Movie Assignment/12 Angry Men Essay Example
The film “12 angry men” is a plot that involves jurors who are tasked by the court the responsibility of deciding the fate of an eighteen-year boy. The boy is charged with the murder, and the victim is his father. If he is found guilty, the boy will receive a death sentence hence it is a big decision that is on the shoulder of the juries. All the votes must be the same for a verdict to be passed and only jury eight who cast no guilty. A discussion is set so as to make others change or he is done to consider his position. After a discussion, he can alter the votes of five others they tie at 6-6.
Leadership is the role of being the one in charge of either a group of people or organization (Mcclerskey & Jim Allen pp. 117). The form contains twelve juries who shows different styles of leadership. Jury 8 is determined person despite the efforts of others trying to convince him to change he stood on his feet and defended the truth. One of the incidences is the murder weapon despite all of the believing that the weapon is a unique and in the neighborhood it cannot be found the jury conducted an own investigation. Approximately three blocks where the scene of the crime was committed he purchase a similar weapon at $6. Hence able to show that the weapon is not unique and easily found in the neighborhood. Therefore, he was able to convince some of the juries also to change their mind.
From the notes, leadership is an important process, and jury eight can modify the mind of some others. Influence is the process where the individual can change the mind of others so as to have a common goal. He has a view, and the rest sees it in a different way but with time able to influence the decision of the others. He is a leader since he can make others to follow the standard of not guilty and being considerate about the attribute of the boy case. A real leader pursues in what he or she believes in regardless of others views. Out of the twelve eleven believes that the boy is guilty and should be given capital punishment.
Another trait brought out is self- centered by jury seven who is only concerned about a ticket to a Yankee game and is due start (Maier et al. pp. 382-397). Therefore he is not worried about the verdict of the boy but only interested by the left there so as not to miss the game. The jury follows the majority decision due to the impatient of being there despite having an hour to decide the fate. The jury follows under the identification one traits, and he has shown the type of the quality that he possesses. The only thing that is of concern is himself, and therefore he is an evil leader. Sentencing the boy to death without considering the evidence presented that is tied the boy. After the rainstorm strikes the city and threatens to cancel the game that is when the jury decided to change his mind. The jury changes his mind and says that he now believes the boy is not guilty. Therefore he is an unstable person. The jury is an example of a leader who is who is not dependent and considers himself before others. Also, in the notes he can be classified as a person who is egocentric hence his traits makes him a weak leader.
Jury two is the most silent in the discussion and proof that he is the simple person and also not willing to take responsibilities. There is a scenario that he asks another jury “or what do you think.” Therefore he is one of the juried who does not seem to have the stand and asks whether the rest agrees with him. Also, he appears to suffer from lack of courage due to the voice is letting him down. If one was to classify him as a leader, he is one who seems to avoid the responsibilities and always do what the majority wants. He cannot thrive in power due to the weakness that he is having. He is a weak leader due to lack of the high principles that he is holding. According to the leadership philosophy, he can be classified as a person of theory X. the jury proof that he is an individual who likes to be controlled instead of being the one in charge. Another is the aspect of him avoiding the responsibilities of explaining the decision.
Another trait is being a simple person who is displayed by jury 8. He goes to the street where the scene took place despite the road being a slum and purchased a switchblade. The rest of the separate juries thought that the blade was unique and the boy has purchased one from the store. He went out of his way and wanted to prove a point. From the leadership concepts, he is a person of theory Y who likes responsibilities and committed to getting the truth. He played a vital role in showing to the others that the blades are easily found in the slums. Another was that he demonstrated commitment after hearing about the blade and achieved the goal. Therefore he is a person who is willing to take up leadership responsibilities and lead others.
Juror 9 displays a leadership trait of being a confident man. According to the notes, a confident person is one who does not second guess themselves. In the movie, after the secret ballot, he comes out as being the one who changed the vote after juror 3 accuses juror 5. He first observes and concludes that discussions need to be made then changes his vote and he is not afraid to reveal that he is the one who has changed because he is self-assured of what needs to be done. He also displays sociability trait. The trait is when juror 3 accuses juror 5 of changing his vote out of sympathy towards children in the slums. Juror 9 takes this opportunity to reveal that he is the one changed his mind. A social leader is one who is sensitive to others and cooperative. Juror 9 is sensitive towards Juror 5 feelings who is being accused of something he has not done hence he decides to reveal himself. He is cooperative in that for the discussion to go on; Juror 3 needs to stop accusing Juror 5, so he steps in showing that he is cooperative.
Juror 9 also displays the trait of being an intelligent leader. Wise leaders have excellent perpetual and reasoning ability. After he sees Juror 4 rub his nose after it has been irritated by the glasses he is wearing, Juror 9 realizes that the woman who supposedly witnessed the murder had impressions in the sides of her nose. From the impressions, he sums up that the woman wore glasses to like Juror 4. He also realizes that the woman did not wear the glasses in court out of vanity. His way of thinking gets confirmed by others who later on note that the woman may not have seen what she said she claimed to have seen. From his reasoning, Jurors 4, 10 and 12 get to change their minds from guilty to not guilty.
Juror 3 who comes out as a stubborn, tempered and opinionated fellow displays negative leadership attributes. (Harms et al. PP 495-509) For instance, he is egocentric. From the beginning of the meeting, he had already concluded that the boy is guilty without many considerations. Later on in the movie, he tears up a photo of him and his son revealing that his relationship and his son is strained. It shows that he was thinking of his son all along and the strained relationship they share that he wanted the boy to be guilty so badly. He even shouts out that the other Jurors are losing the chance to burn the kid after Jurors 8, 6 and 5 question a witness’s claim to have seen the boy running away 15 seconds after the father’s body hit the floor. He is also ruthless. This attribute is perceived when he unfairly accuses juror 5 of changing his vote on the basis that he was sympathetic to slum children. This attribute is also displayed by the way he wanted the boy to be guilty and receive a death sentence when in the real sense what was disturbing him was the strained relationship with his son.
The firm has a total of twelve jurors who have the task of deciding the fate of an eighteen-year-old boy charged with the allegation of stabbing his father to death. If the boy is found guilty, the only sentence will be compelled to death. The panel must all have the same decisions for the verdict to be passed. During the play, the jurors portray different styles of leadership. The main one is jury eight despite another feeling that the boy is guilty he shows some level of innocence in the boy and questioned the evidence given. It is through him that other starts to see the sense of that maybe the boy is innocent. He changes the decision of all the others until the final verdict given is not guilty. There are combined of traits of positive and negative traits the way that they conduct during the play. Some of the negative traits are the egocentric and negative attitude. On the other hand, the positive is responsible and straightforward good orator among others. Hence the firm is an excellent case study of the different type of traits between the leaders in the society today.
Harms, Peter D., Seth M. Spain, and Sean T. Hannah. «Leader development and the dark side of personality.» The Leadership Quarterly 22.3 (2011): 495-509.
Maier, Thomas, et al. «Millennial generation perceptions of value-centered leadership principles.» Journal of Human Resources in Hospitality & Tourism14.4 (2015): 382-397.
McCleskey, Jim Allen. «Situational, transformational, and transactional leadership and leadership development.» Journal of Business Studies Quarterly 5.4 (2014): 117.
More Important Things