-
Day 9 Assignment
Reply to post your work.
-
9 Replies
-
What I learned doing this assignment is that in creating an exceptionally powerful movie every word and tone of voice is crucial. Even though it’s set in a single room with the adjacent bathroom being the only place to go to avoid any fellow jurors you dislike for their approach and attitudes, every movement, standing/pacing/ leaning over a shoulder/ sitting down has been orchestrated to carry the powerful narrative in this tiny bleak environment.
The different personalities are quickly shown and are a fascinating cross index of reality, barring the problem of it being an all white male, middle class jury. We discover initially that 11 are ready to convict without discussion. The challenge is in one of the twelve disagreeing.
The testimony of the old man downstairs, initially accepted verbatim, is challenged with an actual demonstration of space/time, pacing it out, with the reminder that the old man had to be helped into a witness chair.
The woman across the street who supposedly sees the murder is challenged by the revelation she wouldn’t be wearing her glasses in bed so would have hazy vision.
The juror claiming the boy’s guilt because the boy couldn’t remember details about the movie he said he was at, is challenged by another juror to give his personal recollection of his own recent TV viewing and was shown to have incomplete recall.
The juror with baseball game tickets wanting to set a time limit, and not wanting discussion is challenged as to a baseball game being worth more than someone’s life.
‘A man may die because of us’ (challenge is not to take this lightly) provokes the response ‘Whose fault is that?’ – returning to the original old ways that the boy must be unquestionably guilty.
One juror, not having decided the boy’s guilt or not, argues the concept of ‘reasonable doubt’ as the major challenge the judge had reminded them of when summing up.
Historical prejudice abounds – the juror stating the boy’s environment is a ‘breeding ground for criminals….’ is challenged by another juror saying ‘I’ve lived in a slum all my life.’ The response by the first juror in the old ways ‘Nothing personal here’, is challenged by the second juror. ‘There IS something personal.’
Old ways prejudice continues with ‘He don’t know how to speak English,’ as a point towards the boy’s guilt. This is challenged by another juror who corrects the first juror’s own grammar. There’s continued prejudice by referring to the accused’s family as ‘these people’ …that everybody knows how these people lie, are violent, indifferent to killings, have no feelings…
The challenge to this is positive (but equally prejudiced.) ‘Only an ignorant man could believe that.’
A juror telling another that if he opened his mouth again he’d ‘split his skull’ is challenging the beliefs the first juror had, ironically by an equally inappropriate response ( remembering they called the accused’s culture violent), so the second juror, in trying to point out that prejudice obscures truth seeking, is at the same time himself demonstrating a similarly prejudiced belief -that violence can be used to settle an argument.
The old ways are superficial and flippant. (‘I don’t know -when you look at it, what more can I say?’) and prove hard to change. (‘Not here to go into why…’)
When a secret ballot shows a second ‘not guilty’ an incorrect assumption is made as to who changed their vote. The juror who changed did it because ‘he (the lone wolf) gambled for support and I gave it to him.’ This provides the challenge for further discussion with it’s ultimate ending of a ‘not guilty’ verdict.
The boy being supposedly heard to say ‘I’ll kill you’ as a reason for his guilt is challenged by the words ‘You don’t mean that do you?’ when a juror himself yells ‘I’ll kill you.’ There’s recognition that this is an expression often used with nuances in different settings and isn’t usually literal.
The boy claims the knife dropped through a hole in his pocket: Old ways state ‘We know what happened,’ that ‘he knife is the only one of its kind.’ This is challenged when an identical knife is produced and the jurors have to acknowledge the murder weapon is not unique and ‘it’s possible the boy lost his knife.’
‘If the kid didn’t kill him, who did?’ later provides a challenge for an assumption that the role of the jurors is to come up with an alternative attacker if they acquit the boy, that somehow acquittal doesn’t stand alone. There’s a discussion of ‘Too many questions left unasked’ and to the direct question ‘Do you think he’s guilty?’ we have the challenge of the response ‘I don’t know whether he’s guilty or not – let’s talk, supposing we’re wrong; no man can declare a man guilty unless he’s sure.’
The initial assumption that the witnesses were accurate has the old man’s testimony challenged where a train going past meant he couldn’t have heard everything he claimed, and to thinking about the reasons why the old man might have believed his own testimony- (recognition).
The competency of the Defense Attorney is challenged. As a young publicly appointed defense lawyer he’s not the best or most experienced and there’s the suggestion that some Defense lawyers don’t ask questions because they believe they already know the answer. The challenging comment ‘Or they’re just plain stupid’ relates in this case to the Defense relying only on challenging the two witnesses for the prosecution and nothing else. He failed to challenge motive or to ask why the boy would have come back home after killing his father, or whether the witnesses were lying or mistaken. The challenge to the jurors is to recognize these gaps as a failure of defense. ’There are 12 of us in this room concentrating on this…’
‘He can’t hear you -he never will,’ challenges one juror to give up on asking a closed mind to consider anything new. In the end the closed mind does yield.
-
Jeff, What I learned from assisgnment 9, I never seen this movie before and loved it. Watched it twice and may watch again. On the surface its a simple movie filmed in two rooms and they must come to an agreement. I was a lone holdout in a jury once and learned a lot about human behavior that week. In the movie almost all the men were in a big hurry for some reason. Ball game, horrible heat, and didn’t like each other very much. At first they were looking at everything from a surface level, cut and dried guilty and had more important things to do……old way and new way usually came from Henry Fonda. Wasn’t he great? He looked deeper and said “I don’t know” an awful lot”. I was thinking right along with him. One at a time they gave us their old way of thinking and sometimes talked so much they proved their self’s wrong. They were all so determined about being right and how foolish it would be to think otherwise. One by one their old way at looking at the case was challenged and doubt arose. Some of the old ways, Racism, I’ve seen it a million times , No way to have another knife like that one. It gets to a point where ego’s are on the line and cruel statements are flying and at one point they about come to blows. I liked when the one juror said you need to respect your elders and he was ready to take him out. In my case that I was on I was very calm like Fonda. I had about six things I brought up right away. I was nervous at first but in the end we were a hung jury six to six. Turns out the man had been tried before and it was a hung jury.
Assignment 2
Old way new way with my story
I’ve learned a great deal from this assignment and will easily be able to add more depth to my story with this tool
Old way – I’m suppose to relax in retirement
New way – let’s put all that knowledge to good use
Old- there’s nothing I can do
New- there’s a whole world of things to do
Old- it’s never gonna change
New- everything changes
Old- they deserve the trouble there in
New – maybe not and even if it’s true it doesn’t matter you can help
Old-look at this guy- pathetic excuse for a human being
New- leave the judging to God you can help this person
I’m excited about adding these to my story and right from the beginning can add some very easily
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by Jeff Reynolds.
-
This reply was modified 3 years, 5 months ago by
-
Amanda’s Old Ways Challenge Chart
What I learned doing this assignment is thinking about the “old ways” brings depth in the story.
List of Old Ways for your story & ideas you have for ways to challenge each of the Old Ways
Good girls get married and soon after, have a family of their own
· Allison realizes she’s doing as she’s expected and she’s not sure if that’s what she wants.
Good girls listen to their parents and their husband
· Even though Allison is accomplished lawyer she doesn’t really have a voice in her own life and is living a life that’s expected of her
Good girls know how to behave and don’t party excessively
· Allison gets waisted and does drugs during her bachelorette party
Good girls don’t lose stuff, especially their engagement rings
· If you can’t take care of your possessions, you can’t take care of yourself. Losing the ring symbolizes the “can’t take care of yourself” part of the story (which turns out to be false in the end)
-
Sorry -did in two parts.
Ros’ flatmate. Margie. Fiancé killed in work accident. Small town. 1955. Challenge is to resume a social life within an environment that judges her as having forgotten her fiancé too soon.
Ros. 1956. Challenges -to get through the ordeal of a non consensual pregnancy. To remain anonymous. To challenge the system that has no way to allow her to keep her child. To keep the birth and adoption from her parents. To keep silent when she marries in yet another city. Challenge to live with childlessness in a society that expects couples to reproduce. To rebuild her life and stay with her career when her husband is told about her baby and ends their marriage -nastily. Ros loves all children without resentment. Challenge -to be prepared to acknowledge Matthew when he re-enters her life as a nearly thirty year old.
Doctor delivering baby. Prejudicial attitude and judgmental comments. Challenge for Ros not to carry these remarks with her.
Ellie, Ros’s friend since moving after the birth and throughout her married years and after. Challenge -when she is told by Ros that the marriage is over, and is told about the baby, to support Ros. She does this unconditionally.
Matthew -Ros’s son. Challenges -To accept he will never please his adoptive parents. To understand why. To do all he can to keep the peace. To work towards leaving home and living independently. 1976. To face his girlfriend’s parents when Louise becomes pregnant after a one night ‘mistake.’ To keep trying to reconcile throughout the following decade with his adoptive parents. Challenge -to work out how to find Ros, then how best to contact her.
Adoptive parents – Challenged to accept Matt being different in so many ways from their natural born sons, culminating in the parents being unable to accept the humiliation of Matt’s girlfriend’s pregnancy. Challenge of waiting for the oldest boy to find the ‘right’ girl, while the son’s challenge is to hide the fact that he’s gay in the environment of the day.
Louise’s parents -Challenge to make a positive outcome for their schoolgirl daughter’s pregnancy. Challenge to ignore the social climate and to focus on being the family support.
Dave -Ros’s ex husband. Challenge to find that his parents lost their first born, his elder sister, (1930) to adoption. Challenge to accept the ‘unmarried mother’ treatment he foisted on Ros. Challenge that his biggest fear was his ‘saintly’ mother finding out about Ros’s baby, forbidding Ros to contact his mother again, giving his mother another version of why the marriage had ended, and challenged to work out how to undo the wrongs.
-
Day Nine Old Ways Challenge Chart
Valerie’s 12 Angry Men Analysis
What I learned doing this assignment is that it’s very important to do a good job of developing each character’s personality, so that in tense situations like this the dialogue will be stronger and heartfelt.
Old Ways/ Challenge
“Born liars “Only an ignorant man would believe that.”
Assuming he did it. “You don’t believe the boy’s story. You believe the woman’s story. She’s one of them isn’t she? And I can’t see?
“It’s a motive.” “Two slaps on the face provoking him into commiting murder?”
Assuming the case was handled properly. “If it were me, I’d want my lawyer to tear the prosecutor to shreds.”
“It was the only knife like it.” He pulls out the same type of knife.
Man said he heard the boy. “It’s not that easy to recognize a voice.” The L train is too loud to hear accurately. Testimony putting the boy in the electric chair-needs to be accurate.
A prejudice rant “Prejudice obscures the truth.”
Valerie’s old ways challenge chart
Habits-Esme oscillating between cruel and kind behaviors towards Mary Belinda-The two women have a heart to heart or have a huge fight to work towards resolving underlying tensions
Social values-family must be perfect-without revealing dark family secrets, allow family members either in separate groups or all together to discuss or argue about secrets to help with reducing the need and the feeling that they must be perfect and/or put on a perfect front as a family.
Filters of perception- Mary Belinda believes that parents, and or Al and Esme killed her sister. Have her confront them.
Rules-not allowing Mary Belinda to leave the property-father takes her off the property and explains what is happening.
Filters of perceptions-Momma plays the piano all the time rather than dealing with her feelings- have her keep a journal in which she expresses her feelings
-
Lori’s 12 Angry Men Analysis
What I learned from this assignment is to look at old ways that are true for my characters, then see how those old ways can be challenged in a hopefully profound and entertaining way.
Old Ways – Challenge:
Assumption of quilt – Are all kids from the slums capable of murdering a parent?
Just want this over – Shouldn’t we at least discuss the evidence?
Not caring – A child’s life is on the line. If you were him, wouldn’t you want a little more consideration?
Prejudice – Kids these days, they’re all the same. “Prejudice obscures the truth.”
Not looking beneath the surface – On the surface, the kid seems guilty, but what if we look deeper?
Assuming the evidence is not questionable – When the evidence is brought into question, the “rare” switchblade is found to be common, and anyone can buy it in a shop near the murder scene.
Assuming the witnesses were accurate – Let’s test their stories against the reality of time and other circumstances. Would the eyewitness that was trying to sleep be wearing her glasses in bed?
Assuming the Defense Attorney did his job – Would he do his best if he had to take this case? What if the attorney thought the kid was guilty?
Assuming the case is completely logical – Let’s take the old man’s story and see if it plays out logically.
Assignment 2:
Lori’s Old Ways/Challenges:
Thomas can’t celebrate Christmas without his wife. – Christmas will happen regardless, and as a Pastor, how can he avoid it?
Thomas hides his feelings from those closest to him. – Would opening up help him heal?
Thomas can make Christmas perfect for someone else. – The family doesn’t want his help and gets mad at Thomas when he crosses boundaries.
Thomas is the man that everyone else leans on. – What if Thomas allows others to help him? What if he gives the problem over to God?
-
Dale’s 12 Angry Men Analysis
(Assignment 1)
What I learned doing this assignment is how logical and systematic the challenges to the old ways were, bringing the characters around in stepwise and believable ways.
OLD WAY:
Pretty much all of the jurors except for Juror 8 (Henry Fonda) believe that the defendant is guilty.
CHALLENGE:
They all raise their hand when asked who believes in a guilty verdict, expect Juror 8 who says Not Guilty. This is the first challenge.
OLD WAY:
Juror 10 is prejudiced against the group (Latino?) that the defendant belongs to.
CHALLENGE:
He is challenged by Juror 5 who says he was brought up in the “slums” himself.
OLD WAY:
Juror 11 says just because he voted quickly doesn’t mean he’s not certain of his verdict.
CHALLENGE:
Juror 8 says that supposing he’s wrong? Shouldn’t they at least give it an hour of discussion?
OLD WAY:
Juror 10 claims he got a fair trial (assumption). Then he shows his prejudice: “I’ve lived among them all my life, you can’t believe a word they say.”
CHALLENGE:
Juror 9 challenges him with: “Only an ignorant man can believe that.”
Later Juror 8 asks why he doesn’t believe the boy, but does believe the woman who is also “one of them.”
OLD WAY:
Juror 3 lays out the “facts” of the trial. Juror 4 and 10 add more “facts” – ex. Testimonies of old man downstairs and woman across the street. And no one saw him go to movie theater. Juror 6 says the motive was the fight.
CHALLENGE:
These will eventually be debunked one by one by juror 8. 1) the knife is not so unique 2) the noise of the train would have make it impossible for the old man to actually hear what the voices said. 3) A fight was not enough of a motive since the boy was used to being struck by his father.
OLD WAY:
Jurors start to talk about “kids these days” – the whole father needing to “make a man out of you” ethos. Juror 4 says slums are “breeding grounds” for criminals
CHALLENGE:
Juror 5 says he’s lived in a slum all his life (implying he turned out okay).
OLD WAYS:
Juror 3 (Lee J Cobb) says there’s no reason for the old man to lie.
CHALLENGE:
Juror 9 noticed the old man looked ragged, and walked slowly, dragging his left leg. He’s never had recognition. He wants to be listened to, quoted.
Another challenge, this by Juror 7 – Did the old man say he “ran” to the door? He had a stroke, how fast could he move? Fonda now marks out how many steps and times it. The 15 seconds the old man said couldn’t have been. It took Fonda 41 seconds. He says the old man heard the argument, heard someone running down the stairs and assumed it was the boy.
OLD WAY:
A juror says that the boy yelled “I’m going to kill you!” And Juror 3 insists all this nick picking is useless.
CHALLENGE:
Juror 8 points out that people say that, but don’t mean it. And then he confronts Juror 3 by saying he wants to see the defendant die “…not because of the facts. You’re a sadist.”
Juror 11 talks about democracy and the ideal of a jury (in other words, this is a noble job.)
OLD WAY:
Juror 4 insists that the boy should remember the name of the movies he saw and their stars.
CHALLENGE:
Juror 8 challenges him by asking him to remember details about a movie he saw several days ago.
OLD WAY:
Juror 2 questions re the knife and the angle used. Juror 3 “tests” the difference in height. It still seems to make sense.
CHALLENGE:
Until Juror 5 challenges him with his knowledge of living in slums and the use of switchblades in an underhanded not overhanded way.
OLD WAY:
Juror 10’s full prejudice comes out about “those people” as violent, drunk, etc.
CHALLENGE:
There is a physical challenge in that one by one many of the men get up and turn their backs on him. And Juror 8 talks about how personal prejudice obscures the truth.
OLD WAY:
Then Juror 4 talks about the eye witness to the murder, the woman across the street
CHALLENGE:
But one of the jurors brings up the fact that she had marks on either side of her nose that indicated she wore glasses and she was more than likely not wearing those glasses in bed, when she looked through the window.
OLD WAY:
Juror 3 is the last holdout. Why? He says it’s clear the boy is guilty.
CHALLENGE:
When he realizes, tearing up the picture of his estranged son, that it is his own anger at his son that is motivating him, he finally relents and says, “Not guilty.”
Dale’s Old Ways Challenge Chart
(Assignment 2)
What I learned doing this assignment was, although difficult, it took me in some new interesting directions.
Old Ways and Challenges:
Old Ways: Antonia’s old ways include: 1)Belief that she will have equal opportunities in the world – in other words – naïve to the ways of the world for women 2) Pride in her intelligence and honors in three areas of study 2) Reserved and shy 3)Intimidated by Pickering 4) Intimidated by her aunt 5) Despite her initial confidence in her skills, one working under Pickering, she grows unsure of herself and even depressed. 6) Has no confidence when it comes to her looks and style (this is continually re-enforced by her aunt) 7) Belief that her work will stand on its own.
OLD WAY: Antonia believes that her education will provide her equal opportunities in the world of science. (OW: Naivete)
CHALLENGE: Her classmates at Vassar try to disabuse her of this belief – emphasizing that it is no where near out there in the “real world.”
OLD WAY: When she arrives at HCO, she believes she will have the opportunity to work in the observatory – as she has observatory experience. (Again: OW: Naivete)
CHALLENGE: But either Pickering or Mina Fleming let her know that women are not allowed in the observatory for two reasons: It is night and therefore more “dangerous for the ladies” and the equipment tends to be heavy to manipulate. Of course, Antonia finds both these reasons ridiculous.
OLD WAY: Working with her uncle’s 11-inch telescope, Antonia believes that she should be using her initiative to note the special elements that can only be seen with these more close up views. She expresses her excitement at this. (OW: Faith her abilities will get rewarded)
CHALLENGE: Pickering lets her know that they are already working with the simpler-to-use Pickering / Fleming system and seems somewhat annoyed that she wants to go outside the bounds of that. He is on a deadline, and that kind of meticulous detail will slow them down.
OLD WAY: Pickering assigns her the task of calculating the orbit on a binary star, Mizar, he has discovered – which she does. She then discovers and calculates the orbit of a second binary star., Beta Aurigae. She is proud of this!
CHALLENGE: When Pickering publishes results in the American Journal of Science in 1890, the only mention he makes of Antonia is: “…a careful study of the results has been made by Miss A.C. Maury, a niece of Dr. Draper.” This is not the full credit Antonia expected. (He also announced the achievement at a meeting of the American Journal of Science in 1890 – probably with no or little mention of Maury.)
OLD WAY: Working with Pickering and his complaints about her work bring up her insecurities and vulnerabilities. (She had missed the agreed upon Dec. 1, 1893 deadline to hand in her work.) As she says in a letter to him: “I have often said that your criticisms had from the beginning so shaken my faith in my own ability to work with accuracy that I have been struggling with a great weight of discouragement from the start.”
CHALLENGE: And yet, she is not willing to give her up her data on the Northern Bright Stars or new work on the new binary, Beta Lyrae, and she expresses this to Pickering.
OLD WAY: Feels, as she always has, intimidated by her aunt, Mary Anna Draper. This doesn’t help when her aunt sides with Pickering, and may remonstrate Antonia about not being a good team player. Why does she need credit – she was perfectly willing to let her husband get all the credit though they both worked together. (OW: Insecure, dominated.)
CHALLENGE: She questions her aunt and says to her: “And is that fair, aunt? Is that fair to us women, is that fair to science?” (Stands up to her aunt.)
OLD WAY: She has a hard time combatting the sense of insecurity around Pickering and his demands for the work.
CHALLENGE: But she rises to the occasion and completes the work in 1895.: She is given proper credit for it in 1897 in the publication: Spectra of Bright Stars Photographed with the 11-inch Draper Telescope.”
OLD WAY: She continues to think that her discoveries and mapping out of a new classification system will have its day. (OW: Believing a discovery stands on its own with no mitigating circumstances.)
CHALLENGE: Nonetheless, The Revised Harvard Photometry was published in 1908 with The Pickering / Fleming
OLD WAY: At the Solar Union’s Pasadena meeting in 1910, where Pickering wanted astronomers everywhere to respect this compendium as the standard reference authority, she would have retreated from a fight but…
CHALLENGE: She defends her system at the meeting, saying the “c-characteristic… represented a fundamental property of the stars.” Danish astronomer Ejnar Hertzsprung also comes to her defense and in 1905 distinguishes two types of red stars, dwarfs and giants, and argues his red giants were the stars Maury had categorized with c-characteristics.
OLD WAY: Expects recognition.
CHALLENGE: Finds a way to move on by throwing herself into another astronomical passion that of binary stars – in particular the mysterious Beta Lyrae. She ends up publishing a lot about her research.
OLD WAY: The expectation that she would get equal recognition as a woman in science.
CHALLENGE: It was more of a struggle and took much longer than she expected, but she is finally vindicated by the the International Astronomical Union (IAU) modifying its classification system based on the work done by Maury and Hertzsprung, a formulation known as the Hertzsprung–Russell diagram. (Russell and Hertzsprung began work on this in 1913, relying on some of Maury’s system. And then, of course, her Annie Jump Cannon Award in 1943.
-
Karen Tolliver 12 Angry Men Analysis
What I learned doing this assignment is how the movie challenged every one of the Old Way ideas that they had. I have watched this movie before and loved it because of the challenges to old ways they delivered, however I didn’t know it was deliberate. It feels like a natural way of answering a question, I guess they did a beautiful job of writing this film.
Old Ways: Assumption of guilt: “It’s an open and shut case”
Challenge: “I guess their entitled”
Old Ways: Not caring: “I’d slap these young kids down”
Challenge: He changed the subject and said, “Let’s get started”
Old Ways: Just want it to be over: “We can get out quick, lets vote now”
Challenge: I got tickets to a baseball game.
Old Ways: Just want this over: “Just because I voted fast, I still think he’s guilty”
Challenge: “Let’s talk about it first, we can’t decide in 5 minutes. Let’s take an hour”.
Old Ways: Not caring and prejudice: “He got a fair trial, what do you think it cost?”
Challenge: Juror says, “Only an ignorant man can believe that.”
Old Ways: Prejudice: “I’ve lived among them all my life you can’t believe a word they say”
Challenge: Juror says, “Do you think you were born with a monopoly on the truth?”
Old Ways: Assuming the evidence is not questionable: There can only be 1 one-of-a-kind knife
Challenge: Juror pulls out a knife just like it.
Old Ways: Assuming the witnesses were accurate: The woman who eye witnessed it wore glasses.
Challenge: She did not wear her glasses during the crime.
Old Ways: assuming the Defense Attorney did his job: The old man said it took him 15 seconds to walk to the front door.
Challenge: They got a diagram of the apartment and counted out the time it would actually take 41 seconds.
Assignment #2
Karen Tolliver Old Ways Challenge Chart
What I learned doing this assignment is I do have Old Ways in my film that I never noticed before. I didn’t think I was going to find any in my film, but when I exam it close you can see where they are. Thanks ScreenwritingU for helping to improve my film and make it profound.
Old Ways: Teenage girls should start developing big breast.
Challenge: Andrea, “Don’t worry you’ll get these someday”
Old Ways: Woman need to entice men by wearing sexy lingerie
Challenge: Sharon tells the girls “I don’t wear that”
Old Ways: The Police do what ever they want to do.
Challenge: The police steal her money, but accuse her of stealing.
Old Ways: Sharon believes her husband would never hurt her.
Challenge: Sharon finds out about “Second set of books” and now believes he can hurt her.
Old Ways: Her mother says, “He’s just like your father”
Challenge: Sharon gets angry quietly.
Old Ways: Andrea is afraid of flying
Challenge: Statistics show you’re likely to die in a car crash.
Old Ways: White people can’t sing
Challenge: Andrea grabs the Microphone from the White woman and sings.
Old Ways: People only talk to God when their in trouble
Challenge: God always listens and Sharon gets her answer.
Old Ways: When is the correct time to date after leaving someone?
Challenge: When your husband did you wrong you have no obligations to him, it’s time to live for you.
Old Ways: Your new man could be a killer.
Challenge: The girls say, “Let’s follow them, to make sure he doesn’t hurt her”
Old Ways: Only people with kids are responsible people.
Challenge: Consider the consequences of your own actions.
Old Ways: Blonde’s have more fun.
Challenge: Andrea says, “I’m enjoying the attention”.
-
ASSIGNMENT 1
Lauren’s 12 Angry Men Analysis
What I learned doing this assignment:
The Setups and Old Ways were outlined within the first ten minutes. Within acts two and three every Old Way is challenged and the Setups are paid off until the outcome is unanimous for a not guilty verdict.
Old Way:
The person on trial is not my problem and this has nothing to do with me.Challenges:
This boy may be executed by not discussing it through first.
The witnesses for the prosecution could be wrong.
Juror 8 says: “Suppose you were the one who’s on trial?”
There is honor in serving on a jury to make decisions on a stranger’s life.
One cannot play with another man’s life.Old Way:
Assumptions about the defendant because of his race.Challenges:
One juror says that only ignorant people believe they’re liars. w
Why believe one person of this race and not another person of the same race. Putting oneself in the place of the person on trial.
After the juror with a cold says the boy “don’t” speak english, the European juror corrects his grammar.
The racist juror who spews hatred about the boy is now all alone in his hatred during his diatribe.Old Way:
Being entertained and fighting boredom is more important than the person’s life at stake.Challenges:
When two jurors are playing tic-tac-toe to pass the time, juror 8 crumples the paper and says, “This isn’t a game.”Old Way:
The things going on in my life and my time are more important than a person in a life or death situation.Challenges:
It’s only one night of deliberation.
It’s not too much too ask as a boy’s life is at stake.Old Way:
Kids from the slums are the worst of humanity.Challenges:
One of the jurors grew up in a slum and takes offense at the remarks about kids who grew up in slums.
His knowledge of switchblades and that the boy couldn’t have stabbed his father changes the minds of a few other jurors.Old Way:
Very impressed with the attorneys and their presentation of the case because of how compelling they were. The prosecution witnesses are all believed without question.Challenges:
Perhaps the prosecution isn’t quite that talented or intelligent.
Testimony should be accurate and perhaps the witness couldn’t have heard the boy say he was going to kill her father because the train was so noisy and he gave false testimony because after living as an insignificant person his entire life, he’s finally getting attention.
Witnesses can make mistakes.
When under stress it’s very difficult to recall details.
The female witness may have been trying to impress everyone by trying to look younger. But the marks on her nose indicates she wears glasses and perhaps didn’t actually see the boy murder his father.Old Way:
All kids are awful human beings who must be beaten to transform them into adults.Challenge:
The final hold out juror realizes his problem is with his own child and not this innocent defendant.ASSIGNMENT 2
Lauren’s Old Ways Challenge Chart
What I learned doing this assignment:
The subtly of crafting challenges which bring the audience along on the journey instead of putting the audience off. The process of delicately revealing the message one is trying to convey within the story.
List of Old Ways and Challenges:
Old Way: unemotional, heartless
Challenge: struck by her brother’s empathy for trafficked childrenOld Way: focused on her own survival
Challenge: discovers the plans the organization has for the children, she begins to care for the children, wants to save them, realizes she must care for someone other than herselfOld Way: brutalized, starved by the organization to keep her in check
Challenge: Her brother tells her of her past and the life she once lived, there’s a better way to liveOld Way: doesn’t care about the children she kidnaps
Challenge: the organization performs surgery/removes organs, she wakes to find others who’ve gone through the same thingOld Way: the children are heading for a better life with wealthy families, this is clearly better than living on the street or in poor environments
Challenge: discovers the children are being sold across the world to other nefarious organizationsOld Way: everyone exists at this meager level, this is normal
Challenge: Her brother confronts her with what a normal life looks likeOld Way: the organization must be obeyed not matter what
Challenge: discovers the children are being sold into sex trafficking and realizes the organization must be stoppedOld Way: does whatever she’s told by the organization even when it’s wrong, immoral, criminal Challenge: Learns how her brother has dedicated his life to slowing down trafficking and making it more difficult for traffickers
Log in to reply.