十二人の怒れる男

Twelve Angry Men showcases how prejudice and personal experiences shape perceptions of truth. Did anyone else feel the jury's debates reflected real-world biases more than expected?

The tension builds to a pivotal moment that leaves some ambiguity. Did the ending make you question how justice is achieved in real life or just in the courtroom?

The characters' back-and-forths felt so authentic and contemporary. I wonder what inspired Reginald Rose to craft such naturalistic conversations.