Angry men: drama assignment

Relying on their analytic abilities – this is ore clipped speed of cop-show patter on today’s W, his story’s construction is impeccable. This is thrilling drama. Tell +1 212 719 1300 More on Ft. Com/ arts: ‘ Oriole’, Vienna Folksier, and the Hong Kong Philharmonic Orchestra This article describes the use of selected vignettes from the updated version of the film 12 Angry Men in a facilitated discussion to teach the principles of dialogue.

Dialogue is a process for transforming traditional conversation bactericides by defensive routines, agendas, and ineffective listening practices]into a communication strategy that can help individuals and organizations. The exercise may be tailored for use with undergraduate and graduate students, as well as practicing managers and executives, to illustrate barriers to effective communication and decision making and to identify strategies to overcome those barriers. Journal of Management Education, Volvo. 29, NO. , 792-815 (2005) DOI 10. 1177/1052562905277183 0 2005 The Organizational Behavior Teaching Society Using Motion Pictures to Teach Management: Refocusing the Camera Lens Through the Infusion Approach to Diversity Imminent A. Bumps Howard University Motion pictures and television shows can provide mediums to facilitate the earning of management and organizational behavior theories and concepts. Although the motion pictures and television shows cited in the literature cover a broad range of cinematic categories, racial inclusion is limited.

Enlarge 200% Enlarge 400% Table 2 The Thesis of 1 2 Angry Men The evidence to support this thesis is compelling. The physical setting is significant. The jurors are sequestered in a small, hot, locked, and guarded room. Later, a storm rages outside, encouraging joint action to adjust ventilation. They are uncomfortable and irritable. There is no escape, until a verdict is reached. The time frame is significant. Some jurors just want to eave; others want to discuss the issues. The more prolonged the discussion, the more frustrated some jurors become, making them more susceptible to influence attempts.

The decision-making process is significant. This takes the form of a secret ballot, followed by discussion punctuated by further ballots. Sometimes, this discussion involves the whole group, sometimes a subset. The group dynamics are significant. Some group members are antagonistic toward others, rejecting their views out of hand, whereas others are prepared to establish friendships and listen to the opinions of others. The atmosphere of debate is significant. This is sometimes cool and rational, on occasion highly emotional, verging on violence, sometimes evidence based, sometimes based more on perception and prejudice.

Although we know that this is fiction, it is tempting to conclude that this film offers a more realistic portrayal of the process of interpersonal influence in organizational settings than many textbook accounts. Twelve Angry Men is a very interesting play about an unfortunate young man, who was convicted of killing his dad. The worst part was, the young man was only nineteen, and his life was just starting. The jurors listened to all the evidence, then came the hard part, making the decision: guilty, or innocent. Eleven jurors said guilty and only one said innocent. There was a lot of peer pressure involved. I decided to write about different peer pressures three of the jurors used. The three jurors I picked are juror #10, juror #7, and juror #8.

The first juror I want to write about is #10. Juror #10 was using a lot of sarcasm, whenever he was trying to prove his point, or prove someone else wrong. Think that this method of peer pressure is one of the most powerful ones. I believes so, because when you are embarrassed in front of 11 other people (in this case jurors) you do not know, really lowers your self-esteem. It may lower it to the point where you will say guilty, eve though dive.. Altos very art to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth. ‘ Juror 8, page 53] Perhaps this best sums up the basis of twelve Angry Men’ by Reginald Rose.

A jury of twelve men are locked in the deliberation room to decide the fate of the young boy. All evidence is against the boy and a guilty verdict would send him to die in the electric chair. The judge informs the jurors that they are faced with a grave decision and that the court would not entertain any acts of mercy for the boy if found guilty. Even before the deliberation talks begin it is apparent most of the men are certain the boy is guilty. However, when the initial poll is taken Juror #8 (Henry Fond) registers a shocking not guilty vote. Immediately the room is in uproar. The rest of the jury resents the inconvenient of his decision.

After questioning his sanity they hastily decide to humor the juror #8 (Henry Fond) by agreeing to discuss the trial for one hour. Eventually, as the talks proceed juror… 12 Angry Men Essay Juror#3 In a crowded jury room in downtown New York, opinions collide as discussion about the innocence of a young boy is decided. The dark and foreboding storm clouds that hang over the heads of the jurors are beginning to lift as time progresses and new facts are presented. One juror is not happy about this stay of execution and is holding fast his opinion of guilty. Juror three, the president of his business, refuses to alter his vote or opinion in any way.