History Awesome / TwelveAngryMen

-->'''Juror #4''': ...No. I'm convinced. Not guilty.

* They all got a collective moment when they reject Juror #10's racist rant toward the end. As they all turn their backs to him one-by-one, he [[VillainousBreakdown grows more and more distressed]], bewildered by their rejection of his words, until the only man still facing him is the stoic businessman, Juror #4.

* Juror #4 gets another one towards the end when he calmly, rationally (in stark contrast to the racist-assumption-tossing #10) explains why he still thinks the boy is guilty, and is so convincing he actually swings a not-guilty voter back to guilty (albeit temporarily)--the only time that happens.

'''Juror #3:''' (Beat) You what?!\\

'''Juror #3:''' Whaddya mean, you've had enough? That's no answer!\\

'''Juror #7:''' Now wait a minute! You can't talk like that to me--!\\

'''Juror #7:''' Now listen, buddy-!

* Juror #11 gets one when Juror #7 changes his vote to "not guilty" just because he is tired, bored and generally "had enough". Right then, #11 (who already voted "not guilty') berates #7 for not taking the matter seriously:
-->'''Juror #11''': If you want to vote "not guilty", then do it because you are convinced the man is not guilty, not because you've "had enough". And if you think he is guilty, then vote that way! But don't you have the ''guts'' to do what you think is right?

** Also this exchange:
-->'''Juror #7:''' Now wait a minute! You can't talk like that to me--!\\
'''Juror #11:''' I ''can'' talk like that to you.
** Even the personally-biased Juror #3 is appalled by his reasoning.

'''Juror #4:''' I have. Now sit down and don't open your mouth again.

** A particular moment occurs when everyone else is prattling on how the boy's switchblade was damning evidence since it was unique. Juror #8 silently destroys that argument with one blow when he produces an ''exact copy'' of the switchblade and stabs into the table.[[note]]Of course, in real life, since he went out and bought it specifically for the next day's deliberation, that would end the case in a mistrial, but the film does at least point out that he broke the law.[[/note]]
** He gets another a few minutes later, by invoking IneffectualDeathThreats. One argument in favor of conviction was that the defendant was heard yelling, "[[IllKillYou I'LL KILL YOU!]]" at the victim. Juror #8 provokes Juror #3 (the one most adamant for a conviction). Juror #3 ''lunges'' at Juror #8 and has to be held back by the others as he yells, "[[MeaningfulEcho I'LL KILL HIM! I'LL KILL HIM!]]" Juror #8 stays calm and cool, and just says, "You don't ''really'' mean you'll kill me, do you?"
*** This was made into the act break in the stage version due to being so impactful.

** And for the rest of the movie, that's ''exactly'' what he does.
* Juror #4 gets another one towards the end when he calmly, rationally (in stark contrast to #10) explains why he still thinks the boy is guilty, and is so convincing he actually swings a not-guilty voter back to guilty (albeit temporarily)--the only time that happens.

* Juror #5 plays a huge part in proving the [[ReverseGrip knife plot point]] through his own personal experiences with it. He's also the first to stand up to Juror #10's racist rant by slamming down the newspaper and walking away (although technically Juror #3 already stormed away from the table in annoyance when nine jurors vote for acquittal just before #10's rant begins).

* Juror #4 deserves credit for changing his vote ''not'' because of pressure or wanting to leave or realizing no one was listening to him, but because #8 and the others finally instill in him a reasonable doubt, and [[GracefulLoser he immediately and gracefully accepts it]]. What a class act.

** A particular moment occurs when everyone else is prattling on how the boy's switchblade was damning evidence since it was unique. Juror #8 silently destroys that argument with one blow when he produces an ''exact copy'' of the switchblade and stabs into the table.[[note]]Of course, in real life, since he went out and bought it specifically for the next day's deliberation, that would end the case in a mistrial.[[/note]]

* Juror #8 overall, but especially the first part (after the vote became 6-to-6, it was just a matter of finishing what had started) -- at the start, eleven men agree on one thing -- the defendant is guilty. That's pretty much all they agree on, and Juror #8 [[AlternativeCharacterInterpretation turns minor disagreements into major ones]], [[MagnificentBastard eventually convincing the other 11 that there is reasonable doubt]]. There's also ''how'' he does it -- he doesn't ''say'' "the defendant is not guilty", but asks the others to elaborate on their reasons for being convinced, showing each one sooner or later that said reasons don't actually exist, and remaining calm long enough for them to realize it.

* Juror #9 gets two. First, when #8 offers to change his vote to guilty if all eleven other jurors still vote that way, #9 votes not guilty. He's not saying he's been convinced of that; he voted as such because he admires #8 for standing alone in his convictions for so long. Then at the end of the film, he figures out the critical flaw in the most damning piece of evidence against the defendant. When #3 asks why the defense attorney didn't bring it up, #8 points out that, of the 12 of them, 11 couldn't think of it either, and gives #9 a congratulatory back slap.

* They all got a collective moment when they reject the racist rant of Juror #10 toward the end. As they all turn their backs to him one-by-one, he [[VillainousBreakdown grows more and more distressed]], bewildered by their rejection of his words, until the only man still facing him is the stoic businessman, Juror #4.

** He gets another a few minutes later, by invoking the IneffectualDeathThreat. One argument in favor of conviction was that the defendant was heard yelling, "[[IllKillYou I'LL KILL YOU!]]" at the victim. Juror #8 provokes Juror #3 (the one most adamant for a conviction). Juror #3 ''lunges'' at Juror #8 and has to be held back by the others as he yells, "[[MeaningfulEcho I'LL KILL HIM! I'LL KILL HIM!]]" Juror #8 stays calm and cool, and just says, "You don't ''really'' mean you'll kill me, do you?"

* Juror #11 gets one when Juror #7 changes his vote to "not guilty" just because he is tired and bored and generally "had enough". Right then, #11 (who already voted "not guilty') berates #7 violently for not taking the matter seriously:
-->'''Juror #11''': If you want to vote "not guilty" then do it because you are convinced the man is not guilty, not because you've had enough. And if you think he is guilty then vote that way! Or don't you have the ''guts'' to do what you think is right?

* Juror #5 plays a huge part in proving the [[ReverseGrip knife plot point]] through his own personal experiences with it. He's also the first to stand up to Juror #10's racist rant by slamming down the newspaper and walking away (although technically Juror #3 has already stormed away from the table in annoyance when nine jurors vote for acquittal just before #10's rant begins).

* Also, this beautiful piece of irony (keep in mind that Juror #11 is the only foreigner on the jury):

* Juror #4 deserves credit for changing his vote ''not'' because of pressure or wanting to leave or realizing no one was listening to him, but because #8 and the others finally instill in him a reasonable doubt, and [[GracefulLoser he immediately and gracefully accepts it]]. Dude's a class act.

* Juror #8 overall, but especially the first part (after the vote became 6-to-6, it was just a matter of finishing what had started) -- at the beginning, eleven men agree on one thing -- that the defendant is guilty. That's pretty much all they agree on, and Juror #8 [[AlternativeCharacterInterpretation turns minor disagreements into major ones]], [[MagnificentBastard eventually convincing the other 11 that there is reasonable doubt]]. There's also ''how'' he does it -- he doesn't ''say'' "the defendant is not guilty", but asks the others to elaborate on their reasons for being convinced, showing each one sooner or later that said reasons don't actually exist, and remaining calm long enough for them to realize it.

* When Juror #2, after asking if anyone wants a cough drop, walks up to Juror #8 to give him one, he remains standing behind him for some time, probably because he begins to slowly support him, even if he (Juror #2) voted guilty. Later, when Juror #8 walks up to Juror #2 to give him the switchblade, he too begins to stand close to him, probably to give strength into Juror #2's speech.

* Juror #8 overall, but especially the first part (after the vote became 6 and 6, it was just a matter of finishing what had started) -- at the beginning, eleven men agree on one thing -- that the defendant is guilty. That's pretty much all they agree on, and Juror #8 [[AlternativeCharacterInterpretation turns minor disagreements into major ones]], [[MagnificentBastard eventually convincing the other 11 that there is reasonable doubt]]. There's also ''how'' he does it -- he doesn't ''say'' "the defendant is not guilty", but asks the others to elaborate on their reasons for being convinced, showing each one sooner or later that said reasons don't actually exist, and remaining calm long enough for them to realize it.

** A particular moment occurs when everyone else is prattling on how the boy's switchblade was damning evidence since it was unique. Juror #8 silently destroys that argument with one blow, when he produces an ''exact copy'' of the switchblade and stabs into the table.[[note]]Of course, in real life, since he went out and bought it specifically for the next day's deliberation, that would end the case in a mistrial.[[/note]]

* Juror #9 gets two. First, when #8 offers to change his vote to guilty if all eleven other jurors still vote that way, #9 votes not guilty. He's not saying he's been convinced of that; he voted as such because he admires #8 for standing alone in his convictions for so long. Then at the end of the film, he's the one who figures out the critical flaw in the most damning piece of evidence against the defendant. When #3 asks why the defense attorney didn't bring it up, #8 points out that, of the 12 of them, eleven couldn't think of it either, and gives #9 a congratulatory back slap.

'''Juror #11''': For the same reason you're not. It's the way I was brought up.

* Juror #5 plays a huge part in proving the [[ReverseGrip knife plot point]] through his own personal experiences with it. He's also the first to stand up to Juror #10's racist filibuster by slamming down the newspaper and walking away (although technically Juror #3 has already stormed away from the table in annoyance when nine jurors vote for acquittal just before #10's rant begins).

* Juror #8 overall, but especially the first part (after the vote became 6 and 6, it was just a matter of finishing what had started) -- at the beginning, eleven men agree on one thing -- that the defendant is guilty. That's pretty much all they agree on, and Juror #8 [[AlternativeCharacterInterpretation turns minor disagreements into major ones]], [[MagnificentBastard eventually convincing the other 11 that there is reasonable doubt]]. There's also ''how'' he does it--he doesn't ''say,'' "the defendant is not guilty", but asks the others to elaborate on their reasons for being convinced, showing each one sooner or later that said reasons don't actually exist, and remaining calm long enough for them to realize it.

* Juror #8 overall, but especially the first part (after the vote became 6 and 6, it was just a matter of finishing what had started)--at the beginning, eleven men agree on one thing--that the defendant is guilty. That's pretty much all they agree on, and Juror #8 [[AlternativeCharacterInterpretation turns minor disagreements into major ones]], [[MagnificentBastard eventually convincing the other 11 that there is reasonable doubt]]. There's also ''how'' he does it--he doesn't ''say,'' "the defendant is not guilty", but asks the others to elaborate on their reasons for being convinced, showing each one sooner or later that said reasons don't actually exist, and remaining calm long enough for them to realize it.

** And, for the rest of the movie, that's ''exactly'' what he does.

'''Juror #10''': [[{{TranquilFury}} (smile slowly drops)]] ...You're a pretty smart fella, aren't you?

** Topped later when his argument for memory falls apart, and he wipes his forehead for the first (and only) time.

'''Juror #11''': For the same reason you are not. It's the way I was brought up.

-->'''Juror #7:''' Now listen, you can't talk to me like that--!\\

--> '''Juror #11''': Beg pardon...\\
'''Juror #10''': "Beg pardon"? What are you so polite about?\\
'''Juror #11''': For the same reason you are not--it's the way I was brought up.

--> '''Juror #6''': What are you talkin' to him like that for? Guy talks like that to an old man really oughta get stepped on, you know. You oughta have more respect, mister. If you say stuff like that to him again... I'm gonna lay you out.

-->'''Juror #11''': If you want to vote "not guilty" then do it because you are convinced the man is not guilty, not because you've had enough. And if you think he is guilty then vote that way! But don't you have the ''guts'' to do what you think is right?

'''Juror #10''': [[{{Beat}} (smile slowly drops)]] ...You're a pretty smart fella, aren't you?

** Topped later when his argument for memory falls apart, and he wipes his brow for the first (and only) time.

* ExtremeDoormat Juror #2 calling out #7 on his inappropriate snarking.

* Juror #4 deserves credit for changing his vote ''not'' because of pressure or wanting to leave or realizing no one was listening to him, but because he realized he was ''wrong'', and [[GracefulLoser he immediately and gracefully accepts it]]. Dude's a class act.