Year : 2007
Runtime :
159 Min.
Genre : Drama, Crime, Thriller
Director : Nikita Mikhalkov
Movie Stars : Sergey Makovetskiy, Sergey Garmash, Apti Magamaev
Country: Russia
Language : Russian, Chechen
I've wanted to see this movie since it came out in '07 but sadly I wasn't able to find it till now. The film is loose remake of the 1957 film Twelve Angry Men and revolves around twelve jurors trying to decide the faith of a Chechen boy accused of murdering his step father. All twelve men had decided the boy's faith and believe it will be an open and shut case of guilt. If all jurors convict the boy he will serve a life sentence in prison. One of the jurors votes for an acquittal. Since the vote must be unanimous the jurors must remain in the school gymnasium and review the case till they all come upon an agreement. The jurors are not given names during the whole film which makes it a little difficult to go into great detail about their character so please bare with me and I'll try not to confuse you. Each juror reveals personally information that leads to one or two jurors changing their vote while reviewing case evidence and become distinct characters. The boy's story is told in a serials of flashbacks while he awaits his faith.
Juror 1: An extremely racists taxi driver (Sergey Garmash) who offend uses racists slurs about Jews and Chechens. He is the hardest juror to convince of the defendant's innocence because of his deep rooted hatred. He is the main antagonist of all the jurors. He attacks and intimidates the elderly Jewish man and TV producer.
Juror 2: The suspicious doctor.
Juror 3: An elderly Holocaust survivor who is the second to change their vote to not guilty after a thoughtful sit on the toilet. He says that the lawyer did not try to defend the boy and so they never got to hear any contradictory evidence that could exist.
Juror 4: A TV producer that is intimidated to the point of becoming sick by Juror 1.
Juror 5: A musician who is the only one to say not guilty in the first round of voting.
Juror 6: A cemetery manager that takes money from grieving families for the best burial spots. He uses the money to feed the homeless and build a school in his native town.
Juror 7: The head of the table and ex Russian officer. He keeps track of the changing votes and is the most important of the jurors.
Jurors 8-12: These jurors play a less important role in the film.
During the stay in the gym the jurors create experiments and theories to prove the boys innocence and one by one come to the conclusion that the boy was framed. The case has two witnesses: a elderly man with arthritis and a female that lives across the street. The elderly man states that he saw the boy fleeing the crime as he looked out his front door. The jurors come to the conclusion that the man could not have seen the boy fleeing because it would have taken him too long to reach the door from his sofa because of his arthritis in both legs. The defendant's living building consist of two apartments: the boy and his step father's and the elderly man's. The jurors know that a new building project is supposed to occur at that location but because the boy and his step father would not move it is put on hiatus. A recent change in the elderly man's address leads them to figure out that the builders framed the boy to get their project going again. The remaining jurors that think the boy is guilty are now relaying on the female next door until the jurors came up with the explanation that she could not have seen the boy fleeing from across the street because it was night and she would not have been wearing her glasses. She lied because she was jealous of the step father and the boy's relationship.
The jurors vote not guilty and sigh in relief as they prepare to leave till Juror 7 says he votes guilty. In complete confusion the other jurors listen as he clarifies that he knew the evidence from the very beginning and of the boys innocence. His reason for voting guilty is he believes the boy will live longer in prison. The people who framed him will want to tie up their loose ends for good. The boy has no home, family, or money. The jurors argue till juror 7 says if everyone else votes not guilty he will too. Juror 7 is forced to vote not guilty, but at the end of the film he tells the boy that he can live with him and promises to find his framers.
The film is an utter morality show to deal with racial tension and political problems faced in Russia. It has that
To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee feel to it. The director creates this morality show beautifully which makes this near three hour film in to an wonderful watch. The Chechnya flashbacks create a very Russian movie. I would recommended you have a little background knowledge of the Chechen and Russia turmoil. It makes the movie easier to understand. The Chechens are seen as evil terrorists and the Russians as the good force, a major part of juror 1's hatred and willingness to convict the destroyer of the "Russian hero".
