This week, the Wolverhampton Grand shows Twelve Angry Men, an adaptation of the Oscar winning 1957 courtroom drama of the same name, starring Henry Fonda. The current stage production has gathered acclaim in the West End, and is now nearing the end of a regional tour, with a story as engaging and relevant now as it was 60 years ago.
The story plays out in real time, following the trial of a 16-year-old accused of murdering his father. The audience sees nothing of the trial itself, only hearing second-hand opinions and accounts. The jurors - the 'angry men' of the title - have been advised to deliberate carefully, and if there is any reasonable doubt, to return a verdict of ‘not guilty’.
At first it appears that the verdict will be announced quickly, as 11 of the 12 men are sure of the defendant’s guilt. With two eye-witnesses, a unique murder weapon, and an unconvincing defendant, there seems to be little room for doubt - until a lone voice speaks up against the majority.
No names are given in the production, with all jurors referred to by their assigned number. This anonymity both makes a statement about the role of a jury - a random cross-section of the population - but also allows the individuality of the characters on stage to be revealed slowly, and effectively.
Juror 8, played by Jason Merrells, refuses to give a verdict of ‘Guilty’ without proper consideration and, having noticed holes in the case which the uninterested defence lawyer seems to have missed, begins to unpick the certainty of the other jurors. He calmly puts forward his opinion in the face of derision and aggression from the other men. Juror 3 in particular, played by Tristan Gemmill, is Juror 8’s opposite: loud, brash, and quick to lose his temper,
The elegance and drama of the play comes from the characters’ interactions. As their prejudices and weaknesses are revealed, subtleties of their characters are hinted at, even though their conversations never drift too far from the trial. It’s a genius piece of storytelling - a masterclass in ‘show, not tell’ performance.
The whole play takes place in one room in the claustrophobic heat of a summer day, with a large table at its centre revolving so slowly it takes a while to notice that it’s moved at all. It’s a slow-burning story, but completely gripping, and a necessary reminder of the way prejudice and personal feeling can influence opinion - especially when it matters most.
This week, the Wolverhampton Grand shows Twelve Angry Men, an adaptation of the Oscar winning 1957 courtroom drama of the same name, starring Henry Fonda. The current stage production has gathered acclaim in the West End, and is now nearing the end of a regional tour, with a story as engaging and relevant now as it was 60 years ago.
The story plays out in real time, following the trial of a 16-year-old accused of murdering his father. The audience sees nothing of the trial itself, only hearing second-hand opinions and accounts. The jurors - the 'angry men' of the title - have been advised to deliberate carefully, and if there is any reasonable doubt, to return a verdict of ‘not guilty’.
At first it appears that the verdict will be announced quickly, as 11 of the 12 men are sure of the defendant’s guilt. With two eye-witnesses, a unique murder weapon, and an unconvincing defendant, there seems to be little room for doubt - until a lone voice speaks up against the majority.
No names are given in the production, with all jurors referred to by their assigned number. This anonymity both makes a statement about the role of a jury - a random cross-section of the population - but also allows the individuality of the characters on stage to be revealed slowly, and effectively.
Juror 8, played by Jason Merrells, refuses to give a verdict of ‘Guilty’ without proper consideration and, having noticed holes in the case which the uninterested defence lawyer seems to have missed, begins to unpick the certainty of the other jurors. He calmly puts forward his opinion in the face of derision and aggression from the other men. Juror 3 in particular, played by Tristan Gemmill, is Juror 8’s opposite: loud, brash, and quick to lose his temper,
The elegance and drama of the play comes from the characters’ interactions. As their prejudices and weaknesses are revealed, subtleties of their characters are hinted at, even though their conversations never drift too far from the trial. It’s a genius piece of storytelling - a masterclass in ‘show, not tell’ performance.
The whole play takes place in one room in the claustrophobic heat of a summer day, with a large table at its centre revolving so slowly it takes a while to notice that it’s moved at all. It’s a slow-burning story, but completely gripping, and a necessary reminder of the way prejudice and personal feeling can influence opinion - especially when it matters most.
Five Stars
Twelve Angry Men was reviewed by Jessica Clixby on Tuesday 7 May at Wolverhampton Grand Theatre, where it runs until Saturday 11 May.