--- title: "12 Angry Men" year: 1957 kind: "film" canonical: "https://film.one/film/12-angry-men" fi1m_id: "12-angry-men" imdb_id: "tt0050083" tmdb_id: 389 wikidata_id: "Q2345" fi1m_score: 91 critics_score: 85 critics_reviews: 14 published: "2026-09-12" updated: "2026-09-18T08:37:57.431055+00:00" region: "US" licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # 12 Angry Men (1957) Directed by Sidney Lumet · 1h 37m · MPA NR · Drama ## Identity 12 Angry Men - **Canonical:** https://film.one/film/12-angry-men - **Type:** Film - **Fi1m ID:** 12-angry-men - **IMDb ID:** tt0050083 - **TMDB ID:** 389 - **Wikidata ID:** Q2345 - **Same entity:** https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/, https://www.themoviedb.org/movie/389, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2345 **Fi1m score: 91** · Critics 85 from 14 reviews *In a sentence:* For once, we’re grateful to the man who won’t let the meeting finish > Sidney Lumet makes a jury’s deliberations gripping enough to recommend to almost anyone. The writing sometimes arranges its disagreements too neatly, but Henry Fonda and the ensemble make the responsibility of listening feel urgent. ## Synopsis Twelve jurors gather in a jury room to decide a murder case. An opening vote produces eleven votes for guilty, but Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) will not join them without further discussion. As he asks the others to reconsider what they have heard, the men must address reasonable doubt as well as their own motives and prejudices. Lee J. Cobb, E.G. Marshall and Ed Begley are among the jurors facing the same decision from different positions. Sidney Lumet directs from Reginald Rose’s screenplay, with the deliberations taking place almost entirely within one room. ## Review We would recommend *12 Angry Men* even to anyone who usually avoids legal dramas. Sidney Lumet understands how much tension can come from asking people to explain an opinion they thought would go unchallenged. Eleven jurors vote guilty in a murder case; Henry Fonda’s Juror 8 asks them to think again. Reginald Rose’s screenplay makes reasonable doubt something these men have to practise under pressure, rather than merely approve of in principle. We were unsettled by how easily those eleven guilty votes could have ended the discussion. It is the casual readiness to finish that does it: Fonda’s insistence on talking makes the others’ certainty look suddenly careless. His performance gives each question enough weight to hold our attention without making patience seem effortless. Lumet trusts him to sustain interest through the difficult business of getting other people to listen. Lee J. Cobb gives the argument a force that makes Fonda’s patience look like hard work. E.G. Marshall is just as valuable for the impression of certainty he brings to the discussion. Ed Begley makes the film’s treatment of prejudice uncomfortable to watch, even within a cast this forceful. Lumet allows the differences between the actors to matter, so that a roomful of jurors never becomes a row of interchangeable speakers. We can follow the changing balance without needing everybody to announce what they represent. Boris Kaufman’s cinematography makes the jury’s surroundings feel oppressively hot without making the geography difficult to follow. Lumet’s long takes allow us to watch several men sharing the space; the close-ups then make individual reactions harder to overlook. The camera keeps finding useful new ways to frame the men together, and the variety never looks like a director trying to distract us from the confined setting. For a film built around talk, it gives us plenty to watch. Carl Lerner’s editing gives the exchanges a pace that lets us follow the reasoning without losing the strain of listening. That clarity matters, because we need to understand what is being disputed even when the men become angry. Kenyon Hopkins’s music is modest beside the voices. That balance suits a film so concerned with the damage people can do by speaking carelessly. At 97 minutes, it allows plenty of room for discussion without letting the pace slacken for long. Rose does arrange some of the disagreements too helpfully. Motives occasionally return after we have understood them, and Fonda is sometimes so plainly the voice of good sense that the others seem assembled to provide errors for him to correct. The film belongs to a hopeful strain of legal drama, in which patient scrutiny can overcome an easy answer. We accept that hope here, though a little more difficulty in distinguishing the reasonable man from the unreasonable one would have helped. The actors make these arranged disagreements easier to accept. No legal knowledge is needed to recognise the impatience, pride and reluctance to admit an error. Anyone who has endured a meeting will recognise some of the obstacles to getting a fair hearing. Watch it without interruptions; the small changes in attention are worth catching. *Fi1m score 91, published 12 September 2026.* ## What the critics say The reviews lean strongly positive, and the praise gathers around what Sidney Lumet does with a single room. Critics return to the staging, the close-ups and long takes that stop twelve men in one set from going static, and to the economy with which the script sketches jurors who mostly go unnamed. Henry Fonda’s quiet holdout and Lee J. Cobb’s belligerent opposite are the performances most often singled out, with the wider ensemble close behind. The reservations concern the material more than its handling. Time Out finds the story contrived, and the Los Angeles Times treats the film as a relic, its all-white, all-male jury and tidy view of justice belonging to another age. The Telegraph goes furthest, arguing it leans too readily on liberal guilt and reduces its jurors to types, though it still admires the acting and construction. Variety notes some repetition in motives. The spread is narrow: one mixed verdict against thirteen approving ones. ## Straight answers **Is 12 Angry Men worth watching?** *12 Angry Men* is worth watching for almost anyone, including those who usually avoid legal dramas, and we scored it 91. Sidney Lumet makes twelve jurors arguing in one room gripping for 97 minutes, with Henry Fonda and Lee J. Cobb leading a forceful cast. The screenplay sometimes arranges its disagreements too neatly, but the actors make that easy to forgive. **How long is 12 Angry Men, and what is it rated?** *12 Angry Men* runs 1h 37m and is rated NR by the MPA in the US. It is a drama film. **Where can I watch 12 Angry Men in the US?** *12 Angry Men* is streaming on Hulu, Tubi, Amazon Prime Video, The Roku Channel and Disney+ in the US, and it is also available to rent from Amazon Prime Video from $3.99. It leaves Hulu on 1 October. Availability is checked daily; the links above go straight to each service. **How does 12 Angry Men compare to The Ox-Bow Incident?** *12 Angry Men* is the more patient and better made of the two, while [*The Ox-Bow Incident*](https://film.one/film/the-ox-bow-incident) is shorter, darker and more frightening. Both show men mistaking agreement for justice, and Henry Fonda is in each, but Lumet's jurors are given time to talk their way toward doubt, where Wellman's mob is not. Choose the jury room for hope and the western for dread. **What should I watch after 12 Angry Men?** After *12 Angry Men*, try [*The Ox-Bow Incident*](https://film.one/film/the-ox-bow-incident) (1943, Fi1m 84): Another gathering of men confuses agreement with justice, with considerably less patience. Then [*Le Trou*](https://film.one/film/le-trou) (1960, Fi1m 88): Confined spaces and painstaking physical detail make trust a matter of survival; and [*A Separation*](https://film.one/film/a-separation) (2011, Fi1m 93): A family dispute makes every confident judgement harder to sustain. ### Reviews we read (14) - **Radio Times**, Tony Sloman (5/5): The critic calls it a marvellous movie and instant classic that has become part of life's currency, praising Fonda's integrity and Lumet's masterly direction for finding infinite visual variety within a single claustrophobic jury room set. Few films can genuinely be called brilliant, but this is certainly one of them. [Read](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-2802vj/12-angry-men/) - **The Times**, Kate Muir (★★★★★): There is no more perfect chamber piece than this tense, smart and devastatingly revealing courtroom drama. The genius lies in establishing the mostly unnamed characters one by one with economical use of words and reactions. [Read](https://www.thetimes.com/world/us-world/article/12-angry-men-1957-sthbfdqzk) - **Empire**, William Thomas (90/100, inferred): Sidney Lumet's debut is a masterclass in acting and direction, with Henry Fonda gradually swaying the other jurors through reasonable doubt. It stands out for its powerful dialogue, finely etched characters and beautifully worked plot despite the one-room setting. [Read](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/twelve-angry-men-review/) - **RogerEbert.com**, Roger Ebert (90/100, inferred): The film is a masterful examination of reasonable doubt and the jury system, unfolding almost entirely in one claustrophobic room as twelve men debate a murder case. Ebert praises Lumet's direction, the ensemble cast, and the way tension builds through dialogue, personality clashes, and visual choices that heighten claustrophobia. [Read](https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-12-angry-men-1957) - **Slant Magazine**, Glenn Heath Jr. (90/100, inferred): The review celebrates Lumet’s debut as a dynamic, thematically rich courtroom drama that turns a confined jury room into a compelling arena for exploring prejudice and justice. It singles out the director’s fluid long takes and close-ups for revealing character motivations and shifting group dynamics. [Read](https://www.slantmagazine.com/dvd/12-angry-men-bd/) - **The AV Club**, Noel Murray (A-): The critic praises Lumet's dynamic staging and emphasis on faces and confined space in this single-room jury drama. It notes how the script and performances reveal how jurors' personal biases shape their view of the evidence, without the film declaring a definitive truth. [Read](https://www.avclub.com/12-angry-men-1798203985) - **The Hollywood Reporter**, Kirk Honeycutt (90/100, inferred): The critic describes it as a truly great film, Lumet's first, about 12 male jurors battling in a claustrophobic jury room, with standout performances especially from Henry Fonda and Lee J. Cobb. [Read](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/lumet-his-filmography-177508/) - **Time Out**, GA (80/100, inferred): The critic notes the film's contrived story but praises the tense, lucid, and economical treatment, along with strong performances, especially from Fonda, Cobb, Marshall and Begley. The consistently taut, sweltering atmosphere created by the camerawork transforms it into a strangely realistic thriller. [Read](https://www.timeout.com/movies/12-angry-men) - **Los Angeles Times**, Dennis Lim (75/100, inferred): The critic views the film as a relic due to its idealized justice system and all-white male jury but praises it as one of Hollywood's more entertaining civics lessons and a lucid demonstration of the deliberative process. He singles out Lumet's economical direction that exploits the pressure-cooker atmosphere of the jury room. [Read](https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-mar-02-ca-secondlook2-story.html) - **The New Yorker**, John McCarten (75/100, inferred): The film turns a jury deliberation into an engaging drama that reveals the characters' motivations and prejudices as they shift from near-unanimous conviction toward doubt. McCarten notes Lumet's skillful handling of the confined space and commends the strong performances, especially by Fonda, Cobb, and others. [Read](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1957/04/27/surcharged-veniremen) - **Variety**, Variety Staff (70/100, inferred): The story emphasizes the responsibility of jurors and the concept of reasonable doubt as eleven men quickly vote guilty and one holdout forces reconsideration. The review highlights Lumet's effective direction in the single-room setting and states that the film leaves a tremendous impact despite some repetition in motivations. [Read](https://variety.com/1956/film/reviews/12-angry-men-review-1200418382/) - **The Telegraph**, Simon Heffer (60/100, inferred): The film is recognised as a masterpiece and a distinguished start to Lumet's career, stunningly well acted and cleverly constructed. It relies too easily on the liberal idea of white, middle-class, patriarchal guilt, with characters reduced to caricatures. [Read](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/0/12-angry-men-really-classic-film-just-bunch-lazy-caricatures/) - **Eye for Film**, Amber Wilkinson (90/100, inferred): The review highlights the film's status as a jury room classic with strong performances and themes of prejudice. It praises the Criterion Blu-ray's restoration and extras, including the original teleplay, for enhancing appreciation of Lumet's debut. [Read](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/dvdreview/12-angry-men-blu-ray-review-by-amber-wilkinson) - **The Playlist** (90/100, inferred): The piece calls Lumet's debut a gripping, brilliant human drama that sets out his recurring themes of guilt, innocence, prejudice and the justice system. It praises the masterful performances, taut screenwriting and positive, earned conclusions about ideals and decency. [Read](https://theplaylist.net/essentials-films-of-sidney-lumet-a-retrospective-20120409/) ## Details - **Director:** Sidney Lumet - **Director:** Sidney Lumet - **Screenplay:** Reginald Rose - **Story:** Reginald Rose - **Cinematography:** Boris Kaufman - **Editor:** Carl Lerner - **Music:** Kenyon Hopkins - **Producer:** Henry Fonda, Reginald Rose - **Cast:** Martin Balsam as Juror 1; John Fiedler as Juror 2; Lee J. Cobb as Juror 3; E.G. Marshall as Juror 4; Jack Klugman as Juror 5; Edward Binns as Juror 6; Jack Warden as Juror 7; Henry Fonda as Juror 8 - **Runtime:** 1h 37m - **Certificate (MPA):** NR - **Release (the US):** 10 April 1957 - **Genres:** Drama - **Also in:** [Best Picture winners](https://film.one/collections/oscar-best-picture.md) (Nominee, 1957); [BAFTA Best Film winners](https://film.one/collections/bafta-best-film.md) (Nominee, 1957); [Golden Globe Best Drama winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-globe-drama.md) (Nominee, 1957); [Golden Bear winners](https://film.one/collections/golden-bear.md) (Winner, 1957); [The classics, without the homework](https://film.one/collections/classics-without-the-homework.md) - **Budget:** $397,751 - **Box office:** $4 million - **Trailer:** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TEN-2uTi2c0 ## Where to watch in the US - Hulu: streaming, hd, leaving 2026-10-01 - Tubi: free, hd, leaving 2026-10-01 - Amazon Prime Video: add-on - The Roku Channel: add-on, hd - Disney+: add-on, hd - Amazon Prime Video: rent $3.99, hd - Amazon Prime Video: buy $7.99, hd *Checked 2026-09-12.* Also available in: AR, AT, AU, CA, CO, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GB, HR, HU, IT, JP, MX, NL, NO, NZ, PT, RO, RS, US. Add `?region=XX` to this URL for another country. ## Awards - Academy Awards 1958: Best Director (nominated); Best Picture (nominated); Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay (nominated) - BAFTA Film Awards 1958: Best Film (nominated); Best Foreign Actor (won) - Grand Prix 1958: Grand Prix (won) - Berlin International Film Festival 1957: Golden Bear (won) - Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directing – Feature Film 1957: Directors Guild of America Award for Outstanding Directing – Feature Film (nominated) - Golden Globes 1957: Best Actor – Motion Picture Drama (nominated); Best Director (nominated); Best Motion Picture – Drama (nominated); Best Supporting Actor – Motion Picture (nominated) ## If you liked this - *The Ox-Bow Incident* (1943), Fi1m 84: Another gathering of men confuses agreement with justice, with considerably less patience. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-ox-bow-incident.md) - *Le Trou* (1960), Fi1m 88: Confined spaces and painstaking physical detail make trust a matter of survival. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/le-trou.md) - *A Separation* (2011), Fi1m 93: A family dispute makes every confident judgement harder to sustain. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/a-separation.md) - *The Verdict* (1982), Fi1m 84: Another bruising examination of justice, with decency struggling against expedience and exhaustion. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/the-verdict.md) - *Women Talking* (2022), Fi1m 76: People gather to argue through a decision that will govern their lives. — [Fi1m page](https://film.one/film/women-talking.md) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Canonical: https://film.one/film/12-angry-men