The good thing about 12 Angry Men is how generally timeless it is. There will always be juries, and the members of those juries will always have personal prejudice. Sidney Lumet’s 1957 was remade in the 90s by William Friedkin, and there was very little updating required.In the hands of the right director- one that is comfortable working with actors and able to transcend the confines of a single room through camera placement and editing- 12 Angry Men can retain its original power, while also introducing its powerful content to new audiences.Here’s how I think a remake of this film could go:Directed by: David O. Russell Written by: David Mamet Starring:
I’d listen to a podcast about these fantasy castings, they’re so great. I’d like to respectfully disagree on jurors #4 and #8, though. I like Andre Braugher a lot, but I think his natural intensity would clash with #4’s detached, calculated nature. I also like Peter Sarsgaard, but he lacks the gravitas necessary to carry #8. I don’t have any replacements at the ready because I’m not that quick, but still brilliant stuff. Hope to see many more of these. Simmons, Harris, and Serbedzija are damn strokes of genius.
I picked Sarsgaard precisely because he is not an immediately likable actor. His voice and demeanor have a quality that inherently makes one suspicious of him, I think. I like the idea of Juror #8, so reasonable and sympathetic in the original, being somebody that we’re not immediately on board with, but who wins us over through sound argument.
That’s definitely an interesting subversion and one I probably wouldn’t have thought of. I could see that in a more modern, less theatrical telling of the story, and Mamet is certainly smart enough to adjust the other characters accordingly in such a telling. It seems like your other choices are very similar to the original readings of the characters, so I guess that’s why Sarsgaard stood out in such sharp relief.
Yeah, the other characters are fairly archetypical, so you can’t really cast too much against type with them. But Juror #8 is pretty flexible. You could play his attitude as perfectly righteous or self righteous, reasonable or contrarian, conciliatory or superior. And the fact that the hero of the story can allow so many options, depending on the performance, is what I thought was so interesting.
The Sarsgaard/Fonda comparison is interesting. In films Sarsgaard usually comes across as sleazy but is probably a decent guy, while Fonda usually comes across as a pillar of integrity but was reportedly not always a good guy.
The upshot is Sarsgaard’s on-screen persona could work in his favor as Juror 8 because he’d have to convince us, the audience, as well as the other characters.
The good thing about 12 Angry Men is how generally timeless it is. There will always be juries, and the members of those juries will always have personal prejudice. Sidney Lumet’s 1957 was remade in the 90s by William Friedkin, and there was very little updating required.In the hands of the right director- one that is comfortable working with actors and able to transcend the confines of a single room through camera placement and editing- 12 Angry Men can retain its original power, while also introducing its powerful content to new audiences.Here’s how I think a remake of this film could go:Directed by: David O. Russell
I’d listen to a podcast about these fantasy castings, they’re so great. I’d like to respectfully disagree on jurors #4 and #8, though. I like Andre Braugher a lot, but I think his natural intensity would clash with #4’s detached, calculated nature. I also like Peter Sarsgaard, but he lacks the gravitas necessary to carry #8. I don’t have any replacements at the ready because I’m not that quick, but still brilliant stuff. Hope to see many more of these. Simmons, Harris, and Serbedzija are damn strokes of genius.
I picked Sarsgaard precisely because he is not an immediately likable actor. His voice and demeanor have a quality that inherently makes one suspicious of him, I think. I like the idea of Juror #8, so reasonable and sympathetic in the original, being somebody that we’re not immediately on board with, but who wins us over through sound argument.
That’s definitely an interesting subversion and one I probably wouldn’t have thought of. I could see that in a more modern, less theatrical telling of the story, and Mamet is certainly smart enough to adjust the other characters accordingly in such a telling. It seems like your other choices are very similar to the original readings of the characters, so I guess that’s why Sarsgaard stood out in such sharp relief.
Yeah, the other characters are fairly archetypical, so you can’t really cast too much against type with them. But Juror #8 is pretty flexible. You could play his attitude as perfectly righteous or self righteous, reasonable or contrarian, conciliatory or superior. And the fact that the hero of the story can allow so many options, depending on the performance, is what I thought was so interesting.
The Sarsgaard/Fonda comparison is interesting. In films Sarsgaard usually comes across as sleazy but is probably a decent guy, while Fonda usually comes across as a pillar of integrity but was reportedly not always a good guy.
The upshot is Sarsgaard’s on-screen persona could work in his favor as Juror 8 because he’d have to convince us, the audience, as well as the other characters.
What a terrific list. I’m mentally putting together a 12 angry women list right now…i would have liked to see Anne Bancroft in that.
Please do this and post it here! I’d love to see it.
– David
I love all these choices… but how dare you! I only half kid. 12 Angry Men is sacred territory. It was the movie that introduced me to Henry Fonda 🙂
I agree with Scott, I’m not 100% sold on Peter Sarsgaard as #8, but it would be interesting to see.
Maybe it’s a little weird to be commenting on this after 3 years. Likely, no one will read this. Whatever, here’s mine:
Juror 1: Corey Stoll
Juror 2: Matthew Broderick
Juror 3: Michael Keaton
Juror 4: Chiwetel Ejiojor
Juror 5: Michael Pena
Juror 6: Walton Goggins
Juror 7: Michael Shannon
Juror 8: Edward Norton
Juror 9: Morgan Freeman
Juror 10: Brian Cox
Juror 11: Mads Mikkelsen
Juror 12: Jason Bateman