A relatively standard remake that follows the narrative of the original until the third act. At which point it flips the script on its head and inherently becomes about a completely altered topic than it was supposed to be. Instead of it being a triumph of civil society over a lynch mob mentality, this remake becomes an outcry and finger-wagging for the fact that no one (in this case in Russia) is willing to initiate a commitment to actually do anything about perceived wrongs and injustices in society. The indignation that people are all too comfortable to gleefully point out the truths or falsehoods of something but not, in practice, do anything about it is when the line is drawn between action and their welfare or time.
It might seem way too domineering when that third act shoe drops, especially when this reproving oration comes from a juror that is played by the director himself. However, first of all, he wasn't even supposed to play him. He wanted his favorite Oleg Menshikov, and second, his speech didn't change anyone's mind. With him being the only one to stick up for the Chechen teen, that doesn't mean there's some sort of implied martyrdom on the second juror's part. If anything, the first juror's chat with what I'm assuming is the soul of the dead father in the form of a bird is the core behest of the theme. It's up to you whether you even choose to impart anything from it.
Fittingly, the movie is much more mournful and dreary than the original ever could afford, being a play and all. I didn't much care for boys flashbacks to Chechnya, but the idea to set it up in a gym was great. The electricity issues and the recreations of the apartments make the conversations much more animated here, and animated these performances are, because a lot of the actors do dial up the dramatization of the argument quite a bit. Specifically, Yuri Stoyanov, who categorically was acting on an entirely different wavelength than everyone else. Conversely, Sergei Garmash was magnificent and perfectly combined the bitterness and anger. The soundtrack was very good, even if some sound stingers were downright predictable, like it was a sound design format from some horror flick.
The much more cynical view of the jurors is also expertly unveiled. I might just be misremembering the original, but in the remake, a lot of jurors straight out of the gates know that something is wrong with the case but will only speak up once another juror brings something emotionally related to the table they can relate to. Some are just talking out their asses, like the eleventh juror, who tries to identify the type of knife with a knowing, arrogant demeanor. The movie never calls him out on this, but he is completely wrong.
In the case of the third juror, it is even more morose because he isn't even convinced by any arguments, and the only point of contention that wins him over is when jealousy of women is brought up because that was the only thing he could sympathize with. It might be a bit too much for the whole narrative to eventually arrive at a conspiracy angle, but some dramatic device to actually create stakes for the boy, put him in danger, and make the right verdict turn into a negligent one was needed.
Regardless of how sanctimonious the movie ends up being, it fundamentally does not pass judgement. It just showcases something that will become even more relevant in Russia in the future.
It might seem way too domineering when that third act shoe drops, especially when this reproving oration comes from a juror that is played by the director himself. However, first of all, he wasn't even supposed to play him. He wanted his favorite Oleg Menshikov, and second, his speech didn't change anyone's mind. With him being the only one to stick up for the Chechen teen, that doesn't mean there's some sort of implied martyrdom on the second juror's part. If anything, the first juror's chat with what I'm assuming is the soul of the dead father in the form of a bird is the core behest of the theme. It's up to you whether you even choose to impart anything from it.
Fittingly, the movie is much more mournful and dreary than the original ever could afford, being a play and all. I didn't much care for boys flashbacks to Chechnya, but the idea to set it up in a gym was great. The electricity issues and the recreations of the apartments make the conversations much more animated here, and animated these performances are, because a lot of the actors do dial up the dramatization of the argument quite a bit. Specifically, Yuri Stoyanov, who categorically was acting on an entirely different wavelength than everyone else. Conversely, Sergei Garmash was magnificent and perfectly combined the bitterness and anger. The soundtrack was very good, even if some sound stingers were downright predictable, like it was a sound design format from some horror flick.
The much more cynical view of the jurors is also expertly unveiled. I might just be misremembering the original, but in the remake, a lot of jurors straight out of the gates know that something is wrong with the case but will only speak up once another juror brings something emotionally related to the table they can relate to. Some are just talking out their asses, like the eleventh juror, who tries to identify the type of knife with a knowing, arrogant demeanor. The movie never calls him out on this, but he is completely wrong.
In the case of the third juror, it is even more morose because he isn't even convinced by any arguments, and the only point of contention that wins him over is when jealousy of women is brought up because that was the only thing he could sympathize with. It might be a bit too much for the whole narrative to eventually arrive at a conspiracy angle, but some dramatic device to actually create stakes for the boy, put him in danger, and make the right verdict turn into a negligent one was needed.
Regardless of how sanctimonious the movie ends up being, it fundamentally does not pass judgement. It just showcases something that will become even more relevant in Russia in the future.