Review On "12 angry Men"

The movie "12 angry men" is a movie about 12 men deciding the fate of a 18 year old boy, who "murder" his own father. The movie starts with the most jury deciding that the boy is guilty, having just listened to the facts and evidence but haven't really paid attention to the actual story. With only one man who thinks the boy is innocent, the movies is spent with him proving his points and thus, one by one, the other members changing their mind; and agreeing that the boy is innocent.
I'd give the movie 4 out of 5 stars. Reason being is that it is a very good movie, showing how that one man has looked at all the points and tried to put them together but failed; thus his decision to the fate of the boy; and in turn, changing the opinions of the rest of the jury. I didn't like how the last person to agree that the boy was innocent was spent on just saying "Yes he is Guilty." But that was the point of his part.
My favourite parts were seeing the whole jury change their opinions when the guy presented his opinions and how certain events couldn't have been right. It shows that it is only when you start to listen and think about the facts given to you that your opinions start to change
Favourite characters was jury1 who lead the meeting and maintained ( most of the time) the "peace" in the room. Also there was the "Man in White"  (can' remember any names!) who for one, got these men to actually start thinking about the facts given to them, and (at the end of the movie) got the whole jury to change their votes and say that the boy is guilty.

As a  small reflection from something I noticed, if the man in white wasn't open-minded and was instead, like the rest, hot and bothered to a point that he didn't care about the boys life and was only thinking about himself; that boy would have been sent to the electric chair. In this world we don't have many people like that, who would listen throughly and try and place the evidence together and see whether the person convicted is innocent or just plain guilty. We seem to just accept the facts and evidence and that the lawyers must be right with the evidence that they have. Just thinking about all those innocent people who, over the years, didn't have anyone like that "Man in White". It shows that we all make mistakes but some maybe too great to turn them around. Yes there are people like that, we all would suppose; assume that there are. And I'm sure that we would say that we would all have acted like the "Man in White". Truth is that not many of us would have done that. Not without someone to says "No I don't agree." and definitely not in that say situation. Wonder what would have happened if the "Man in White" was in charged of deciding whether the person is guilty or not