Opinion

Why deliberation is necessary

Saskia Nowicki

 Closing the fall season at Players’ Theatre, the cast and crew of Twelve Angry Men take on the daunting task of performing an American classic on the McGill stage. Based on the 1954 teleplay by Reginald Rose, Twelve Angry Men has been adapted twice for film, performed on Broadway, and the original motion picture was inducted into the National Film Registry of the Library of Congress. Director Natalie Gershstein’s production aspires to a realistic portrayal of this timeless account of 12 jurors deciding the guilt or innocence of a young man charged with murdering his father.

Set in a crowded and, at times, claustrophobic jury room, the play recounts a single juror’s stubborn refusal to succumb to the pressures of his peers in the decision over the murder trial. The action of the play revolves around the protagonist’s attempts to convince his fellow jurors to review the evidence presented, and revise their quick judgment of the case. His attempts to alter the group’s verdict are presented with both subtlety and complexity, focusing on the shifting dynamic of the group and the varied interactions between the 12 characters.

Twelve Angry Men is an important artistic depiction of the American judicial system that manages to resonate as well with audiences today as it did 50 years ago. The characterization of the many prejudices inherent in American society can be viewed historically as a commentary on McCarthyism, fascism, communism, or as a timeless indictment against all forms of bigotry. The piece’s message is perennial and it remains relevant in the face of social change thanks to its astute depiction of humanity.

The protagonist, Juror Number Eight (Rowan Spencer), distinguishes himself from the group with his deliberate aloofness and introspection. Although Spencer’s performance controls the stage, his talent lies in his ability to disconnect from the action and to lead the jury with reason. The group’s interactions are dominated by the bigotry of Jurors Number Three (Matthew Banks), Number Six (Alex Rivers), and Number Ten (Matthew Steen), whose aggressive views and unwillingness to engage in rational discourse eventually alienate them from the rest of the jury. However, the play’s true antagonist appears to be a stockbroker, Juror Number Four (Andrew Cameron), who coolly matches Spencer’s character point for point with reasonable dissent. As the play progresses. the more rational characters—Juror Number Nine (Gerard Westland), Juror Number Eleven (Martin Law), and Juror Number Five (James Kelly)—quickly line up on the side of the protagonist, while the rest of the cast—the Foreman (Leo Imbert), Juror Number Two (Richard Carozza), Juror Number Six (Max Lanocha) and Juror Number Twelve (Max Lloyd-Jones)—take longer to be convinced.

The comprehensiveness of the cast’s performance is remarkable, in particular its ability to represent a wide range of mannerisms and stereotypes. Gerard Westland is convincing in the difficult role of an old man, thanks in part to some great makeup. Also notable is the dynamism between several of the actors. The interaction between Juror Number Twelve, an ad man lacking in convictions, and Juror Number Eleven, a German immigrant with an outsider’s perspective on the situation, is especially enjoyable to watch, as is the strange alliance that forms between Jurors Number Three and Number Four.

The play’s staging adheres to Gershstein’s realist aims. The painted faux wood floor frames the action nicely, and frequent use of props, like two switchblade knives and an overhead projector, enhance the production. Lighting is used to focus the audience’s attention on the action when it shifts to the washroom, and when seated around the table the characters stagger their chairs and situate themselves so as to avoid blocking anyone.

Even with 12 actors in such an enclosed space, the play’s action manages to shift smoothly. While certain characters are speaking, others will mime dialogue, or position themselves to the sides of the stage. The careful realism of Twelve Angry Men is broken only a few times, in particular during one indelible scene where the characters turn their backs on Juror Number 10’s dogmatic monologue. The moment is blatantly theatrical, but the performance retains an overall realistic quality throughout.

Gershstein’s production of Twelve Angry Men is a thorough and methodical performance of the play that succeeds in capturing the impetus of Rose’s original script. Although this version doesn’t attempt any radical modifications, its critique of prejudice, reason, and persuasion in the judicial system remains relatable and necessary.

Twelve Angry Men plays from November 17-20. Tickets are $6. For more information visit ssmu.mcgill.ca/players/

Share this:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

*

Read the latest issue

Read the latest issue