The movie 12 Angry Men is trying to shed light on the mistakes and loopholes of the criminal justice system. The film focuses on 12 men who all have different personalities that will influence the case and the final verdict. The film touches on racism in the jury, grudges between families, and the fact that the court could be “bought,” but it does all of this in a fun and entertaining way. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay The first problem the film shows is racism. In this film the most obvious racism comes from juror no. 10. From the beginning of the film, juror no. 10 tries to see who is against him and who is with him. He states “who stands where” several times which tells us he is more of a hateful person. When asked why he thinks the boy he's sending to his death is guilty, he has an answer every time. He states “he is one of them,” which we interpret as the defendant not being white and that is why he votes guilty or mostly why. Later in the film he begins to get angry at all the other jurors because the boy is guilty, because once again “he is one of them” and they are murderers. The other jurors decide they've had enough of him and walk away from the table, which shows juror #1. 10 who is the strange man with his beliefs. This is a moment in the film where juror no. 10 realizes that his opinions are compromising the case. This shows us, the public, how just one racist juror can greatly influence the final outcome of a trial. If he hadn't changed his mind, the outcome of the case could have been different. Grudges are also an important theme in this film. This characteristic is more dominant in juror no. 3, who never had any evidence as to why the boy is guilty, except for the points Juror No. 4 argued with the other jurors during the film. Juror no. 3 lightheartedly informs us about his son who ran away from home at the beginning of the film, but in the moment it seems insignificant. Towards the end of the film, juror no. 3 goes on a rampage, screaming that the boy must be guilty. Then he stops and looks at his wallet where there is a photo of his son and starts to cry. He ultimately changes his vote from guilty to not guilty. What we deduce from this is that he had a grudge against the accused because his son had run away, not because the boy was guilty. He sees his son in the accused and takes it out on him. This situation could happen differently. Imagine that juror no. 3 (the one who had a grudge) had a grudge against his father, so he would be more likely to vote in favor of the defendant. These grudges could cost someone their life if they are not tamed. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay The amount of money could be the most important thing that will influence the path. A recurring discussion in the film is why the defendant's lawyer didn't raise so many key points. This message comes up a lot in the film as the jurors discuss the case. Their answer is because the lawyer didn't care why he was paid so little. The jurors talk to each other about how it was an unfair fight from the start, because the prosecuting attorney was fully engaged and the defendant's was not. This shows us how much money can influence the outcome of any case, no matter how big or small. If the defendant had more resources for his lawyer, he may never have had the 11 to 1 guilty vote and juror #1. 8 shouldn't have been a "knight"..”