Twelve Angry Men

This is an excellent production, well acted with taut direction.

Twelve Angry Men is 50 years’ old this year and this production shows why it’s a classic. The audience is a fly on the wall in a jury room, watching 12 male jurors deliberate the evidence on a murder trial. A 16 year old boy faces the death sentence for killing his father. We never go beyond the jury room: we only see the evidence that the jurors discuss. By show’s end we know the verdict; we never find out if the boy actually did kill his father, but that’s not what the show is about. It looks at the prejudices we bring when judging someone, and how those prejudices can cloud our thinking and decisions.

We never know the boy’s ethnic or cultural background. All we know is he had an abusive father and grew up on the poor side of town. The director wisely keeps this show set in its original era of the 1950s, and casts all the jury as Caucasian. It reinforced the message that (with the exception of the rules of cross-examination and evidence) not much has changed. 

This cast is strong, ably guided by David Cascarino’s clear direction. Focus and characterisation are well maintained. Angela Cascarino’s costuming and props cemented the feeling that we were with a jury in the 1950s. The set designer isn’t credited in the programme, but a bouquet to whoever it was, as it’s effective. Similarly too the impressive programme.

With an ensemble piece it’s hard to single out major players, as all are very good. However, the senior cast members (Stephen Wheatley as the Foreman, Paul Mackenzie as Juror#3, and Tony Woollams as Juror #9) resonated with me more than the younger ones.

In my ignorance I thought one of the jurors had the worst Jewish accent ever. However at interval the director explained that the script specifically states this Juror should have “a European accent” but not specific to any country, culture, or faith, so it had to sound like a challenge for Professor Higgins. Just a heads up to other audience members in case you make the same mistake I did.

One of the cast sported a Ronaldo cut, which only stuck out because everything else looked so 1950s, and once or twice the group anticipated a reaction (e.g. when the second knife was produced). When these are a show’s only negatives then you know you’re onto a good thing.

Engrossing stuff.

Peter Novakovich