Before it was on the stage or a 1957 movie, “Twelve Angry Men” was a live teleplay on CBS Studio One. The film kinescope copy, thought to be lost until found a few years ago, is cleaned and restored to the original frame rate of live television, so you may see what it looked like when originally broadcast live.
This project was one of the more difficult of projects, due to the dirty film and poor sound quality on the soundtrack. Commercials are inserted from a show of the same season, as the originals are not on the film. This production was obviously one of “close quarters.” See if you can notice various cameras moving in and out of the edge of the picture from time to time.
For Best results watch in 60p by selecting it from the YouTube video settings.
source
Brilliant! Thank you for this upload and keeping the advertisements, which I loved! “You can be sure…if it’s Westinghouse!” ?
Im Angered because i have to watch this for School. But it is a cool restoration.
Thank you so much. Really appreciate your efforts. This is so great.
"I speak from experience" ouch
who actually watched the whole video
The stage play and film that Rose expanded from this is vastly better. "You open your mouth again and I'll split your skull is a terrible line, a terrible tactical mistake. In the longer version his otracizing by silence was much more devastating, if a bit too schematic, like a ballet.
this is so good i am 13 and i like it
Norman Fell, aka Stanley Roper as the jury foreman, if you need him. I think he was in over his head…
The 1954 $17.95 Westinghouse iron would cost $175 in today's money!
The Indian one is also very good.
My theater prof made me watch this. Had regrets at first but it turned out to be really good.
Thanks a TON for this upload
watching this for my "theater homework" from home because of Covid, oop
Always, Always a great movie, with top actors
Watching this 60 year old film in my house because of the Coronavirus
I went to The Museum of TV and Radio to watch as many of these old kinescopes as I could before launching my own project of theatre on live television. It was very difficult but felt great when things went well.
That $17.95 iron from Westinghouse in 1957 would be $163.75 in 2019 dollars adjusted for inflation.
Betty Furness was a MILF.
Saw the one with Henry Fonda.
"nobody wears their glasses to bed that's crazy!"
Me: slowly glances sideways and laughs
Looks so much like videotape.
Being made only a few years before the 1957 Henry Fonda film, these two adaptations are ripe for comparison, even though it must be taken into consideration that the limitations of the television medium at the time puts it at a natural disadvantage. I think the movie is superior, but not really because there are too many things that can be faulted in the TV version; it's just that all the great things in the TV version (including excellent performances) are also present in the movie.
Some changes for the movie that I liked include:
1. A greater emphasis on the characterisation of each juror, including backstories for most of them. This is especially noticeable for Jurors 1, 2, 6 and 12, who don't really have separate identities in the TV version. The TV version compensates slightly by having 2 and 6 responsible for the revelation about the woman's glasses (done by Juror 9 in the movie but not feasible in the TV version as Joseph Sweeney wore glasses).
2. Ed Begley's initial introduction as a more jovial, comical character in Juror 10, before he increasingly becomes hostile as he realises others don't share his views.
3. The conversations in the bathroom, most significantly between Jurors 6 and 8, where Juror 6 asks an unanswered question: What about if they're about to exonerate a guilty man?
4. More emphasis on the cause of Juror 3's antagonism in relation to his own son. It's brought up in the TV movie, but Lee J. Cobb's acting at the end…unforgettable.
5. Making Juror 5, as opposed to Juror 8, responsible for the revelation about how the knife was used. His background made this a more appropriate choice.
6. Further emphasising Juror 7's indifference to the goings on with his constant baseball references. The change from his having theatre tickets to baseball tickets is a minor one, but it allows for a lot more talk without it getting repetitive.
7. The brilliant use of camera angles in the film to make it increasingly claustrophobic. This is, of course, much harder to do in the live TV medium (some of the cameras are even visible here), but those angles in the film are masterful.
8. The extra running time. I don't know if Rose had written the script for the film first and then cut it down for the television play, but I feel the pacing is a little off in the TV version, but I'm not convinced that my opinion isn't just being coloured by the film. Even with the longer running time, there doesn't seem to be a moment in the film wasted.
Just some thoughts. You'll note that I don't have too much criticism for the TV version. It really is good and deserved its Emmys.
Thank you for the restoration and posting.
Prefer the 1957 version
Who else here is doing it for Mrs.Perry’s class ?
This isn’t how I want to spend my FOUR DAY WEEKEND ?
#LGBTQ ?️? ?
36:46 Does that fridge have lead lining?
Watching this amazing production of TWELVE ANGRY MEN on September 24, 2019.