
12 Angry Men Colorized is a timeless classic that has captured the hearts of movie-goers for decades. Now, thanks to the innovative technology of AlwanFilm, you can experience the film in a whole new way. Our team has meticulously colorized and restored the film using the most advanced techniques available, bringing it to life in natural and vibrant colors.
For the first time since its release in 1957, viewers can enjoy the film as it was meant to be seen – with the actors’ clothes, decorations, and faces in their true colors. AlwanFilm’s cutting-edge artificial intelligence technology has been used to enhance the quality of the film and preserve its legacy for generations to come.
Inaddition, you’re a die-hard fan of classic Hollywood films or a newcomer to the genre, 12 Angry Men Colorized is a must-see movie that has stood the test of time. Following, don’t miss your chance to experience it like never before with AlwanFilm’s colorized and restored version. Join us on our platform to watch the film and discover the magic of classic cinema in a new light.
Subscribe to our Youtube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/alwanfilm
12 Angry Men Colorized (1957)
Director
Sidney Lumet
Writer
Reginald Rose
Stars
Henry FondaLee J. CobbMartin Balsam
After the defense and the prosecution have rested, the jury is filing into the jury room to decide if a young man is guilty or innocent of murdering his father. However, what begins as an open-and-shut case of murder soon becomes a detective story that presents a succession of clues creating doubt. As the story unfolds, it becomes a mini-drama of each of the jurors’ prejudices and preconceptions about the trial, the accused, AND each other. Based on the play, all of the action takes place on the stage of the jury room.
Release date
April 10, 1957 (United States)
Country of origin
United States
Language
English
Filming locations
New York County Courthouse – 60 Centre Street, New York City, New York, USA(Exterior)
Production company
Orion-Nova Productions
This once-in-a-generation masterpiece simply has no equal. However, the late 90’s TV remake was quite adequate though totally unnecessary and in the upshot proved simply that updating a film for updating’s sake is really an exercise in futility. Even if it had been as good, so what?
There could be few, if ANY film-goers reading this who are unaware of the plotline, and in any event, many others have re-hashed this for you.
The brilliance of the film is evident in so many aspects. To begin with, the ability to not only sustain interest but to command the viewer’s attention for basically its entire running time within a setting of principally just one room, borders on the inspired. However, whether or not that would actually work with TODAY’S audiences is another discussion!
What we have here are twelve everyday Mr Joe Blows, summoned together on a jury panel to decide a defendant’s guilt or innocence with regards to a murder charge. If you were to gather unto yourselves ANY twelve jurors at random, you would most likely be able to pinpoint the Henry Fonda, Lee Cobb, E. G. Marshall, Jack Warden etc etc amongst them! Their very “ordinariness” is where the film succeeded. Everyone can identify with at least ONE of those characters. Whether or not he may WANT to is a different matter.
The thinker, the sensitive man, the arrogant bully, the opportunist, the mentally challenged loudmouth, the slimeball, the emotionally withdrawn, the sheep etc – they’re all here! Welcome to society folks! I dislike society in the main – doubtless a reason I found this film to be such a revelation..even when I was barely into my teens!
12 ANGRY MEN also pinpoints the shortcomings of the law, how “truth” can be so intrinsically left-field and unintentionally flawed. Lumet, working within a minimal budget here, delivers unstinting brilliance in both direction, character portrayal and script interpretation. He had of course superb acting talent at his disposal although some of the most memorable performances are from the lesser players.
Some have denounced Fonda’s role as being acceptable rather than awesome. I think however he was to a great degree playing himself here, not to an audience. His, is a study in deliberation and logic not show-pony stuff, but hell that never WAS Fonda was it?
This is a great great movie, as is evidenced by the extremely high user-vote worldwide. IF you haven’t seen it – you really should do something about that!
This film deserves to be on anyone’s list of top films. My problem is that it is so perfect, so seamlessly polished, it is hard to appreciate the individual excellences.
The acting is top notch. I believe that monologue acting is quite a bit simpler than real reactive ensemble acting. Most of what we see today is monologues pretending to be conversations.
FirstlBut in this film, we have utter mastery of throwing emotions. Once the air becomes filled with human essence, it is hard to not get soaked ourselves as the camera moves through the thick atmosphere. Yes, there are slight differences in how each actor projects (Fonda internally, Balsam completely on his skin…) but the ensemble presents one vision to the audience.
The writing is snappy too. You can tell it was worked and worked and worried, going through several generations. It is easy to be mesmerized by this writing and acting, and miss the rare accomplishment of the camera-work.
Additionally, this camera is so fluid, you forget you are in one room. It moves from being a human observer, to being omniscient, to being a target. It is smart enough to seldom center on the element of most importance, so expands the field to all men. This is very hard. Very hard, to make the camera human.
So much easier to do what we see today — acknowledge the machinery and jigger with it. Do we have a filmmaker today who could do this?