really interesting and kind of exciting even though there wasn't any action or anything.The movie is about a jury that has to decide if an 18-year-old boy is guilty of murdering his father. In the beginning, it seems like the case is pretty straightforward and most of the jurors think the boy did it. But then this one juror, played by Henry Fonda, starts poking holes in the evidence and making the other jurors question if the boy is really guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.What I liked most was seeing how the jurors' opinions changed over time as they re-examined all the testimony and evidence. Some of the jurors were really stubborn at first and hadalready made up their mind that the boy was guilty. But juror number 8, the Henry Fonda character, kept pushing them to look at things more objectively and consider that maybe the witnesses were unreliable or the evidence didn't actually prove guilt.It was really fascinating to watch the psychological dynamics between all the different personalities on the jury. You had the loudmouth who was really biased against the boy from the start. The quiet, timid guy who went along with the majority at first. The harsh, no-nonsense business guy who didn't want to waste time debating. The wise old man who could see through all the deception. Watching them go back and forth, getting fired up and yelling at each other, and then slowly start to come around to reasonable doubt was super engaging.My favorite part was when the hero juror, Mr. Fonda, got the old man from the apartment across the street to come in and demonstrate how he could have made the same supposedly unique old person's walk that was described in the witness testimony. That showed the witness who claimed to have seen the boy fleeing the crime scene must have been wrong about what he saw. It was like the big "aha" moment that proved reasonable doubt.In the end, I was really happy and relieved when the jury ended up voting not guilty. I think the movie did a good job showing why the justice system is designed to find someone innocent if there is any reasonable doubt about their guilt, even if the evidence seems to point to them at first glance. You could tell the Henry Fonda character really believed strongly in giving the boy a fair trial and not sending an innocent person to prison. His determination to get all the facts totally changed my mind from thinking the boy was guilty to being convinced he probably did not do it.Overall, I totally loved 12 Angry Men and can see why it's considered such a classic, important film. Even though it's a simple premise of just jurors debating in one room, it reveals so much about how people think, how first impressions can be wrong, and why our justice system is designed to protect people from unfair convictions as long as there is reasonable doubt. I'll never look at juries or trials the same way again after this movie. Two thumbs up!篇2My Thoughts on "12 Angry Men"Last weekend, my parents let me watch a really old movie called "12 Angry Men." It's all in black and white and doesn't have any special effects or action scenes, but I ended up really liking it! It's about a jury that has to decide if a boy is guilty of murdering his father. At first, it seems like an open and shut case, but one juror (which is what they call the people on the jury) isn't sure the boy did it.The whole movie takes place in just one room where the 12 jurors are discussing the case. It's really boring at first because it's just a bunch of men in suits sitting around and arguing. But as the movie goes on, you get to know each of the jurors and why they are voting guilty or not guilty. Some of them are just going along with what everyone else thinks. Others have their own personal reasons for wanting the boy to be guilty, like being mad at their own kids or not liking people from the boy's neighborhood.The juror who keeps saying he's not sure the boy is guilty is this really neat old guy played by Henry Fonda. He's super patient and just keeps calmly questioning all the evidence over and over again. Slowly, some of the other jurors start changing their minds as they realize the evidence isn't as solid as it first seemed. There's this really tense scene where a couple of theangry jurors get right up in Henry Fonda's face and yell at him, but he doesn't get mad or yell back. He just stays calm and polite the whole time.Without giving away the ending, I'll just say that watching the jurors go through all the little details of the case was really interesting and made me think a lot about how important it is to look at evidence really carefully before making a decision that could change someone's life forever. I could see myself getting impatient and just going along with what most people were saying without really thinking about it myself. The old guy juror made me realize that sometimes you have to be the one to really question things, even if it's not the popular opinion.I know "12 Angry Men" probably seems like a weird movie for a kid to like, but I thought it was really good! Sure, there's no action or anything, but the acting is awesome and it shows how a group of people can change their minds by really listening to each other instead of just yelling. It makes me want to be more open-minded and not judge people or situations too quickly before I know all the facts. I'm glad my parents had me watch it because I definitely learned an important life lesson in a pretty entertaining way. The only thing I didn't like was that there weren't any girls or women in the whole movie! But I guess that'sjust how things were back in the old days. Anyway, I'd totally recommend "12 Angry Men" to other kids my age - it's way more interesting than it looks!篇312 Angry Men Movie ReflectionWow, the movie "12 Angry Men" was really something else! I just watched it for a school assignment and I have so many thoughts swirling around in my head. It's a old black and white film from way back in 1957, but the story and messages are so powerful even today.The whole movie takes place in just one room - the jury deliberation room after a murder trial. At first, it seems like it will be an open and shut case. This young guy from the slums is on trial for killing his father and 11 of the 12 jurors think he's guilty from the get-go. But then this one juror, played by Henry Fonda, starts poking holes in the story and raising some really good questions.Even though he's just one voice against the majority, he stands his ground. He gets the other jurors to actually think critically about the evidence rather than just going with their first gut instinct. One by one, each piece of evidence gets dismantledand doubts start creeping in about whether this kid could really be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.What I loved is how the power of logic, reasoning, and asking questions trumped peoples' personal biases, preconceptions, and knee-jerk reactions. It showed how even upstanding citizens can discriminate against someone just because of their background or neighborhood without meaning to. The jurors had to check their own prejudices at the door.Another big takeaway for me was the importance of listening to the minority viewpoint and not just siding with the majority out of convenience or peer pressure. It only took one strong voice of dissent to get the ball rolling, then others started coming around as they were exposed to a different perspective. It makes me think about always keeping an open mind instead of being a sheep that just goes along with the herd mentality.The acting was phenomenal, especially from the Henry Fonda character who was the moral compass fighting an uphill battle. You could see the struggle playing across his face as he desperately tried to appeal to peoples' sense of ethics and fairness. And the other jurors ran the full gamut - you had closed-minded bullies, heroes willing to stand up for what's right,people plagued by prejudices, and everything in between. It was such a microcosm of society.Even though it was just 12 men locked in a room, the tensions built to a fever pitch at times. There were these riveting clashes of personalities and belief systems. The editing and camerawork made the room feel like a pressure cooker about to explode from all the rage and conflict boiling over. For a movie over 60 years old, it was shot in such a modern and innovative style to draw you in.I know I'll probably have to write an essay or book report about this, but I was inspired to just share my thoughts while they're still fresh. As heavy as the subject matter could be, the overall message filled me with hope about the power of critical thinking and fighting for justice. It made me want to be more courageous in voicing my opinions, but also keeping an open mind to other viewpoints that challenge my beliefs.At its core, "12 Angry Men" is a reminder about the importance of being an active citizen who questions things rather than being passive. It takes work and conviction to defy the status quo rather than just going along with it. But doing the hard work of analyzing all sides could be the difference between an innocent person going free or being wrongly condemned.That's a big responsibility that we can't take lightly if we want a fair society for all.Yeah, so those are my main thoughts after watching this classic film! I could probably keep rambling, but I'll wrap it up there. If you haven't seen "12 Angry Men" yet, I highly recommend checking it out. Who knew a black and white courtroom drama could end up being so engaging, intense and thought-provoking? It's one of those movies that really sticks with you long after the credits roll.篇412 Angry Grown-UpsWow, the movie "12 Angry Men" was really exciting and made me think a lot! It's all about a trial where 12 men on a jury have to decide if this guy is guilty of murdering his father or not. At first, it seems like an easy decision because most of the jurors think he did it. But then this one juror, Mr. Davis, starts pointing out that there are some things that don't make sense about the testimony and evidence.Mr. Davis is my favorite character because he never gives up trying to get the other jurors to really think about everything carefully. Even when they all get mad at him and yell, he stayscalm and polite. He keeps bringing up good questions like "How could the old man who got killed hear the kid yelling all the way from down the hallway?" and "Why would the kid go get a movie ticket if he was just planning to kill his dad?" Mr. Davis showed that you have to look at things from all angles before making a big decision.It was really frustrating to watch most of the other jurors not listening at first and just wanting to go with their first impression that the guy was guilty. The juror who was most stubborn was Mr. Parkhurst. He's a mean guy who doesn't like people who are different from him. When another juror who grew up in the slums tried to share his perspective, Mr. Parkhurst basically told him he couldn't understand since he wasn't "one of them." I got so mad when he said that!As the jurors went back through all the evidence, more of them started having reasonable doubts about whether the kid actually did the murder. It showed how hard it is to find the truth sometimes, especially when there are cultural divides and people judge others who seem different from them. The scene that really got me was when a couple jurors realized the old man who was killed wasn't even that nice of a guy and might have treatedhis son terribly. That made them wonder if the son could have had a reason to want him dead.By the end, Mr. Davis convinced nearly all the jurors that there just wasn't proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There were too many questionable parts of the witnesses' stories. And the jurors started seeing how rushing to judgement, letting their biases cloud their thinking, and not looking at other perspectives can lead to a big mistake.The movie is called "12 Angry Men" but it really should be called "12 Angry Grown-ups" because a lot of their anger didn't make much sense to me. They let little things like a guy taking a long time in the bathroom or another guy being an immigrant upset them way too much. If they had just stayed cool like Mr. Davis and focused on the evidence instead of yelling at each other, it would have gone a lot quicker!What I learned from this movie is that you have to think critically, look at an issue from all sides, and not let stereotypes about people who seem different from you cloud your judgment. Rushing to conclusions or filtering everything through your limited personal perspective can really distort the truth. Mr. Davis was the heroic one for gently but firmly pushing his fellowjurors to overcome their knee-jerk conclusions and analyze the case more thoroughly and fairly.Whether it's being on a jury or just solving any tough problem, being open-minded, not making snap judgments, considering multiple viewpoints, and examining all the evidence super carefully is so important. Watching Mr. Davis model those qualities is what made "12 Angry Grown-Ups," I mean "12 Angry Men," such a powerful and thought-provoking movie for me. It really got my brain working and made me want to be a fairer, more discerning, critical thinker as I get older.篇512 Angry Men – A Movie That Made Me ThinkLast week, my teacher showed us a really old movie in class called "12 Angry Men". At first, I wasn't too excited because it was a black and white movie from way back in 1957! I thought it would be super boring, but boy was I wrong. This movie turned out to be one of the most interesting and thought-provoking films I've ever seen.The movie is about a jury of 12 men who have to decide whether a young man is guilty of murdering his father or not. If he's guilty, he'll get the death penalty! At first, it seems like anopen-and-shut case because there are a lot of pieces of evidence pointing to his guilt. But one juror, played by Henry Fonda, isn't fully convinced and votes "not guilty".From there, the rest of the movie shows the jurors going back and forth, arguing and discussing all the evidence and testimony. Each time someone brings up a good point that makes the defendant look innocent, someone else rebuts it with another argument for why he must be guilty. It's like a big debate that keeps going around in circles!What I loved about this movie is how it really makes you think hard about the case and evaluate every single detail. Just when you think "Oh yeah, he's definitely guilty", one of the jurors brings up something that plants a seed of reasonable doubt in your mind. And then that doubt gets attacked too! It's a constant back-and-forth that kept me on the edge of my seat.The characters are all really interesting too, especially Henry Fonda's juror who just can't accept sending someone to death unless he's 100% sure of the facts. Some of the other jurors get really mad at him for not agreeing right away, but he stands his ground because he knows how important it is to really examine everything thoroughly. His arguments and analyses were so smart and well-thought out.As the jury deliberates more and more, you start to see some of the jurors changing their minds about the case. And when they do, you can kind of understand their perspective and reasoning too. The sign of a really good movie, in my opinion, is one that lets you see different viewpoints on the same issue and appreciate the complexity of it all, rather than just having one side be clearly right or wrong. 12 Angry Men did that brilliantly.But probably the best part of the film is the climax towards the end... I don't want to give away too much and spoil it for those who haven't seen it yet. Let's just say that a few of the jurors' personal experiences, biases and struggles get revealed in some pretty powerful scenes that shed more light on how and why they were viewing the case a certain way. By the end, I had a completely new perspective on everything.When the credits rolled, I just sat there thinking about what I had watched for a good few minutes. A movie about a jury deliberating a murder case doesn't sound that exciting on paper, but 12 Angry Men had me hooked from start to finish with its brilliant writing, acting and fundamental question about how we evaluate truth and evidence. It showed me how making judgements, especially when someone's life is at stake, shouldnever be done lightly or without rigorously going through every single detail.For a 65-year-old film, 12 Angry Men felt more relevant, intelligent and thought-provoking than most new movies I've seen recently. I'm really glad my teacher showed it to us because it's the kind of movie that engages your critical thinking skills and starts great discussions. It certainly started an inner dialogue in my head that kept me thinking for days afterward. I can't wait to watch it again and pick up on even more nuances that I might have missed the first time around. If you haven't seen this cinematic masterpiece yet, I can't recommend it highly enough!篇612 Angry Men Movie ReviewWow, the movie "12 Angry Men" was really intense and exciting! It's a black and white film from a long time ago, but the story had me on the edge of my seat the whole time.It's all about this jury of 12 men who have to decide if an 18-year-old guy from the slums is guilty of murdering his father or not. At first, it seems like an open and shut case because most of the jurors think he did it based on the evidence presented incourt. But then this one juror, Mr. Davis, starts poking holes in the story and bringing up good reasons to doubt the kid's guilt.What I loved about the movie is how it shows the power of looking at evidence from different angles instead of just making snap judgments. Mr. Davis asks really smart questions that make the other jurors rethink their positions. Like why would the old guy who witnessed the crime from across the street be able to hear details clearly from that far away with a passed train blocking the sound? Or why would the kid who supposedly did it walk back to retrieve the murder weapon when he could have just run away if he was guilty?The more doubts Mr. Davis raises, the more the other jurors get sucked into debating and examining every little detail of the case. At times, it gets pretty heated with guys yelling at each other and storming around the room. A couple of the angrier men, like Mr. Parkhurst and Mr. Lee, definitely looked like they could have popped a vein from how mad they got! But Mr. Davis stays cool and keeps pushing them to think harder.What I found really powerful is how the movie shows that innocence or guilt isn't as simple as it may seem on the surface. Our backgrounds, personal experiences, and even our own biases can cloud how we interpret the same evidence. Some ofthe men were too quick to judge the kid as a "slum kid" who grew up no good. But Mr. Davis makes them realize how flawed that way of thinking is.My favorite part is towards the climax when the different jurors' tough exteriors start cracking one by one as they grapple with the gravity of their decision. These grown men who seemed so confident start tearing up and looking vulnerable as they find they can't ignore the resonating doubts raised by Mr. Davis' arguments. The truth of the situation dawns on them in heavy ways.In the end, all but one holdout juror ends up agreeing that there is too much reasonable doubt to declare the kid guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The fact that it took 12 very different life experiences examining the same evidence from every angle to find consensus is so powerful. It really makes you think about how important it is to reserve judgment and consider different perspectives before jumping to conclusions.While the movie is seriously intense at times, it has an awesome message about open-mindedness, critical thinking, and not taking things at face value. It celebrates the power of logic and reasoning to cut through personal biases and uncover truth. Even though I'm just a kid, those themes really resonatedwith me in a profound way. The story shows that standing up for what's right and fighting for justice isn't always easy, but it's so important. I think every adult and kid should see this classic film!。
十二怒汉观后感英语作文200词
《十二怒汉》观后感:正义的力量与陪审团的责任Having watched the经典法庭戏剧 "Twelve Angry Men," I was deeply moved by the intense debate and the unwavering quest for truth among the jurors. This movie, set entirely within a courthouse room, showcases the power of perseverance and the importance of jury duty.The story revolves around a jury of twelve men, eachwith their own prejudices and biases, as they attempt to reach a verdict on a murder case. At first glance, the evidence seems clear-cut, pointing to the defendant's guilt. However, one juror, Number 8 (played by Henry Fonda), isnot convinced. He challenges the assumptions of his fellow jurors, sparking a debate that lasts for hours.As the debate ensues, each juror is forced to examine their own prejudices and assumptions. They delve into the details of the case, questioning the validity of the evidence and the motives of the witnesses. The film showcases how easily people can be swayed by initial impressions and how crucial it is to question those impressions.What struck me the most was the determination of Juror Number 8. He faced intense opposition and ridicule, but he never gave up. His perseverance and unwavering belief in the importance of jury duty inspired me. His actions remind us that each individual has the power to make a difference, even in seemingly hopeless situations.The film also highlights the importance of critical thinking and objective analysis. In today's world, where information is constantly flooding in from all directions, it's crucial to have the ability to filter through the noise and arrive at a rational conclusion. "Twelve Angry Men" teaches us that we should never accept things at face value and always question the motives and assumptions behind the information we receive.In conclusion, "Twelve Angry Men" is a powerful reminder of the importance of jury duty and the role of the individual in society. It teaches us the value of perseverance, critical thinking, and objective analysis. The film鼓励我们 to question our assumptions, challenge authority, and always strive for the truth.**《十二怒汉》观后感:正义的力量与陪审团的责任**观看经典法庭戏剧《十二怒汉》后,我深受触动。
十二怒汉观后感英文
十二怒汉观后感英文在《十二怒汉》里~由12普通民众组成的陪审团中~仅有一个8号的建筑师~凭借陪审团12位成员必须达成一致方可定罪原则~第一次投票便投了无罪一票~致使大部分陪审员只想走完程序给被告定罪的想法落空。
下面是英文的《十二怒汉》观后感~欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感英文 Back to the room, slumpedin a chair, all of a sudden no fighting spirit. Turn over the film, to avoid the destruction of negative emotions.This is a classic old piece called "Twelve Angry Chinese". The story is a jury of twelve members, in a small conference room to discuss whether a juvenile murderer is guilty, the process of ups and downs, the outcome of great. It is a classic, in my view is that: shooting the film in the more distant, black and white, but I very smoothly finished it; and after reading without a tired feeling, but a kind of scattered emotions, it is difficult to name. Want to know my only two live watch 3D blockbuster (Pirates of the Caribbean and Pacific rim of the Pacific Ocean), are watching the sleep of the 4. As a blind dull viewing fans, meet the1 / 11"Twelve Angry Han" such a film, the top of your lungs are also top ah.The film explores the justice of the law and the freedom of the individual. The whole discussion is done in one scene. The reason in a narrow monotonous stuffy room shooting, but also let the audience watching the breath, the key is in one word: MAYBE.MAYBE, that is, that is, a hypothesis. If Xu Xian by Lady White Umbrella, there is no "White Snake" hypothesis; these twelve individuals began to agree with all the youth guilty, there is no next twelve angry men. The twelve person is not a judge or a lawyer, they did not need to prove that young guilty, they think, so the boy could sit chair; they think that no, they just need to find out the possibility of thejuvenile is not a murderer.So the focus of controversy, are around a possibility. One may be denied, and the next may be raised.If we can tolerate the possibility that there is no such a possibility, then our personality, and perhaps will be more sound. You want to, the children2 / 11came home from school late, parents immediately decided to go, so he hit the plane delayed whiplash; passengers, decided that some officials with the right gasser, life to wait for the plane. There is no such a possibility: children encounter love girls, to go; do not fly the aircraft, because the captain constipation but not said.In the film, an angry mouth said: this boy is a slum grew up, where the child was born barbaric, fighting and killing no human nature, theboy must be guilty. While he was speaking, all the members of the jury have got up and left, turned back, except one, who also can't endure the angry man said: please sit down and shut up.In other words, to judge a person, who can not be based on personal bias. Once stubborn prejudice, it will kill all the precious possibilities, it will be fair and far away, to despise. Americans are proud of their laws because they tolerate all kinds of possibilities and give each person the freedom to make every choice possible.MAYBE, a chance, a chance. Many lovers break up, because they do not believe it is possible, do not give3 / 11each other the opportunity. In some countries, good people are not happy cause bad, do not give the opportunity, but because of the justice of law with the lack of personality, more and more far away from the people, leaving only a false balance, at this time for the opportunity, but also desperate.At the end of the film, two angry men in the court gate shookhis hand, each name. And then return to the house, as if the previous argument is just a lazy rain in the evening. However, I do not know how many viewers in their back to see, is the dignity of personality independence and justice hope.十二怒汉观后感英文 But think about it, oronly gave three stars.Why?Because the movie is not pure. It is the theme of too much, the amount of information you want to convey is too large, although not so difficult to understand and accept, but the actual shot out of the situation is much more confusing: the jury system questioned theoriginal Lumet preserved, influence to the Russian Chechen War mentality is he stressed, then through to4 / 11Russia's dissatisfaction with the status quo of the beginning ("streets are Mercedes BMW Audi, only three minutes walk to the theatre of the road eight"), the narrative part involved everyone when mixed with too much of everyone's personal feelings, almost everyone said a case may not have with their the relationship between the piece, and then to the case itself (because of a surge in interest related to ethnic issues ah) increased the number of suspense drama elements, and finally to a strange man fancy...... Wang Yi think that this version than the conception of Lumet high, oh, maybe, but was not everything, although Kharkov has never let his film meters out of control, but still seem messy, and the strength is a scattered, feeling no matter which themes are focused on not just skimming over the surface like this in the past. No matter - I hate conception conception is not in the way of literature to discuss the film, the film quality, whether it is the rhythm, focus, or narrative control, this is a lot less than the old version.Then talk about technology. Whether new or old version, is a technology very good film, but the5 / 11difference is that the old version of the technology, with the integration of narrative is very good, whether it is the opening track length mirror beautiful, or to enter the space after the precise positioning, had a sudden feeling, and the new version, most of the time, let the people think it is a virtuoso technique -- try a decorative. For example, 4 ed in dog holding hands through the lens, in a sense, can reduce at least once, always repeat, even the flashing lights of suspense, to finally will make people feel flat anduninteresting.Watch this movie shows a sense, not the seafood cooked together, called sea food and poultry, or a hodgepodge.By the way of Mikhalkov, the Slavophilism heavy director, is now famous Russian director in one of the largest, but I am not very love, because that kind of Slavic tastes! Sometimes, in order to render this complex, he is willing to destroy the whole structure of the film (Siberia barber), so that the mood itself has become an independent part of the film. When it comes to artistic conception, with the same Slavic6 / 11complex than Sokolov, far worse.十二怒汉观后感英文 I don't know when to start, when upset or depressed, I used to find old movies, especially in black and white,from which get quiet and elegant is important to me. When the movie is the movie, every word, every shot, a seamless heavenly robe.If not a summer night, in front of the 12 inch TV "murder in the Orient Express", I am afraid I will not engage in the occupation, so Sidney Lumet on my film concept that enlightenment can be formed. Not only is my occupation, Lumet outlook on life enlightenment, than the so-called supernatural forces of evil, I fear more complex. So far, I do not dare to read the murder of the Orient Express, the original, even if I have read most of Agatha's works, for fear that the text will destroy my heart on the film version of the feelings."Twelve Angry Men" is a kind of courage to cash, Henry Fonda against eleven companions of courage, personal subjective experience andattitude against the truth of courage, fairness and justice against self courage, American judicial system and social harmony of confrontation, and of course Lv Mei will have the7 / 11courage.If I in twelve, I will think what what language, I am afraid that I am going with Ning Wang Zong not paranoid, or just because the bad boy will affect the society and others, so he will be charged to preach. This is not only my own narrow, I believe this is the so-called "good man" narrow.He is good at a single space, refining and performance in depth at mining and play on the event. "Twelve Angry Men", "summer afternoon","Murder on the Orient Express" is a single main space, single and multi scene, closed interior, rich images may have been the maximum limit, but these films are undoubtedly good. Hitchcock was regarded as a master, he is often neglected, comparison of production, the style is fixed, is probably Lumet's limitations, but I still Lumet grievance. Who bought a home on film creation works in the United States, it is a pity that English, lazy I still will put on the shelf.I love those who do not show off the lens of the director, even if I teach audio-visual, but do not think that audio-visual should be placed above the film, the8 / 11film is still moving me those characters and stories. So I loveBilly Wilde, I love Sidney lumet. Most of the enclosed space is the scene of studio Lumet's studio, but he always prefers to use even short focus wide-angle lens, especially the "Orient Express", if not considering the light, three foot position and space depth background that really makes people think a real. So is the "Twelve Angry Men", using live scene very well, but he is not very restrained, the excessive use of "impossible shots", get consensus only at the end of twelvejurors picked up one by one, hung in the closet coat slowly out of the lens with dressing cabinet a few suits the prospect of jury they are leaving, finally leaving Henry Fonda picked up is still lying in thelast like a stubborn choked the suit on the table, put him on, this is the understanding and support between men.He was restrained, even if the opening second is through the lens space and the atmosphere design of long lens typical account court,until out of the case is still the core of the film court. But as the opening is very suitable for the era, which has no feelings of infatuation to mirror director long, compared with9 / 11Ocean Wells's "touch of evil", this scene actually has been quite restrained.He was restrained, he did not because the single space added in the trial court, witnesses the flashback or reproduce the scene. For most of the directors, such a structure is always inevitable, even though I, although we all understand the interest and charm of a single space, but no confidence or ability to truly achieve such a perfect.He was restrained, he did not take Henry Fonda design into absolute hero, he is just a lot of sanity, the testimony of witnesses of the confusion is gradually put forward by other jurors, everyone to put forward their own personal experience and observation questions, such as poor background, people questioned the holding spring knife method, the old man questioned the witness of vision. Throughout the discussion, a juror number is outside the role of internal organizer, Fonda organizer, only this.He was restrained, even his warmth. At the end of the jurors out of court, the rain has stopped, summer evening and the sky, as the first man to supporters10 / 11Fonda, two people for each name, then separated from.He was restrained, he did not go to revisit the superfluous case is non truth, that has nothing to do with the story of the core, the core of the story is just a boy of guilty or not guilty.A building is successful, the development of drama is successful, but the control in restraint extremely in the home.Study and drama director, "Twelve Angry Men" is absolutely worth repeatedly fine works.Once again, he to me movie ideas and life beliefs are deeply influenced, but the master.I love this summer, you can see a good movie, you can write, you can look at their own rational and restrained.11 / 11。
十二怒汉观后感英文版
十二怒汉观后感英文版在1957年由悉尼.卢曼特执导的《十二怒汉》是探讨美国陪审员制度和法律正义的经典作,本片则是由威廉.弗里德金重新拍摄的电视版,由杰克.莱蒙取代亨利.方达演男主角,其他合演者包括金像奖影帝乔治.C.斯科特。
下面是英文版的《十二怒汉》观后感,欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感英文版As a IMDB movie, originally only read and when the university language class fuzzy again writing film is a very extravagant things, but this afternoon again like a completely blew my mind, giving too many surprises and things will still lead a person to endless aftertastes, on the next.Talk before seen a movie, called the man from Earth (the man from the earth), features a proposed very beautiful view or treason and heresy, by constantly review and logical scrutiny to details of other people's point of view in the opposite direction. The point is that the language of art and clever reasoning, give people the feeling of layers of peeling cocoon. This 12 anger is more in-depth study of human nature and the United States judicial and democratic system.Originally seemingly incontrovertible casebecause the jury has an objection, so an amazing negotiations began. The opposition is a smooth and logical architect, and a producer of the film. The first round of the debate is mainly composed of a It's possible! That led, the boy may be innocent, the witness may be wrong, false testimony could, to a 18 year old boy without thinking directly to the electric chair is a be brutal and inhuman. At this stage, the only point against the success of Davis is to let people get away from the surface of the evidence and their own prejudices, with careful scrutiny of the details of the mind, for the next stage to lay the foundation.In the details of reasoning, Davis has been a breakthrough point and support the knife, when out of pocket knife with almost the same knife, all surprised sound jump, so the evidence will lose credibility, on the knife in the back again to become a breakthrough point. Davis proposed to reproduce the boy murder scenes, so that the boy insisted that the guilty get Davis for demonstration, higher than their own people, manipulation is holding a knife stabbed in the chest from the top down, and from a slum, have seen a lot ofpeople stand up and fight to get stressed such adjustment method, it is a waste of time the tool, familiar boy didn't like this.To discuss the progress on many of the details in advance, such as time difference; the old man can walk out of the bedroom, through the corridor in 15 seconds, the boy rushed out to see the woman; both sides of the nose mark and kept rubbing surface of the eye is myopic. Although there are set close enough to leave the drama to overthrow the testimony of the suspects, but still very appreciated this insight.Another wonderful place is a lot of analysis of human nature of the plot, such as the first to support the Davis people to explain why the old man would do the perjury, that is because of a comic book unknown to the public suddenly one day to get attention, others want to refer to his views, and flattered him with long battle, trying to hide myself the lame. It can be said that this is a weakness of human nature, in order to other people's attention or respect, at the same time distort the facts.Confrontation and Davis and his resolute opponents,Davis said a press button to personally chair is sadistic, who shouted I will kill rage came forward to beat Davis, you! And Davis were all pulled at him, calmly questions, you don't really want to kill me, right let him have nothing to say?. Clever people to move the stone to hit their feet very exciting, but the more exciting is the director here to give a very clear view, that is, an idiom in china.From A to Z 3 opponents is not for evil, frowning, talking is intolerable or pessimistic, but strong scream as you want the boy to death immediately said, this man has become a justice in the case when the correct, but when the error is a disaster. How can one be able to act as a judge of the fate of others by letting them have their own prejudices and that they have no prejudice? Only a disregard for human life.The discussion in the final is firmly opposed to face their own feelings with his photo when collapse over, perhaps the boy really killed my father, but this is a shining glory of human nature of the trial, the greatness of the judicial system reflects the most incisive. Especially with China nearly thousands ofyears of autocratic centralization comparison, and even become the decision habit, look at a building built not demolished and rebuilt for several years, I can not help worrying, Chinese how many innocent common people Yuansi, how many wise decisions in authoritarian pressure die, many seemingly overweeningly ambitious construction plan also in the pipeline?十二怒汉观后感英文版This Indoorsman empty and lonely months come out a fart, this essay is moving around the brain exercises, do not take it seriously."12 angry men", epee no front, delicate workAbout the film itselfOf all the movies I've seen, "12 fury" is not my favorite top ten, but it's definitely the most boring I've ever seen in the top 10. The whole film is only one scene, 12 men, hours of dialogue, or a black and white film. However, it is cattle, cattle cattle, with the most boring way, about the most exciting story.The whole film is about a murder trial. A bad boy was charged with the murder of his father, hear the voice of the old man across the street downstairs, witnessed the process of women's murder knife,unconvincing alibi, seems to have been placed in the electric chair in front of the child will be. 12 members of the jury will determine the child's life and death, but they have to make a unified ruling, the results can be effective. At the beginning of the film, 11 people think that the child is guilty, only one out of respect for life, that the case pending. After hours of hard work, all the evidence is classified as "reasonable doubt", that is to say, there is a reason why it cannot be fully established. The boy was acquitted.The story itself does not have any complicated place, neither brain nor burning suspense. However, the film, there is a kind of good. This is a typical confined space film, but there is no usually confined space film repression. The plot is fascinating, as if an invisible hand, grabbed in the viewer's mind, to promote the development of the plot. Then the hand is hidden very deep, you can only cast a tepid performance, and the degree of relaxation rhythm to feel it. It is difficult to point out that it is in which point, the plot, so that the merits of a step forward. It makes a "mission impossible" completed, but does not show abrupt. Likewarm boiled frog, unconsciously, has been the director of the road.On the confined space of the film, you can take the "12 angry Han" and "sniper phone booth" to do a comparison.The latter is my personal narrow viewing experience, in recent years considered very good confined space film. It is more intense than the "12 angry Han", more depressed, more popular. However, the latter of the wonderful, is the process of viewing the obvious exciting, the director deliberately for the tension (of course, it is not easy). It will be the hero and the audience, and placed under the gun, like a gun under the deer hunter. Every thought, every action, will determine your life and death. So it's hot, hormones are always high.The former is different, the director will be shot, placed on the spectator's point of view, and without any emotional color. Group play is also very difficult to bring the audience into the sense. This kind of calm angle of view, can let a person look at the whole process more calmly. The former is like the slalom, the latteris watching the scenery is better, but also the reader's taste.About humanityThe director cut the case in the form of a jury, but also brought another narrative convenience, no matter what kind of decisions made by the 12 angry men, will not have any impact on their own, they are bystanders. Moreover, the restriction of 12 people, a person's decision, the role of both large and small. This is like 100 thousand people pulling the hair of a person, everyone will think, he pulled out a hair of others will produce what kind of impact on the people, but when tenth million individuals pulled over the last hair, who is responsible for this thing? The individual in the collective judgment, are more likely to get a sense of security even moral, ah q would say, I feel the monk can not be touched? As a result, the only thing that can restrain the 12 anger is the moral of the individual, respect for life, the fear of the law, and the American dream of American pride. However, it is for the respect of other people's lives, the value of the personal status of citizens, can better reflect thereason why the "social man" noble.On Jurisprudence11:1, does not represent the overwhelming victory, the minority to the majority, also did not see so reasonable. Let a few people speak freely, is a fair basis.十二怒汉观后感英文版"The twelve fury", a black and white film that was shot in the 50s of the last century, still holds the top spot in the list of legal films. The filming of the film is now still seems to be very good or even fresh, a jury of twelve people to discuss the scene occupies the vast majority of the film. The basic circumstances of the case is almost a convicted juvenile patricide after the trial requires twelve man jury made unanimous verdict. Finally, after a long and bitter debate, the kind of people in the aura of human nature under the leadership of the hero to the boy to freedom.A movie is great, it must be that it allows everyone to find their own interpretation and indirect exposure to real life. What does the film say? The responsibility of the rights and obligations of unity, Americanjudicial system, "would rather let ten thousand can not kill the wrong one" judicial policy on human, fine, deep dig of character psychology analysis, inference of life precious goodness of life, respect, in the face of adversity to find a breakthrough in the actual combat skills, logical reasoning method and so on. Among them, my most shocking is the jury in the system of human feelings and legal justice in the game between the precise performance of the game.First of all, from the significance of the establishment of the jury system. As everyone knows, the jury system is a more common in the countries of Anglo American law system for the realization of democracy and set up the court ruling, but in this case is obviously that consisting of 6-12 people, a case of a group, decide whether the defendant guilty of petty jury. The task of the jury is to find the truth, to seek the defendant's heart, to judge whether the law is fair, and to fight against the dictatorship and oppression of the government. Judging from the case, twelve different personalities, different origins of the jury finally completed this sacred mission, although theprocess is full of hardships and disputes, although meager pay.Obviously, the jury system establishment greatly to the "people" will have reflected the way, representative of the first throw to the "people" problems, from the set goal, one of the ways of expression also embody the will of the consciousness of law. This movie is a result to the satisfaction of all, "people's democracy" successful practice, worthy of praise.It can be said that this kind of non professional, only the simple way to judge the feelings of law to a certain extent reflects the demographic characteristics and values of a society, naturally has a natural rationality and institutional affinity. This kind of justice can make the majority of the people in this society to be convinced, and not like the law of the general cold ruthless, the decision was also less likely to be overturned. This is also the system from the Anglo Saxon era has been widely used and today there are still many reference reasons.The next step is to discuss whether the justicebased on human judgment is the justice required on the legal balance.In the movie "Twelve Angry Men", each juror all have some worry, anxious to help their own work and entertainment, because of some emotional problems naturally to the case of the boy off, some because of hot weather to escape from the narrow discussion room...... All these practical problems are unable to avoid or even to be taken into account when the jury system is set up. But this is real life. As the most common people, the jury will be influenced by all kinds of personal and environmental factors.A great movie is that it takes all kinds of factors affecting the justice of Law -- or clear or vague to show in front of the audience, the audience from the heart to feel, if oneself is in jury, it is very difficult to guarantee that complete justice. Just one example, in seemingly irrefutable evidence, even lawyers are too lazy to defend for the boy, the judge is also a lazy way, that will make everyone believe: the child First impressions are strongest had killed his father and have to pay the price to be sent to thechair in the end has not yet started life. That is why there is a big gap between 11 and 1, which is likely to have an impact on the environment.It is a little question although it is difficult to have a keen insight into matters but people-oriented "actor has been discussed by expanding, finally let more and more jurors tend to believe that the boy innocence. But this calm person in reality is very rare, if we depend on every case in each group the jury can have a "hero" to calm to control, it is not realistic! As one of the judges in the film said to himself, "it's a little bit of a heart attack" if it's a long time to change into another jury. Just imagine, as a result, the jury system has become a kind of terrible, if the jury random selection will lead to two completely different results for the case even for a young life and death, let the life in the legal system of the people and how to maintain adequate sense of security and justice of law faith?So I think that any system has its own defects, the rationality of its existence and its inevitable, certainly not in personal feelings or political stanceover highly or completely system, the disadvantages and system optimization is the right path of human progress. It may also be a more than half an hour to convey the meaning of the film more far-reaching.Finally, it is worth mentioning that the opening and the end of the film is very interesting, with the film language1.十二怒汉观后感英文版2.十二怒汉观后感英文3.十二怒汉观后感英语4.十二怒汉观后感中英版5.精选十二怒汉观后感6.看不见的好朋友读后感怎么写7.坚定信念超越自我演讲稿200字8.什么的变化作文400字年重庆开学第一课观后感。
十二怒汉英文观后感
十二怒汉英文观后感Title: Reflection on "12 Angry Men" (十二怒汉)"12 Angry Men" is a classic American film that revolves around the intense deliberations of a jury in a murder trial. Directed by Sidney Lumet, this courtroom drama portrays the complexities of human behavior and the power of critical thinking in the face of prejudice and personal biases.The movie takes place almost entirely within the confines of a jury room, where twelve jurors with diverse backgrounds and personalities are tasked with deciding the fate of a young man accused of murdering his father. As the deliberations begin, it becomes evident that some jurors have already made up their minds, based on preconceived notions and prejudices. However, one juror, played by Henry Fonda, stands against the majority and advocates for a fair and thorough examination of the evidence.Watching "12 Angry Men" in English allowed me to appreciate the dialogue and the nuances of the characters' interactions. The tension created by the confined space and the differences in opinions kept me engaged throughout the film. Each juror brings their own life experiences and perspectives to the table, resulting in heated debates and clashes of ideology. This diversity of viewpoints portrayed the inherent flaws in the justice system, revealing how personal biases can cloud judgment and hinder the pursuit of truth.One aspect of the movie that resonated with me was the emphasis on the power of empathy and open-mindedness. As the narrative unfolds, we witness the transformation of the initially stubborn jurors, as they slowly question their initial judgments and begin to consider alternative possibilities. This gradual shift highlights the importance of critical thinking, fairness, and the willingness to challenge one's own beliefs.Furthermore, the film serves as a powerful social commentary on the issues of prejudice and discrimination that persist within society. The characters' prejudices, whether rooted in race, class, or personal experiences, are exposed and scrutinized. Through the intense debates, the movie calls for viewers to reflect on their own biases and encourages them to approach situations with an open mind.In conclusion, "12 Angry Men" is a captivating film that delves into the intricacies of justice, human behavior, and the flaws within our legal system. The thought-provoking narrative, coupled with outstanding performances, creates a compelling experience for viewers. This movie serves as a reminder of the importance of critical thinking, empathy, and fairness in our journey towards a just society.。
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性,平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益,请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间:9:00-18:30)。
十二怒汉观后感英文版在1957年由悉尼(卢曼特执导的《十二怒汉》是探讨美国陪审员制度和法律正义的经典作~本片则是由威廉(弗里德金重新拍摄的电视版~由杰克(莱蒙取代亨利(方达演男主角~其他合演者包括金像奖影帝乔治(C(斯科特。
下面是英文版的《十二怒汉》观后感~欢迎阅读。
十二怒汉观后感英文版 As a IMDB movie,originally only read and when the university language class fuzzy again writing film is a very extravagant things, but this afternoon again like a completely blew my mind, giving too many surprises and things will still lead a person to endless aftertastes, on the next.Talk before seen a movie, called the man from Earth (the man from the earth), features a proposed very beautiful view or treason and heresy, by constantly review and logical scrutiny to details of other people's point of view in the opposite direction. The point is that the language of art and clever reasoning, give people the feeling of layers of peeling cocoon. This 12 anger is more in-depth study of human nature and the United States judicial and democratic system.Originally seemingly incontrovertible case1 / 14because the jury has an objection, so an amazing negotiations began. The opposition is a smooth and logical architect, and a producer of the film. The first round of the debate is mainly composed of a It'spossible! That led, the boy may be innocent, the witness may be wrong, false testimony could, to a 18 year old boy without thinking directly to the electric chair is a be brutal and inhuman. At this stage, the only point against the success of Davis is to let people get away from the surface of the evidence and their own prejudices, with careful scrutiny of the details of the mind, for the next stage to lay the foundation.In the details of reasoning, Davis has been a breakthrough point and support the knife, when out of pocket knife with almost the same knife, all surprised sound jump, so the evidence will lose credibility, on the knife in the back again to become a breakthrough point. Davis proposed to reproduce the boy murder scenes, so that the boy insisted that the guilty get Davis for demonstration, higher than their own people, manipulation is holding a knife stabbed in the chest from the top down, and from a slum, have seen a lot of2 / 14people stand up and fight to get stressed such adjustment method, it is a waste of time the tool, familiar boy didn't like this.To discuss the progress on many of the details in advance, such as time difference; the old man can walk out of the bedroom, through the corridor in 15 seconds, the boy rushed out to see the woman; both sides of the nose mark and kept rubbing surface of the eye is myopic. Although there are set close enough to leave the drama to overthrow the testimony of the suspects, but still very appreciated this insight.Another wonderful place is a lot of analysis of human nature of the plot, such as the first to support the Davis people to explain why the old man would do the perjury, that is because of a comic book unknown to the public suddenly one day to get attention, others want to refer to his views, and flattered him with long battle, trying to hide myself the lame. It can be said that this is a weakness of human nature, in order to other people's attention or respect, at the same time distort the facts.Confrontation and Davis and his resolute opponents,3 / 14Davis said a press button to personally chair is sadistic, who shouted I will kill rage came forward to beat Davis, you! And Davis were all pulled at him, calmly questions, you don't really want to kill me, right let him have nothing to say?. Clever people to move the stone to hit their feet very exciting, but the more exciting is the director here to give a very clear view, that is, an idiom in china.From A to Z 3 opponents is not for evil, frowning, talking is intolerable or pessimistic, but strong scream as you want the boy to death immediately said, this man has become a justice in the case when the correct, but when the error is a disaster. How can one be able to act as a judge of the fate of others by letting them have their own prejudices and that they have no prejudice? Only a disregard for human life.The discussion in the final is firmly opposed to face their own feelings with his photo when collapse over, perhaps the boy reallykilled my father, but this is a shining glory of human nature of the trial, the greatness of the judicial system reflects the most incisive. Especially with China nearly thousands of4 / 14years of autocratic centralization comparison, and even become the decision habit, look at a building built not demolished and rebuilt for several years, I can not help worrying, Chinese how many innocent common people Yuansi, how many wise decisions in authoritarian pressure die, many seemingly overweeningly ambitious construction plan also in the pipeline?十二怒汉观后感英文版 This Indoorsman empty andlonely months come out a fart, this essay is moving around the brain exercises, do not take it seriously."12 angry men", epee no front, delicate workAbout the film itselfOf all the movies I've seen, "12 fury" is not my favorite top ten, but it's definitely the most boring I've ever seen in the top 10. The whole film is only one scene, 12 men, hours of dialogue, or a black and white film. However, it is cattle, cattle cattle, with the most boring way, about the most exciting story.The whole film is about a murder trial. A bad boy was charged withthe murder of his father, hear the voice of the old man across thestreet downstairs, witnessed the process of women's murder knife,5 / 14unconvincing alibi, seems to have been placed in the electric chairin front of the child will be. 12 members of the jury will determine the child's life and death, but they have to make a unified ruling, the results can be effective. At the beginning of the film, 11 people think that the child is guilty, only one out of respect for life, that thecase pending. After hours of hard work, all the evidence is classifiedas "reasonable doubt", that is to say, there is a reason why it cannotbe fully established. The boy was acquitted.The story itself does not have any complicated place, neither brain nor burning suspense. However, the film, there is a kind of good. Thisis a typical confined space film, but there is no usually confined space film repression. The plot is fascinating, as if an invisible hand, grabbed in the viewer's mind, to promote the development of the plot. Then the hand is hidden very deep, you can only cast a tepid performance, and the degree of relaxation rhythm to feel it. It is difficult to point out that it is in which point, the plot, so that the merits of a step forward. It makes a "mission impossible" completed, but does not show abrupt. Like6 / 14warm boiled frog, unconsciously, has been the director of the road.On the confined space of the film, you can take the "12 angry Han" and "sniper phone booth" to do a comparison.The latter is my personal narrow viewing experience, in recent years considered very good confined space film. It is more intense than the "12 angry Han", more depressed, more popular. However, the latter of the wonderful, is the process of viewing the obvious exciting, the director deliberately for the tension (of course, it is not easy). It will be the hero and the audience, and placed under the gun, like a gun under the deer hunter. Every thought, every action, will determine your life and death. So it's hot, hormones are always high.The former is different, the director will be shot, placed on the spectator's point of view, and without any emotional color. Group play is also very difficult to bring the audience into the sense. This kind of calm angle of view, can let a person look at the whole process more calmly. The former is like the slalom, the latter7 / 14is watching the scenery is better, but also the reader's taste.About humanityThe director cut the case in the form of a jury, but also brought another narrative convenience, no matter what kind of decisions made by the 12 angry men, will not have any impact on their own, they are bystanders. Moreover, the restriction of 12 people, a person's decision, the role of both large and small. This is like 100 thousand people pulling the hair of a person, everyone will think, he pulled out a hairof others will produce what kind of impact on the people, but when tenth million individuals pulled over the last hair, who is responsible forthis thing? The individual in the collective judgment, are more likelyto get a sense of security even moral, ah q would say, I feel the monk can not be touched? As a result, the only thing that can restrain the 12 anger is the moral of the individual, respect for life, the fear of the law, and the American dream of American pride. However, it is for the respect of other people's lives, the value of the personal status of citizens, can better reflect the8 / 14reason why the "social man" noble.On Jurisprudence11:1, does not represent the overwhelming victory, the minority tothe majority, also did not see so reasonable. Let a few people speak freely, is a fair basis.十二怒汉观后感英文版 "The twelve fury", ablack and white film that was shot in the 50s of the last century,still holds the top spot in the list of legal films. The filming of the film is now still seems to be very good or even fresh, a jury of twelve people to discuss the scene occupies the vast majority of the film. The basic circumstances of the case is almost a convicted juvenile patricide after the trial requires twelve man jury made unanimous verdict. Finally, after a long and bitter debate, the kind of people in the aura of human nature under the leadership of the hero to the boy to freedom.A movie is great, it must be that it allows everyone to find their own interpretation and indirect exposure to real life. What does thefilm say? The responsibility of the rights and obligations of unity, American9 / 14judicial system, "would rather let ten thousand can not kill the wrong one" judicial policy on human, fine, deep dig of character psychology analysis, inference of life precious goodness of life, respect, in the face of adversity to find a breakthrough in the actual combat skills, logical reasoning method and so on. Among them, my most shocking is the jury in the system of human feelings and legal justice in the game between the precise performance of the game.First of all, from the significance of the establishment of the jury system. As everyone knows, the jury system is a more common in the countries of Anglo American law system for the realization of democracy and set up the court ruling, but in this case is obviously that consisting of 6-12 people, a case of a group, decide whether the defendant guilty of petty jury. The task of the jury is to find the truth, to seek the defendant's heart, to judge whether the law is fair, and to fight against the dictatorship and oppression of the government. Judging from the case, twelve different personalities, different origins of the jury finally completed this sacred mission, although the10 / 14process is full of hardships and disputes, although meager pay.Obviously, the jury system establishment greatly to the "people"will have reflected the way, representative of the first throw to the "people" problems, from the set goal, one of the ways of expression also embody the will of the consciousness of law. This movie is a result tothe satisfaction of all, "people's democracy" successful practice,worthy of praise.It can be said that this kind of non professional, only the simpleway to judge the feelings of law to a certain extent reflects the demographiccharacteristics and values of a society, naturally has a natural rationality and institutional affinity. This kind of justice can makethe majority of the people in this society to be convinced, and not like the law of the general cold ruthless, the decision was also less likelyto be overturned. This is also the system from the Anglo Saxon era has been widely used and today there are still many reference reasons.The next step is to discuss whether the justice11 / 14based on human judgment is the justice required on the legal balance.In the movie "Twelve Angry Men", each juror all have some worry, anxious to help their own work and entertainment, because of some emotional problems naturally to the case of the boy off, some because of hot weather to escape from the narrow discussion room...... All these practical problems are unable to avoid or even to be taken into account when the jury system is set up. But this is real life. As the mostcommon people, the jury will be influenced by all kinds of personal and environmental factors.A great movie is that it takes all kinds of factors affecting the justice of Law -- or clear or vague to show in front of the audience, the audience from the heart to feel, if oneself is in jury, it is very difficult to guarantee that complete justice. Just one example, in seemingly irrefutable evidence, even lawyers are too lazy to defend for the boy, the judge is also a lazy way, that will make everyone believe: the child First impressions are strongest had killed his father and have to pay the price to be sent to the12 / 14chair in the end has not yet started life. That is why there is abig gap between 11 and 1, which is likely to have an impact on the environment.It is a little question although it is difficult to have a keen insight into matters but people-oriented "actor has been discussed by expanding, finally let more and more jurors tend to believe that the boy innocence. But this calm person in reality is very rare, if we depend on every case in each group the jury can have a "hero" to calm to control, it is not realistic! As one of the judges in the film said to himself, "it's a little bit of a heart attack" if it's a long time to change into another jury. Just imagine, as a result, the jury system has become a kind of terrible, if the jury random selection will lead to two completely different results for the case even for a young life anddeath, let the life in the legal system of the people and how to maintain adequate sense of security and justice of law faith?So I think that any system has its own defects, the rationality of its existence and its inevitable, certainly not in personal feelings or political stance13 / 14over highly or completely system, the disadvantages and system optimization is the right path of human progress. It may also be a more than half an hour to convey the meaning of the film more far-reaching.Finally, it is worth mentioning that the opening and the end of the film is very interesting, with the film language1.十二怒汉观后感英文版2.十二怒汉观后感英文3.十二怒汉观后感英语4.十二怒汉观后感中英版5.精选十二怒汉观后感6.看不见的好朋友读后感怎么写7.坚定信念超越自我演讲稿200字8.什么的变化作文400字年重庆开学第一课观后感14 / 14。