12 Angry Men

[Philosophyking87]

If you haven't seen this movie, I highly recommend you check it out. It's perfect for any thinking person. At any rate, if you have seen the movie, I would like to hear what types the 12 jurors may be.

I'll start by posting what I think of them.

Juror #1 - ESFJ (very organized, hosting, simple, traditional)
Juror #2 - ISFJ (very quiet, timid, and unsure)
Juror #3 - ESTJ (very opinionated bully)
Juror #4 - ISTJ (logical, knows plenty of facts, brainy)
Juror #5 - INFP (quiet and sensitive)
Juror #6 - ISFP (quiet, simple worker)
Juror #7 - ESTP (or ESFP - loud, cool salesmen who loves sports)
Juror #8 - INTx (either INTP or INTJ - quiet, skeptical, logical, imaginative, empathetic, creative)
Juror #9 - INFJ (insightful, mystical, fair-minded)
Juror #10 - ESTJ (or ESFJ - loud, opinionated, traditional)
Juror #11 - ISTP (logical, independent, simple)
Juror #12 - ENFP (idea person, not very logical)

 

[lucky12]

love this movie. instant karma for you :smiley_emoticons_mr

 

[Philosophyking87]

Yeah, it's really great. Hopefully more people have seen it, and perhaps are interested in attempting to type the characters. =p

 

[lucky12]

saw it maybe.. 6 years ago, I do want to watch it soon though. I'll try my best.

 

[Philosophyking87]

Great!!!

 

[Moocow]

I also recommend this movie, especially for the fact that it all takes place in one room yet isn't at all boring or stale.

 

[nanook]

you are referring to the original movie, not the TV production with jack lemmon, right? i have seen them both, years a ago. i think they are both good. i can't type characters, i only try to VI actors. i don't feel like sharing, though. but i agree with many of your guesses (referring to the original movie).


original: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0050083/
tv production http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118528/

 

[Philosophyking87]

I also recommend this movie, especially for the fact that it all takes place in one room yet isn't at all boring or stale.

Indeed.

you are referring to the original movie, not the TV production with jack lemmon, right? i have seen them both, years a ago. i think they are both good. i can't type characters, i only try to VI actors. i don't feel like sharing, though. but i agree with many of your guesses (referring to the original movie).

Yeah, the original 1957 movie. A few of the characters are wild guesses, but I've given some of them some thought.

 

[WSidis]

Thanks for starting this thread.

If you haven't seen this movie, I highly recommend you check it out. It's perfect for any thinking person. At any rate, if you have seen the movie, I would like to hear what types the 12 jurors may be.

I'll start by posting what I think of them.

Juror #1 - ESFJ (very organized, hosting, simple, traditional)
Juror #2 - ISFJ (very quiet, timid, and unsure)
Juror #3 - ESTJ (very opinionated bully)
Juror #4 - ISTJ (logical, knows plenty of facts, brainy)
Juror #5 - INFP (quiet and sensitive)
Juror #6 - ISFP (quiet, simple worker)
Juror #7 - ESTP (or ESFP - loud, cool salesmen who loves sports)
Juror #8 - INTx (either INTP or INTJ - quiet, skeptical, logical, imaginative, empathetic, creative)
Juror #9 - INFJ (insightful, mystical, fair-minded)
Juror #10 - ESTJ (or ESFJ - loud, opinionated, traditional)
Juror #11 - ISTP (logical, independent, simple)
Juror #12 - ENFP (idea person, not very logical)

Good list, I do disagree with you in a few spots though. I'll run through my reasoning:

Juror 1 - ESFJ Definitely get the Fe dom sense, reminds me of my ENFJ father - extremely sensitive to criticism - and I don't get the sense that he uses aux. Ni. Plus, he's a football coach: Si all the way.

Juror 2 - ISFJ for sure. Self-righteous and sensitive, clearly utilizes Fe with his friendly generous attitude. Clearly introverted and sensing.

Juror 3 - ESTJ Reminds me of Alex from the show In Treatment. I'm rather sympathetic to this character. Definitely Te dom. Clearly Si over Se.

Juror 4 - INTP I disagree with you here. I think we can agree that surely he's some sort of IxTx. I could see you seeing a well developed Si and saying ISTJ. But I get Ti over Te. To be honest I don't see any Ne (though not that I usually do in INTPs) but then again I don't see any Ni either (although I find Ni to be more noticeable). If I had to guess it would be INTP. I see him as Ti dom over Si dom.

Juror 5 - ISFP Definitely an Fi dom. I'm not 100% on the S/N, but I sense Ni over Ne. When he has that realization that the old man couldn't have been running, it seemed rather Ni-esque (of a non-Ni dom.) Also, his excitability and willingness to fight 3 seemed liked Se. Although, his not remembering the exact word used by the old man "run" versus "went" would indicate Ne Si over Se Ni.

Juror 6 - ESFP I thought Se dom Fi aux after his threatening 7. I don't see him as an Fi dom. Definitely Fi Se though.

Juror 7 - ESTP For sure Se dom and definitely Fe over Fi.

Juror 8 - INFJ The way he manipulates Juror 3 is very Ni>Fe>Ti>Se; he uses Se to observe 3's temper and inform his Ni (you can see 8 smile after 3's outburst at 5, signaling the beginning of the plotting), Fe to manipulate 3's emotions when the ripe opportunity presented itself, and Ni to guide each process along and mastermind the whole operation.
I initially thought INFP with the way he spoke with such conviction, I thought I was seeing an Fi dom. But examining him closely, he clearly exhibits Fe over Fi, and Ni over Ne. This leaves four alternatives: INFJ ENFJ ISTP ESTP. Obviously, he's an INxx. So it's clear he's most likely an INFJ.

Juror 9 - INFJ His ability to psychologize the old man seemed very Ni Fe. Also his noticing the marks on the nose of Juror 4 was Se informing his Ni. He very well could be an INTJ though, he's old enough where it's hhard to distinguish T and F based on demeanor, but I thought I saw cases of Fe. His interruption of 4 was done with what looked like Fe diplomacy.

Juror 10 - ESTJ Te > Ti, Si > Se

Juror 11 - INTP Si over Se. Ti over Te. So he's either INTP, ENTP, ISFJ, or ESFJ. He's one of the more clearly intuitive characters in the movie. And I think he's an introvert, despite noticing him exhibiting a lot of energy when using his Ne.

Juror 12 - ESTP He's pretty sensitive for an ESTP. Noticeably Se and Fe.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Great thread.

I played Juror # 5 during my junior year of high school, so it's interesting to see that he's not far off from me in terms of MBTI type.

After rehearsal one night, another juror mentioned that every time #8 spoke the line, "At first I was alone. Now five others agree," she wanted to burst out into "I will survive." We all thought it would be hilarious, so before rehearsal the next night, the director went around and told everyone but #8 about our nefarious plot.

So we run through the play, and when we get near the end everyone is stifling a laugh coming up to this line. As soon as the words left #8's mouth, we all burst out with "I WAS PETRIFIED! Kept thinking I could never live without you by my side!" #8 was just in shock, so he turned to the director like "What do I do?" only to find that the director is belting out the lyrics just as loud as the rest of us. It took us a good 20 minutes of laughing before we all calmed down enough to finish the play.

 

[WSidis]

Two edits:

Juror 4 is INTJ. Clearly not an Fe user, and upon more careful observation an Ni dom.

Juror 6 is ISFP. During his first speech he's basically an Fi machine.

 

[Philosophyking87]

Two edits:

Juror 4 is INTJ. Clearly not an Fe user, and upon more careful observation an Ni dom.

Juror 6 is ISFP. During his first speech he's basically an Fi machine.

After further consideration, I actually agree with you on juror #4. At first I thought he was more of an ISTJ, but I now think he's probably an INTJ (although I still get an ISTJ feel from him). He's just too analytical and rational to me to really be an ISTJ. Although, it's still questionable. Mostly, he's still a bit balanced (so mostly IxTJ for sure).

Also, I really don't agree with your assessment of juror #8. He was extremely creative and logical, so that even if he was somewhat compassionate and nice, I still don't see him as an INFJ (as most other people do).

Here's what I got from juror #8's interaction with juror #3: one person clearly sticking to a "fixed" point of view, thinking the situation is "self-evident" (that the kid is "clearly guilty"), while another person is using creative logical reasoning to test every single aspects of the "wall of premises" (so to speak) that hold together juror #3's position (which is basically the original position of every one of the jurors other than juror #8 at the beginning of the session).

Here's a few of the premises juror #8 attacks:

• *that the kid's supposed knife was "rare" --- juror #8 challenges that view by showing the other jurors another knife just like it.

• that a man heard a scream and later saw a boy walking angrily out of the house -- Juror #8 challenges this by noting that if a woman across the way claims to have seen the boy stab his father as a train was passing, that means it must have been pretty loud noise, which means the man is not likely have heard a scream. This puts much more doubt on the notion that the kid was clearly guilty.

• that the man then walked over and saw the knife sticking out of the father's chest. -- Juror #8 physically demonstrates in the deliberation room that an old man with a bad leg isn't likely to walk in the time specified by the witness, again creating doubt towards the testimony.

• that the knife was used by a shorter kid to stab a taller father -- the jurors physically demonstrate that the particular knife used to kill the father was to be used properly in a straight-jabbing motion, which doesn't agree with the fact that the knife was used in a slanted downward motion/angle.

• that a woman saw the kid stab his father across the way as a train was passing by. -- Juror #9 points out that the witness likely wore glasses and that, therefore, there's reason to doubt her testimony. Juror #8 helps to point out the possibility that she went to sleep without her glasses and may have forgotten to put them back on.

So basically, Juror #8 is often using creative reasoning to poke holes at the convictions of the other jurors, who seem initially to be extremely certain of themselves in judging the kid as guilty without a thought.

If you think about it, then, doesn't juror #8 basically play the role of "Socrates" in this movie? While everyone else is so sure of themselves, thinking they know everything, and that their decisions are entirely justified, Juror #8 (like Socrates) comes in and starts nit-picking and hair-splitting every detail with pesky doubts, asking the other jurors to explain why they are so sure of themselves. And when they give reasons, he pokes holes at them, showing that they aren't really as strong as they initially thought, which ultimately leads to a "not guilty" verdict.

So I ultimately vote INTP for Juror #8. His role was basically the "philosopher" archetype. He's investigative, he's skeptical, he's rational, he's logical, and he's creative in his thinking -- a very imaginative and insightful character with a quick wit.

What do you think?

 

[A22]

That's a 12/12 movie. But I don't remember which juror is which.

 

[Philosophyking87]

That's a 12/12 movie. But I don't remember which juror is which.

Yeah, I agree. It's definitely a very well-done movie. I would think many INTPs would definitely love this movie. Here's a list of the jurors with pictures, so that everyone knows exactly to whom we're referring:

Juror #1 =

Juror #2 =

Juror #3 =

Juror #4 =

Juror #5 =

Juror #6 =

Juror #7 =

Juror #8 =

Juror #9 =

Juror #10 =

Juror #11 =

Juror #12 =

 

[WSidis]

What do you think?

Juror 8 - First, being creative and/or logical and/or philosophical doesn't prevent one from being an INFJ or other feeling types and certainly is not exclusive to INTPs. And actually, I would think INFJs, being Ni dominant, are more likely to be creative than INTPs, but I don't think the presence or absence of creativity implies anything about the type he is. Also, in regards to the 'logical = INTP', INFJs have tertiary Ti and (male) INFJs are likely to develop it (tertiary Ti) well and early due to the demands from society for rugged, thinking men, especially in the 50s. Thus, the idea that he is too logical to be an INFJ doesn't really hold up. The examples you gave were hardly evidence of a Ti dom anyway, and, looking back, most of the analysis that led to casting doubt came from outside 8, especially the most important bit (the eyewitness examination) was conducted by 9. The situation that led to 8 making a show of walking was created by the feeler 5's revelation that the man couldn't have run. He really only revealed two things by himself: the knife and the old man's testimony about the yelling. How do those two bits confirm your theory that he's an INTP?

Second, when the movie begins, 8 appears most strikingly to be an introverted intuitive feeling type (or possibly - yet unlikely - an INTJ with developed Fi), just by the appearance of his face. He generally has a pleasant smile on that takes over his whole face and eyes, very characteristic of feeling types in general. You mentioned his having a great depth of empathy and then you focus on the few moments where he utilizes logic. You didn't mention the amount of effort using his logic took; he constantly had to pause (due to using up energy) to formulate his thoughts; he's not matter-of-fact like most thinking types are, who get more energized when doing such analysis (like 4 does). Take the examination of the old man's testimony again: when 8 puts the information together, he has to close his eyes and concentrate in order to do so.

I would say it's between INFP or INFJ. I think the reason he comes across as more of an INFP (and so is often mistyped as such or INTP) is because Fonda himself was an ISTJ, so he actually utilizes - in real life - all the cognitive functions an INFP would. Si Te Fi Ne. But his acting appears to be a projection of an INFJ more than an INFP. His stubborn attitude; his ability to maintain his confidence despite 11 others having a different view, all the circumstantial evidence, and the eye witness testimony; and his overall diplomacy and charisma are indicative of an Ni dom, especially an Ni dom with aux Fe.


Another edit - 9 seems to be an INTJ. He appears to be using Te rather then Fe, I'm not sure though. This guy is tough because he's so balanced.

12 does seem to be an ENFP as you said. I have reasons, but I can't think about them anymore.

I think we have a lot of problems because there is a difference between what type they are supposed to be and what type they actually are at times. For example, I think it's clear juror 2 is supposed to be an ISFJ, but his indecisiveness and lack of empirical evidence-based (phenomenological) reasoning and "I just think he's guilty" attitude make him seem like an introverted intuitor. Yet he clearly does not rely on the complex reasoning mechanisms of an N.

Anyway...

Updated List

1- ESFJ
2- ISFJ
3- ESTJ
4- INTJ possibly S
5- ISFP well developed Ni = seems more introverted and intuitive
6- ISFP poorly developed Ni = seems more extroverted
7- ESTP
8- INFJ
9- INTJ
10- ESTJ
11- INTP
12- ENFP

Question: Could 3 be an N?

 

[lucky12]

I finally watched it again, typing is hard for jurors 4,8,9,11 which has been said.

I felt a strong connection between 4 and 8.
-All 'facts' of the trial have many fine details imagined by these two, therefore arguing validness of each fact is a long progress. Juror 4 is first annoyed, yet as his idea's fill with doubt he begins to sway. I never would have assumed from his body language that he would be one of the last to say not guilty.

Juror 8 somewhat seems far and distant after it is 6 to 6. He is still there to return the same kind of disrespect he received from juror 3 in the beginning though. He never had any need to control anyone, just implant some theories.

Juror 9 is very good with fine details. The nose marks with the glasses, he made the connection after staring at 4 for the whole debate. That part in the movie, everyone is fidgeting with their glasses before he makes the connection.

Juror 11 is hilarious, always reminding people of what is proper.

I wont type, I like all 4 of these jurors immensely though. They lead the imaginative drive of the argument and they were always concentrated at the issue at hand.

 

[WSidis]

I'm close to certain about these:

1- ESFJ
2- ISFJ
3- ESTJ
4- INTJ
5- ISFP-Ni
6- ISFP
7- ESTP
8- INFJ everything he says/does is based on "feeling", he's an INFx for sure, he's too structured and methodical to be an INFP
9- INFJ ' '
10- ESTJ
11- INTP
12- ENFP