Rahul Srivastava

Though this movie came in 1957 and similar ideas have already been the centre of many succeeding crime thrillers and courtroom dramas, yet the arguments set by this thought provoking masterpiece are still valid. If you are watching this movie in 2021, the idea of discussion of facts and circumstances among jurors over the exoneration or conviction of an 18 year old boy who is accused of killing his own father may seem banal to you. But how personal biases, prejudices, stereotypes blind one's judgement and interpretation of evidences is extraordinarily portrayed in the movie. "Justice" or more appropriate term "verdict" should be based on fair, objective and unbiased assessment of facts and evidences, on the contrary how subjective it could be and how juror's whim or present state of mind can bend it are remarkably shown. This movie raises one more issue: the reliability and credibility of eyewitness testimony. In the history there have been many cases in which, because of unreliable eyewitnesses, innocents are serving terms behind the bars and guilty ones are roaming freely. Highly recommended