Originally written by Reginald Rose in 1954 as a television play, "Twelve Angry Men" went on to ultimately have a stage version by Sherman L. Sergel in 1955. The plot follows a jury as they determine the fate of a young man standing trial for murder. It is through this debate that reason and prejudice meet head on, notably through Juror #8 and Juror #3 respectively.
A remarkable aspect of Jenkintown's performance of "12 Angry Jurors" was that it was student directed by Emily Dubin who had a remarkable eye for detail in not only casting but in her stage movements. There was not a single moment without a realistic element of life as those cast as jurors would bring aspects of everyday life into their every action. Be it getting water or asking a question to the person seated beside them, the actors under Dubin's guidance brought their characters to life with some admittedly repetitive but necessary movements.
Juror #8, played by William Carter II, acted as the voice of reason and the protagonist of the play. While almost one-dimensional at times, Carter truly played the part of the outsider with incredible composure and moments of controlled emotion. Charlie Mangan, who played Juror #3, acted with intense passion that left the audience silent on multiple occasions. He was easily understood and seemed to have the emotional build-up and background of his character down perfectly. Caitlin Frazee portrayed the wealthy Juror #4 with grace as well as clarity; her actions were elegant and she acted as the buffer between the aforementioned characters with certainty.
The set, designed by Charlie Mangan, was simple and streamlined. While it did not draw attention from the jurors and the drama unfolding on stage, it felt as if there was no space for the actors to move around easily. However, the suspending windows and overall layout were functional and understated in that they provided the needed background but were not overwhelming.
Marielle Zakrzwski paid amazing attention to the varying intricacies of the actors/characters of "12 Angry Jurors" through her costume design. Along with her sophisticated style and individual notes of each juror's personality, Zakrzwski used small changes in each actor's appearance to display the overbearing heat of the summer day along with the stress and frustration of deliberation.
Jenkintown High School's powerful performance of "12 Angry Jurors" explored multiple facets of society, but it had multiple areas of character development and connection in regards to the actors. All characters were very well executed, although a few jurors seemed to fade into the background at times. Overall, it was a poignant production and a fantastic job by all involved!
by Emily Serpico of Interboro High School
------------------------------
A locked room, blistering heat, and passionate yelling? Sounds like a nightmare. But, in Jenkintown High School's performance of "12 Angry Jurors," directed by Emily Dubin, the audience was on the edge of their seats begging for more.
Written in by Reginald Rose, the story of twelve jurors from a murder trial deliberation unfolds. The decision of sending a young teenager to a death sentence seems obvious to eleven jurors, but one juror, Juror #8, stands against them. Eagerly attempting to reach a unanimous vote, the jurors complain in the heat desperately trying to reach a consensus, even though prejudice and different beliefs divide them.
The performance was anchored by the amazing chemistry between the cast and the realism depicted by each individual juror.
Juror #8 (William Carter II), the naysayer, consistently portrayed the emotions his character was experiencing. By utilizing body movements and facial expressions, he allowed the audience to gain an understanding of his position. Despite disliking his character's argument, the audience was drawn to the passion and anger that Juror #3 (Charlie Mangan), the antagonist, emanated. Mangan's performance convinced the audience, with his portrayal of a range of emotions, and at times despite the drama, brought laughter.
As a whole, the group of jurors were charming; constantly fidgeting and walking around, they accurately showed the reality of a jury room. However, three stand-out performances were that of Juror #7 (Mattie McNamara), Juror #4 (Caitlin Frazee), and Juror #2 (Sophie Pettit). In keeping with the sassiness of her character, McNamara chewed gum throughout the entire performance, capturing her character's essence. Caitlin Frazee and Sophie Pettit served as buffers between the madness of the other jurors; in their own individual styles, they conveyed different ways humans deal with hard situations. At times, actors had difficulty with their lines because of nerves, but they persevered. Some actors appeared monotone in their acting, but the overall chemistry in the group made up for this.
The set, designed by Charlie Mangan, was simplistic -- two big brown windows, a water station, and a large table with chairs -- but it was nicely and creatively executed. Even though the actors did not use microphones, they could be heard easily. The costumes, designed by Marielle Zakrzwski, were consistent in representing each character in everyday attire.
Jenkintown High School was successful in tackling the difficult themes of prejudice, justice, and speaking up for what is right. As the lights faded, the audience questioned how they can make a difference and speak up for what they believe in. Perceptions of others are merely perceptions, and Jenkintown High School's production reiterated that fact.
by Sarah Eckstein Indik of Jack M Barrack Hebrew Academy
------------------------------
The tension in the air is palpable as twelve jurors argue what exactly constitutes "reasonable doubt" when a life is at stake in the courtroom. Some are entirely convinced by the evidence, while others remain unsure. Shouting and anger erupt as the jurors contemplate the case through their own personal biases. Jenkintown High School presents relevant issues in their thought-provoking rendition of "Twelve Angry Jurors."
First seen on television as "Twelve Angry Men," "Twelve Angry Jurors" follows a jury who, after an arduous, hot trial must decide on a verdict: guilty or innocent. A 19-year-old boy from the slums is accused of murdering his abusive father. American law states the decision must be unanimous, so tempers rise when one of the twelve votes innocent. Yet, after a reexamination of the situation, the jurors discover new uncertainties, causing some to reconsider their own votes.
"Twelve Angry Jurors" is difficult to produce, for all of the main cast must remain on stage for the entirety of the show. Still, the Jenkintown High School actors managed to stay in character, even when the spotlight was not on them, and their impassioned performances brought new life to the courtroom thriller.
Charlie Mangan played the vehement Juror 3, always quick to anger and furious in arguing for the boy's guilt. He consistently delivered a fervent passion that made his performance stand out. Meanwhile, William Carter II portrayed the impassive Juror 8, the only one to believe the boy innocent. He provided a good foil for Mangan's character, constantly arguing with calm, yet intensely delivered lines, standing firm in his belief despite the fact that it drew his peers' ire.
The ensemble's performances kept the audience fully immersed in the atmosphere of the story, through little actions such as fanning themselves from the hot day. Juror 4 (Caitlin Frazee) provided the rational argument for the boy's guilt, keeping a level head while those around her reached points of high emotion. Sophie Pettit portrayed the nervous Juror 2, who caught the audience's attention with her sweet, slightly awkward behavior.
The production was directed by student Emily Dubin. Her creative decision to keep the cast dynamically moving about, with trips to the window and small conversations in the background, conveyed the frantic feeling that comes with bearing the responsibility for someone's future. Though this could be distracting at times, it also caused the show and its characters to seem even more realistic and relatable to those viewing the play. The production's costumes did well to exhibit each character's personality even before they had spoken a single word.
Jenkintown High School brought "Twelve Angry Jurors" to life with passionate performances that caused its audience to reflect on their own biases and consider what "reasonable doubt" really means when a life is on the line.
by Anji Cooper of Academy of the New Church
------------------------------
The students of Jenkintown High School took the themes of representation, standing alone, and prejudice in their production of "Twelve Angry Jurors", written by Reginald Rose and adapted by Sherman L. Sergel.
A very tense situation is introduced at the beginning of the play. Set in 1954, a jury of 12 sits around a table, reviewing a case of a man who is suspected to have murdered his father. Only one, Juror #8, believes he is innocent. He butts heads with Juror #3, who firmly believes the man is guilty. Over time, Juror #8 must convince the jury that the man should not be put to death.
The show was superb in all facets of production. The set was simple and useful, the costumes made sense, and it was hard to believe the acting was done by high school students.
The play focused around two male leads: Jurors #3 and #8. The push and pull of the characters was very effective. Juror #8 (William Carter II) was advocating for the freedom of the defendant. As difficult as it is to play the "good guy," Carter was endearing and persuasive. Juror #3 (Charlie Mangan) struggled internally by making the case personal to his paternal problems. Mangan was incredible in this role, using anger and sadness very believably to make the audience understand him.
The supporting cast complemented the play, and the differences among the characters were immediately clear. Juror #10 (Laura Dibble) was striking as a racist woman who took a long time to choose "not guilty." Juror #5 (Maggie Farr) was a woman who had grown up in the slums, and her personal experience was portrayed very well. Lastly, the body language of #9 (Yusra Ali) as an old woman stood out and was very consistent. Overall, the ensemble of the jury was unfaltering in character and each character was notably distinct.
Although plain, the tech aspects of the show were impressive. Mainly, the set was chairs and a table. There were also two windows, used as a symbol of possibility, and two working doors. Lastly, there was a water dispenser, which served as an impetus for the characters moving around the stage. The costumes were also admirable in their specificity to the characters and their relevance to the time period.
The cast and crew of Jenkintown High showed that they can handle a mature play and still stand out as a vibrant, memorable, and talented group.
by Olivia Shuman of Friends Select School
------------------------------
Recently, many have been inspired by the activities of young students across the nation. At Jenkintown High School, students chose to spark conversation about prejudice and bias through their production of 12 Angry Jurors.
Written in by Reginald Rose in 1995, 12 Angry Jurors follows 12 men and women in a jury room as they decide the fate of a young man on trial. Through observation of the casts deliberation, the audience discovers how the jurors' biases affect their ability to judge the situation.
The maturity and seriousness of the cast gave power to 12 Angry Jurors' underlying message about the assumptions of stereotypes forced on members of different demographics. Many times the actors were tasked with delivering convoluted monologues that revealed their characters biases or commented on another's. Every juror was left on stage unpack several weighted discussions. With their eloquent and passionate deliveries of each line, the cast ensured that the audience would understand the writer's intended message and encouraged the audience members to think more about societal tendencies themselves.
Standout performances were given by Charlie Mangan, who played a fiery and aggressive Juror #3 as well as William Carter II, who played Juror #8. Together, they forced the audience to think critically and closely.
In addition to the performances, the costumes, headed by Marielle Zakrwski, accentuated the personality tropes of each character. Additionally, the realistic set design allowed for the jurors to interact with their environment.
All works of the cast and crew came together wonderfully to create an enjoyable production of 12 Angry Jurors.
by Carly McIntosh of Baldwin School
------------------------------
The American justice system rests upon the value of "innocent until proven guilty," a concept simple in language but ever-so complex in execution. Jenkintown High School spent this past weekend revealing the complexities and challenges within the system when one factors in prejudice and biases in the show Twelve Angry Jurors.
One boy from a "slum" background is on trial for murder, and eleven jurors claim he is guilty. But for the twelfth juror (Juror #8, Will Carter), this issue is not so black and white. Information about the juror's lives- why they stand so strong to their convictions- comes to light, and the jury ensemble reveals differences and similarities between people and tries to demonstrate why the world is the way it is.
Overall, the production focused around the interactions between the different characters of the jury ensemble and their dynamics, allowing for the audience to focus on the arguments and reasoning with minimal distractions.
Charles Mangan (Juror #3) ended up providing a ferocious contrast to Will Carter. The two actors chose to reveal their characters' anger in polar opposite ways, Mangan representing the brash, emotional, and prejudiced side of the argument and Carter the logical, objective perspective. Mangan in particular, however, dominated the stage with his fierce physicality and line delivery, notably in his outburst of "I'll kill him!" at the end of act 2.
Within the supporting cast, Juror #4 (Caitlin Frazee) stood out as a prominent player by acting as the mitigator (or rather buffer) between Jurors 3 and 8. Everything from her line delivery to her posture emanated authority and justice. In addition, Juror #7 (Mattie McNamara) appeared to be perhaps the most realistic character, delivering all of her blocking and lines with no inclination of it being forced or unnatural.
Emily Dubin managed to tackle an incredibly topical and sensitive show, meeting the challenge of orchestrating a show composed of both bigotry and benevolence, condemnation and kindness. The show was also supported by the wide range of student-produced costumes that allowed more information to be shared about the cast than can be found in the script.
In closing, this was a difficult show on an emotional level to produce but in performing it, the students of Jenkintown hopefully provided a conversation starter about privilege and prejudice through the portrayal of all characters, the bigoted and the merciful and everyone in between.
by Emily Thompson of Baldwin School
------------------------------
Murderer, monster, menace to society; that's how the jury describes the 19 year old boy on trial for the death of his father. One man is already dead; but should another man die too?
In Jenkintown High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors, it becomes clear that the real monsters are the ones sitting in the deliberation room.
Based on the 1954 teledrama by Reginald Rose, 12 Angry Jurors turns the murder trial into something more than just guilty or not guilty, exploring bias and prejudice in the justice system through the twelve jurors and their subconscious biases. All the evidence points to the boy on trial; but one juror dissents nevertheless. Like dominoes, the jurors begin questioning their moral compass as they are forced to face the outdated beliefs so deeply rooted in their subconscious.
Jenkintown's adaptation added a contemporary twist to the timeless story, complete with a cast of jurors who seemed as real as the issues at stake. These are people you encounter every day: the woman next door, the man sitting across you on the train, even your grandmother; each character was distinctly defined and thoroughly believable.
Charlie Mangan stole the show with his explosive portrayal of Juror #3, an obstinate man plagued by his agonizing relationship with his own son. Always fidgeting, always reacting, Mangan's performance was like a ticking time bomb: ready to erupt with rage at any moment. While the entire cast carried the story along with equal contribution, other stand-out performances included Henry Gifford as the Foreman, whose presence as an arbiter brought a mellowing balance to the volatile atmosphere; as well as Sophie Pettit as Juror #2, a mousy, sheepish woman whose contributions ultimately lead to a discovery that sways even the most stubborn of the group.
Director Emily Dubin's attention to detail and authenticity punctuated the performance with a level of professionalism that makes it difficult to believe the production was student directed. Despite the particularly simple set design, lighting, and sound effects, Marielle Zakrwski's exquisite costuming compensated thoroughly. Every piece of clothing was evidently thought out, augmenting each character's already well-established individuality.
All in all, Jenkintown High School presented a much-needed social commentary that ultimately hit home. Even if the boy's innocence is left ambiguous, the talent and dedication of the cast and crew certainly wasn't.
by Kit Conklin of Baldwin School
------------------------------
The cast of Jenkintown High School's 12 Angry Jurors had the audience wonder guilty or not guilty. From the deep characterization, to the addition of a student director, to the realistic set design and costumes, the cast made the show easy to watch and provided a powerful message of our current jury system.
Twelve Angry Jurors, originally 12 Angry Men, was a drama written in the 1950's by Reginald Rose. Initially, it was a TV play concerning the jury of a homicide trial. It was soon adapted to the stage, and made into a successful film. Throughout the year, there have been many adaptions and remakes of the play. The ensemble of 12 Angry Jurors has their own adaption as well, mentioning topics that are still as relevant today as they were in the 1950's.
All of the Jurors were able to shine in their roles, and were deeply committed to their characters. One prime example of this is Charlie Mangan as Juror #3. Juror #3 is the juror who is the father who seems to have anger issues and issues with his son. Every line Charlie said was supported with motivation, though the motivation wasn't typically shared. Charlie's facial expressions were apparent, and in scenes you could see the emotion pouring out of him. William Carter II, who played Juror #8, had a wonderful performance as well. Juror #8 is the juror who always has the reasonable doubt. Throughout the show, William continued his driving force of this reasonable doubt, and by the end of the play, had everyone believing it.
Not only did the males thrive on the stage, the women did as well. Juror #4, Caitlin Frazee, seemed to have a more mature quality to her. She spoke her lines with decorum, and truly embodied her more mature character. Another student who shined was Mattie McNamara, Juror #7. She had this nasty attitude and stank face on the entire time, and brought it to everything she did. All the women brought this decorum to all of their characters, which worked, for they were apart of a jury.
Charlie Mangan, Juror #3, also provided the set design. The set was simple, but was productive for the show. Additionally, Marielle Zakrzwski, who was one of the guards, created the costume designs. The costumes were very colorful, and showed the variety of people in the room. But what may be the most unique part of the show is that they had a student director. Emily Dubin, who had done theatre previously, co-directed the show. Emily being a director allowed us to see a different point of view, and a point of view of the show from the students.
12 Angry Jurors fared quite well. With all of the relevant topics in the show, it sometimes makes it a little challenging to decipher which reference is which. But the ensemble of 12 Angry Jurors made it quite easy to decipher. Additionally, they provided an insight on how these topics can affect people, and what we can do about it.
by Faith Sirdashney of Eastern Regional High School
------------------------------
Twelve Angry Jurors ensues right after the court hearing of a convicted, 19 year old, murderer. The boy was convicted of killing his dad, and there are two witnesses to this crime. The case seems open and shut, but one person on the jury has another thought. The play was written by
Reginald Rose, and it is set in 1954.
William Carter II, Juror #8 set us up with an intoxicating story. He went against the grain and proved to all these other jurors that this kid was given almost no chances in life. He made the audience believe the kid wasn't guilty. Charlie Mangan, who played Juror #3, played angry like it was second hand nature. He knew all the right points to hit with his rage, and his facial expressions made everything that much more realistic. Throughout the play, his character did a great job evolving into his personal vendetta.
The foreman and Jeremy Todaro, Juror #11 both added a bit of laughter to the play. Laura Dibble, Juror #10, was hard to watch because of how believable her character was.
The actors were not mic'd, but the audience could hear them adequately. The set and props were also crafted well. Hair and costuming fit the time period. It was a nice touch that some actors clothes looked a bit more messy when the second act started. Makeup on stage was great. Especially Yusra Ali's, Juror #9, who portrayed an old woman.
All in all, Jenkintown delivered this piece with a great degree of accuracy and it was enjoyable to watch.
by Avery Johnson of Friends Select School
------------------------------
Twelve angry jurors stuck in one hot room, who are not allowed to leave until they've come to a unanimous decision: is the defendant guilty, or not guilty?
Jenkintown High School brought us Reginald Rose's Twelve Angry Jurors, a play that highlights the biases each person carries with them, and in this case, when they're faced with hard decisions. Even though it was written in the 1950's, many of the problems that arise in the show are still relevant today. It's set in a small room on a hot summer day where twelve jurors are debating over a murder case and must come to a single decision: are we sending the defendant to jail or letting him go?
Overall, the actors really brought the tension of the play to their table. Since the jurors aren't allowed to leave the room until they've come to a decision, all twelve are on stage for most, if not all, of the show, and they shared the space well all while having the energy and focus of the audience flow smoothly from person to person. And while not all of them had an equal amount of lines or time spent in the spotlight, no Juror felt left behind in the story. Whether they were talking, or simply reacting, the cast as a whole worked to bring to light the complex debate of Twelve Angry Jurors.
Juror #3, played by Charlie Mangan, sets himself apart from the other jurors very early on. He is completely set in his choice, and nothing is going to change that, nothing at all. Charlie brought #3's anger right into the faces of the other jurors, unafraid to really yell. And right next to him, Juror #4, played by Caitlin Frazee, is also very set in her beliefs but brings a contrast to #3's anger. She stays calm and collected, sticking to a fact-based argument instead of a more emotionally driven one. #3 and #4 work as this high-contrast team, both very unwilling to move and ready to convince anyone that they're right, and Mangan and Frazee really brought that to life.
Juror #8, played by William Carter II, starts as the only person against convicting. He is the voice of reason, staying calm in the face of some very angry jurors, who are already set on convicting. Carter has to stand mere inches away from a man screaming in his face and never once did he lose the seriousness of Juror #8. Juror #7, played by Mattie McNamara, is just ready to be done with this case. McNamara, even while just listening to others argue, never lost touch with the "I have a place to be that isn't right here so I am very done with this debate" feel of Juror #7.
Charlie Mangan, the set designer of Twelve Angry Jurors, made everything in the single set, from the tissues on the tables to the water cooler, useful, and so they became little pieces of each character. From the floating windows in the back, and the constant opening and closing of said windows, to the ever-growing pile of tissues, no part of the set wasn't functional. And without names, audiences can get lost as to who is who, but Marielle Zakrzwski's costuming choice to have each juror in a distinct color or style made it very clear as to who was who.
Twelve Angry Jurors is a show that asks audiences to consider, along with the actors, the facts of the case, and Jenkintown High School's production really brought to life that hot summer day.
by Claire McHarg of Friends Select School
------------------------------
Jenkintown's re-creation of the always timely Reginald Rose courtroom classic "Twelve Angry Jurors," (or Twelve Angry Men as originally titled) was poignant and poised in its performance.
The play concerns twelve jurors who must preside and decide over the case of a boy murdering his father. Despite overwhelming evidence implicating the boy's guilt, one jury member refuses to let the boy be indicted and eventually executed because of doubts with the stories of witnesses. Despite everyone being confused and angry at the holdout's decision to vote not guilty, they slowly begin to come around and admit their biases that have been influencing them.
The two characters who serve as the central characters among the twelve person jury are the third (Charlie Mangan) and eighth (William Carter II) jury members, who adamantly believe in finding the boy guilty and not guilty respectively. Mangan's portrayal of the third juror was powerful and professional, as a character who is almost constantly angry and occasionally bursts out into fits of rage; it is a difficult character to portray. Anger itself is a difficult emotion to portray onstage without appearing awkward and Mangan managed to perform the character without descending into awkwardness. William Carter II's portrayal of the eighth juror did well to help engage the audience as the voice of pure unadulterated morality. Carter displayed immense stoicism in a role that demanded it and deserves to be commended.
Caitlin Frazee's portrayal of the 4th juror is also deserving of praise. As one of the main supporting players outside of the two main jurors, Frazee did well to act as a buffer between the third and eighth jurors. She agreed with the third juror in the boy's guilt but helped keep things civilized in the jury room despite the third juror's attacking of anyone who disagreed with him.
The set design is also deserving of praise, helping to establish the jury room and the various motifs associated with the timeless play.
Overall, Jenkintown did a fine job and deserves commendation for their performance.
by Eli Luchak of Friends Select School
------------------------------
Jenkintown High School did a great job with their portrayal of Twelve Angry Jurors last weekend.
The play itself revolves around, as one might expect, a jury trying to decide whether a young man is to be found guilty in a murder case, the victim of which is his own father. As the events of the play unfolds, we see the jury's views and opinions change and develop based on their interactions with the evidence and each other. We are also allowed glimpses into how each juror's background and personal life experiences affect their judgement.
The set designer managed to create a simplistic environment that allowed the audience to focus on where the action was happening, but also gave the other characters freedom to move and seamlessly interact with their surroundings in an organic fashion. Be it the windows, the water crock, or the background colors which captured the heat of the summer day on which the events of the play took place, all elements of the stage were placed with thought and care.
As for the actors, Charlie Mangan (Juror #3) and William Carter II (Juror #8) were absolutely inseparable from their characters. Their projection was excellent and each channeled emotions their characters were carrying with determination and well-rehearsed poise. Mangan's zealous accusations and Carter's stoic calmness and perseverance were nothing short of admirable and memorable.
Caitlin Frazee (Juror #4) did a great job in her character's role as captain of this chaotic ship of a jury room, and knowing when and how to steer the conversation in a way that studying lines alone does not teach.
There's also a lot to be said for the overall composure and in character behaviors of the actors when the action shifted away from them. They, as well as the directors, deserve to be very proud of the show they put on.
All in all, Jenkintown High School's Twelve Angry Jurors was a thoroughly enjoyable production.
by Mohamad Eisa of Friends Select School
------------------------------
12 Angry Jurors performed at Jenkintown High School had the audience on the edge of their seats. The story followed 12 jurors (and a jury foreman) trying to decide if a person accused of murder is guilty or not guilty and cannot seem to agree.
Juror #3 was portrayed by Charlie Mangan. Mangan did an amazing job. He was sincere with his performance, had superb character development, and even when he stumbled over his lines he made it seem natural. The audience really got to see the layers of his character and how he contributed to the show.
Juror #8, performed by William Carter II, was completely believable. It was clear what his thought process was throughout the entirety of the show. He really stood out from the other actors for his mannerisms and portrayal of his character. It was clear that he had given his character a lot of thought and was very natural about being Juror #8.
Jurors #2, #4, and #7 portrayed by Sophie Pettit, Caitlin Frazee, and Mattie McNamara, all had very distinct characters. They were convincing in their performances and even when others were talking they were still in character interacting with others. Sometimes their actions seemed forced but still did a fine job as their characters.
The whole show was directed by student director Emily Dubin. Dubin had done extraneous research about the show and each character. She had directed the actors in a way that made them seem natural and it was clear that she had each actor think long and hard about who they were. At times it was unclear to the audience for why she directed the way she did. For example, at one point a group of jurors were mad at a specific one, and got up and started staring at the wall to ignore her. All in all, Dubin impressed the audience as a student director.
Charlie Mangan also did the set design. He had three initial sketches of what he wanted that evolved into what the set ended up looking like. His set was simplistic yet practical. A long table was in the middle of the stage with chairs around it for the jurors. If a juror wanted to get up to go to the bathroom or get a cup of water they would have to walk all the way around the table which would sometimes distract from the dialogue coming from other actors.
12 Angry Jurors engaged the audience up to the very end. The show was a dramatic work that was very clearly thought about and worked on extremely hard. The show had its ups and downs but was nevertheless a success!
by Sara Kelley of Friends Select School
------------------------------
NOT GUILTY. But, the audience definitely was found guilty of attending the show of "12 Angry Jurors" presented by Jenkintown School.
The play is set in a jury room with twelve men and women all with very different mindsets and personalities who are told to decide the innocence of an adolescent boy for the murder of his father. Between arguments, spilled secrets and the unbearable summer heat, the decision of the life of this boy is made within what seems like a lifetime but only a matter of hours.
Juror #3 and Juror #8 were the two main focal points of the show. The two polar opposite roles were impressively played by Charlie Mangan and William Carter II. The boys were set to have to opposite viewpoints on the case which caused a head to head combat but eventually into something greater. Especially for Charlie, portraying that much anger and hatred without an ounce of breaking character throughout the show takes a strong skill which was very intriguing. Both the boys talents were strongly shown through the show.
As for some other jurors, Juror #4 and Juror #7 were greatly unique as well. The roles were taken by Caitlin Frazee and Mattie McNamara. Caitlin played a more "motherly" figure of the show. She has her own opinions but heard others out and settled any form of disagreements that got out of hand. Maintaining her character was outstanding. Mattie who played a more one sided "better than anyone else" girl, was amazing. The tone of voice and small actions such as chewing gum truly helped shape her character during the production.
The set was beautifully lit with the faint lights against the white wall. It truly set the mood for the show. Along with the costumes, they were perfectly fit for each character. It was the main source of portraying the personality of each character.
The overall show was very well done. All the cast was incredible and kept me interested the entire time. Every blocking choice and casting decision couldn't have been done better. Fantastic job to the student director Emily Dubin.
by Aryonna Orth of Interboro High School
------------------------------
Tensions boil high in the stuffy holding room that is at the forefront of the Jenkintown production of �12 Angry Jurors.' Reginald Rose's original work �12 Angry Men' is showcased by the talented students of Jenkintown as they become the titular jurors who decide the verdict of the case of a young boy allegedly murdering his father. The jurors, eager to get out of the court with the summer heat irritating them further, insist upon a guilty verdict. With the exception of one juror, who stands alone and gradually shows the rest of the jurors his point of view throughout the duration of the play. This student run production deserves its props as it fully enraptures the audience with the aid of its simplistic yet purposeful set and its invested actors.
The set could be mistaken as incidentally cramped but this merely adds to the tension of the inescapable confrontations between the jurors as they decided the fate of one young man with his life on the line for the murder of his father. With no where else for the tension to go, it's no wonder why it boils over in such a way as it does over the course of their time in the jury room. With Juror #3 (Charlie Magnan) being the primary instigator and the direct contrast to that of Juror # 8 (William Carter II), as Carter insists upon a not guilty verdict.
The standout performances of Magnan and Carter are backed by a whole cast of talented actors, individually devoted to their roles with befitting characteristics and manners that give them distinct and varied characters so even if one's gaze does drift during the duration of the performance, one is never born while watching these students fully dedicate themselves to their individual roles.
Important to note is the degree to which this is a student run production. Backing a stellar cast is a student director, Dubin, who is to be commended for a job well done in a field that is usually so difficult for those of a student age. A simple stage crew did seamless work that made the show go off with a hitch.
With powerful line delivery and sometimes hard to achieve enunciation from all cast members, the performance of �12 Angry Jurors' at Jenkintown was an enjoyable and inspiring performance of one man sticking to his guns and ultimately reigning victorious in a tense and rigorous situation. The cast did a commendable job and proved to be a talented team who bounced off each other quite well.
by Bailey Collington of Interboro High School
------------------------------
"Twelve Angry Jurors" at Jenkintown Middle & High School was a show that left the audience as impassioned as the characters onstage!
"Twelve Angry Jurors", a show pertaining to a young man put on trial for the murder of his father, displayed the true colors of several types of people in society-- represented by twelve jurors-- whom battle each day with prejudice and deciphering the truth. The show was originally a teleplay in the early 1950s and entitled "Twelve Angry Men," but was later adapted into a play that could have either gender performing in it.
Most notable in Jenkintown's portrayal of the show were Charlie Mangan as well as William Carter II, whose strong personalities in the play were in the spotlight through its duration. The two fought brutally for what they each felt was morally correct, with immense raw emotion; it was effortless to believe that each person truly felt the way their character did.
Also giving a convincing performance, Juror #10, (Laura Dibble) was a bigoted and detestable woman that contained a great deal of hate in her heart as well as towards her. Dibble made the audience despise her, with her well spoken and timed wording of her racist, discriminatory rants. Her spotlight moment towards the end of the show depicted her character's stubbornness in her opinions of groups of people, but also her vulnerability when she is left alone with no one to agree with her. Sophie Pettit played her timid but eventually passionate and good hearted character as Juror #2 well despite her initial quiet demeanor. As the play progressed, her volume increased as well as the character's confidence, which she brought out beautifully.
The set, although simple, gave the cast the ability to have nearly all of the attention of the audience without distraction except for the occasional interruption of moving chairs due to the quarters being so tight. Overall, the characterization and memorization of the lines from the entire cast was extremely impressive as well as believable.
"Twelve Angry Jurors" was a show that Jenkintown should not be angry about, but happy about based upon their notable performance.
by Rachel Suga of Interboro High School
------------------------------
On Thursday March 8th, Jenkintown High School put on Twelve Angry Jurors, originally written by Reginald Rose in the 1950's.
The play is about twelve jurors that are stumped on deciding whether the defendant is guilty or not. It all begins with one juror that is firm with his idea that the defendant is not guilty. After hours of fighting, the jurors all begin to switch sides. Multiple entertaining stories unfold as the jurors make their decisions.
Although a few actors broke character, every actor's characterization was commendable. Some actors had roles that were difficult to take on, however they were great with portraying their character. Each character was unique and interesting in their own way.
Juror #3, played by Charlie Mangan, did an outstanding job with his characterization. His character was extremely interesting. Throughout the play, his story began to unfold. It was clear he had an unhealthy relationship with his son. Mangan was excellent with expressing emotions, and it was almost as if he was personally feeling the emotions. Juror #7, played by Mattie McNamara, was an intriguing character. From the second she walked on stage, she was admirably irritating. She portrayed her character excellently and always had chewing gum if anyone needed some.
Juror #8 was played by William Carter II. His character seemed to always have his thinking cap on. He was very clever when analyzing every second the crime. Carter II was successfully able to persuade all the Jurors, as well as the audience, that there was reasonable doubt about the defendant being guilty. Another character that the audience seemed to enjoy was Juror #9. Juror #9, an elderly woman, was played by Yusra Ali. Ali's characteristization was also very impressive. She constantly stayed in character and she easily portrayed the crotchety mannerisms of her character.
The set was was designed by Charlie Mangan (Juror #3) and fits the time period the play was written in. The tables and chairs had a vintage look to them, and made the audience feel as if they weren't in 2018 anymore. There were small factors that identified the aspects of a real courtroom, such as paper and pens, a water jug, a trash can, and even a bathroom in the corner. Although there were dangling windows and visible swaying curtains that became distractive at points, the set was designed well and clearly had a lot of thought put into it.
Jenkintown High School's Twelve Angry Jurors was well directed by student director, Emily Dublin. The play was dramatic, and was fun to watch. The audience seemed to enjoy the play in its entirety. Twelve Angry Jurors was a show worth seeing!
by Ryan McGinley of Interboro High School
------------------------------
One life has been lost, another is on the line. Twelve Angry Jurors follows a battle of tempers and personal biases in the jury room as a group of twelve individuals are forced to either condemn a man to death or potentially free a murderer. Reviewing each piece of evidence and painstakingly questioning every aspect of the trial, Twelve Angry Jurors is a provocative, exciting, and fascinating look into the American Judicial system. Jenkintown High School's production was emotionally powerful and incredibly thought provoking.
Although the piece is a completely ensemble piece, the storyline revolves around the adversarial relationship between Jurors 3 and 8, the former hell-bent on declaring a guilty verdict and the latter being the driving force behind a careful consideration of the case. Charlie Mangan portrayed Juror 3, with incredible precision and emotion. The Juror, being a hot-tempered, complex character, is very difficult to master, however Charlie executed the role perfectly. With stunning emotional range and a complete control of the stage, he stunned the audience. From his smallest interactions with other characters on stage to his long monologues, Charlie's performance was near flawless. Playing opposite him, Juror 8 (William Carter II) must stand his ground and stand alone to convince others of a reasonable doubt. While Carter was slightly quiet on stage, his acting was not timid. He boldly convinced the audience of the importance of standing for truth. William's expressive and at time
s comedic acting helped him to play a very convincing Juror.
The rest of the cast was also incredibly high energy and talented. Notably, Jurors 7,9, and 10 (Mattie MacNamara, Yusra, Ali, and Laura Dibble) added depth and passion to the stage as Jurors from different ideological and cultural backgrounds. Mattie perfectly portrayed a brash, outspoken woman that vehemently stands up for what she believes. In contrast, Yusra was a sweet, kindly old woman who sympathized with the Defendant and refused to allow sweeping judgements and emotional whims to permeate her decision-making process. Finally, Dibble was perhaps one of the most provocative characters. She portrayed an unapologetically prejudiced individual (specifically against one unspecified group) and her long tirade about "them" and how "they" are not to be trusted, powerfully showed the audience how prejudice can dictate our lives and how it can even seem natural or reasonable to us. All three masterfully handled their backstories and motivations.
This is due in large part to the direction of the show by student Emily Dubin. She deserves much applause for putting together such an intense show where at least twelve characters are in a single room at a time. In addition, the technical aspects of this show were well done. The set, although minimalistic, was artistic and student done, an especially difficult feat.
As a whole, this charged, emotional, and energetic performance of Twelve Angry Jurors was executed exceptionally well by Jenkintown High School and the lesson of how our own narratives affect us was imprinted on the audience with clear intent.
by Noah Glickman of Jack M Barrack Hebrew Academy
------------------------------
The jury room is a place in which moral dilemmas frequently arise. Jenkintown High School's production of Twelve Angry Jurors brought to life the complexity of a decision that could potentially convict a man of murder who may be innocent or acquit a man who may be guilty.
Twelve Angry Jurors, also known as Twelve Angry Men, is a play by Reginald Rose that calls attention to the challenges jurors may face. The play is set in a jury room, where jurors are forced to decide the fate of a man accused of murdering his father. Initially, eleven jurors believe the man is guilty, with only one dissenting opinion. However, as the play progresses and tensions arise among the jurors, enough reasonable doubt is raised to sway the jury towards an acquittal.
In Jenkintown's production, every member of the jury uniquely embodied his/her own distinct part with specific mannerisms and consistent character developments. The jurors as a group had a very strong dynamic that allowed for each individual personality to shine through.
Charlie Mangan and William Carter II played the two jurors who were the main combative forces within the jury room. Carter, who played the juror with the dissenting voice, performed his part convincingly in a way that enabled the audience to resonate with his beliefs in true justice. Mangan, who played the juror who persisted in arguing that the accused was guilty, actively engaged the audience by masterfully portraying the dynamic aspect and development of his character.
Caitlin Frazee, Mattie McNamara, and Laura Dibble played other juror members with prominent parts. Frazee put on a captivating performance, making all her points clear and understandable. McNamara's sassy and bold mannerisms enabled her to highlight her character's intentions wonderfully. Dibble's precise delivery of her character's racist lines was believable and thought-provoking.
Student director, Emily Dubin, remarkably directed this incredibly engaging and compelling performance. The student stage managers, Ari Ellision and Delen Beauchamp, ran the crew wonderfully, enabling the fluid execution of this production. The costume designs by Marielle Zakrzwski were very creatively thought of, with each distinct costume an accurate reflection of each distinct juror.
Overall, Jenkintown produced an incredibly riveting and captivating production of Twelve Angry Jurors, bringing to light many issues that are relevant to contemporary times.
by Rivkah Wyner of Jack M Barrack Hebrew Academy
------------------------------
Eleven people who want to just say "guilty" and get out of there. One person who wants to examine the case further. One hot room, twelve hot tempers, and one tension-filled play. In Jenkintown High School's production of "12 Angry Jurors," the talented cast made the tension felt and did a tremendous job with this difficult show.
Dealing with issues of prejudice and the way personal experience might affect someone, "12 Angry Jurors" gives an insight into the goings-on behind the closed door of a jury room. Though the murder case seems open-and-shut at first, through careful argument and re-enactments, one juror, Juror 8, slowly but surely convinces the others that there is reasonable doubt. Juror 3 is the angriest of the jurors, upset at anyone who even considers the boy on trial might not be guilty. The other jurors lie somewhere in the middle of these two poles, and add their own unique characters to the mix.
Jenkintown did a terrific job with this serious material. The cast's superb characterizations made the performance extremely believable and riveting to behold.
Charlie Mangan, as Juror 3, was an absolute wonder to behold. From his very first "pfft," to his confident body language, to his outburst at the end of the first act, to his very last line, his talent shone through. His anger seemed entirely natural, and when his body shook or when he yelled, the performance was so convincing it was a little terrifying. But while realizing he is wrong, he perfectly achieved several moments of great gentleness, making his performance all the more powerful and showing his incredible versatility as an actor. William Carter II, as Juror 8, also gave a great performance, maintaining a fairly cool and collected presence throughout to balance out Charlie's anger.
The other jurors also gave strong performances. They each understood their characters very well, and though occasional lines seemed forced, they gave an overwhelmingly realistic performance. From their constant fidgeting to their coughs and trips to the water cooler, each moment was realistically active, though the movement on stage was occasionally distracting from the main action. They worked extremely well together, so that even a moment where they were just waiting for the second hand to get to 60 was filled with breathtaking tension. Especial highlights were Mattie McNamara, the strong gum-chewing Juror 7 and Sophie Pettit, the cute watch-bearing Juror 2, but each cast member, including the judge and guards, brought something valuable to the show.
The creative work done by students was also valuable to the show. The costumes, designed by Marielle Zakrzwski, were varied and appropriate. The set, designed by Charlie Mangan himself, though fairly simple, was beautifully stark and added to the atmosphere of the show. Student director, Emily Dubin, did an impressive job handling the actors and this difficult material.
Overall, Jenkintown did an amazing job, showing each character as distinct and human, and conveying powerfully the message that no person or situation is truly open and shut.
by Ruthie Davis of Jack M Barrack Hebrew Academy
------------------------------
"Maybe you don't understand the meaning of reasonable doubt."
Jenkintown High School's Twelve Angry Jurors rips into the flawed American judicial system and all of its uncertainties, questioning if anyone really understands how justice works. Showing that "proof" frequently isn't really all that clear. Eyewitnesses, hearsay, blood, murder weapons all culminate in making close to no difference when determined by a group of people of all different beliefs and backgrounds. The American justice system is a dice roll that blindly determines the fates of the people it holds within its grasp.
Playwright Sherman Sergel's work, Twelve Angry Men, based on the Television show of the same name written by Reginald Rose, was originally played by an all white male cast. Twelve Angry Jurors shares the roles with women. They must determine the guilt or innocence of a boy from a poor neighborhood who is accused of murdering his father. The play never specifies race or religion and instead raises the question: who is the boy? As it reveals the prejudice of the jury, it points out the prejudices of a people divided.
The play is not Twelve Annoyed Jurors or Twelve Uncomfortable and Bothered Jurors, these jurors have to each get really angry. Reaching believable anger on stage can be tough. Even more challenging, when staged proscenium at tables, the play places the jurors in a situation where movement can be static. Student director Emily Dublin, bravely encouraged her cast to leave the safety of the three long tables placed across the front edge of the stage. Though she sometimes missed the mark, placing actors in locations that made the lines, particularly in confrontations, not ring true, her willingness to let them explore the space helped actors to physically reveal character.
Character is what Twelve Angry Jurors is basically about. As an ensemble piece, each role in the play has an equally large responsibility in creating the powerful message of the show. Charlie Mangan plays one of the angriest jurors, #3, Mangan did a good job of bringing a truly tense atmosphere to Jenkintowns' production. As the old lady, Juror #9, Yusra Al, was also constantly invested, demanding silence from her co-jurors with her wise words, powerful tonality, and strong presence. Despite less lines than many of the other characters, her performance transcended the sometimes less specific acting choices of her castmates.
Twelve Angry Jurors is a thought provoking drama that dissects the bias that can be involved when a jury decides the fate of a defendant. A well executed production of the play relies heavily on a strong ensemble of actors. Congratulations to Jenkintown High School and its student directed production for taking on this topical and challenging work.
by Lionel McCulloch of PA Leadership Charter School's Center for Performing & Fine Arts
------------------------------
Innocent men are put behind bars, killers are let loose into the streets, and only is it many years later does solid evidence arise that could prove a the innocence of a convicted man, or the guiltiness of a murderer. The decision really lies on the shoulders of the jury, man's fellow companions. In the play "12 Angry Jurors," performed by Jenkintown High School, the thought process and emotions of twelve jurors and how they prove the innocence of a young boy are evaluated.
The play starts with all twelve jurors entering the jury room. All of them complain of the heat, and want to go home. However, Juror #8 holds his silence. After some quarreling amongst them, they take their seats and vote if a boy, who is accused of murdering his father, is guilty or not. Juror #8 is the only one to vote not guilty. After arguing his case, and reviewing the evidence, slowly the jury's opinions switch to not guilty. The last one, who is the hardest to persuade, Juror #3, from the start has a clash with Juror #8. But eventually it is revealed he has struggles with his own son, which persuades his own vote on the matter.
William Carter II, who plays Juror #8, was able to create a noticeable aura to his character. Juror #8 had an energy to him, a certain calmness in the room full of tensions and heat of the hot summer. Carter's level-headed approach to Juror #8 helped him stand out almost as a leader amongst the jurors, prompting the most questions, and raising his concerns over the discrepancies in the evidence. His foil, Juror #3, a high-energy angered juror who plays the antagonist of this play, was played by Charlie Mangan. Mangan had a way of raising and lowering his voice to make his anger more dynamic than just plain screaming. He also had eccentric body language that truly told the story of his character and how his character developed. His character felt alive, and helped create the atmosphere of a jury room.
Juror #9, played by Yusra Ali, is a sweet old lady who has wisdom that is useful to the jury. Ali was able to create the vision of this character who was definitely more than meets the eye. She offers up some wonderful advice including speaking from experience and saying, "The old man wanted attention by believing a lie he told himself."
The work of the jury is not easy, and it most certainly isn't any easier when it comes to deciding the fate of someone's life. The cast and crew of "12 Angry Jurors," did a great job of capturing the feeling of a jury. At the end of the day, it always comes down to those last two choices: Guilty, or not guilty.
by Madeline Myers of Phoenixville Area High School
------------------------------
An immovable object push meets an unstoppable force went deciding the fate of a murder suspect in Francis Schools' Twelve Angry Jurors.
The story follows twelve members of a jury as they try to decide if a man murdered his father. At first all but one vote guilty, but the last is defiant and is convinced that there is a reasonable doubt. The play follows these characters as they try to convince each other of what they think is the truth. Dissecting every single detail about the case. Slowly the jury sees that there is little fact in the prosecution's case. But there is one member who absolutely believes that the suspect is guilty, but that may be because he is projecting.
The cast admirably attempted to deliver their lines in a way that really differentiated their characters. But Juror #8 and Juror #3 had the bulk of the lines and were able to show how their characters started and ended the play through how they were acting.
The set design of the jury room had some interesting elements but other than that, there were few technical aspects too but that was not a drawback for the show. Twelve Angry Jurors is not a complicated and technical show, and its simplicity is a bonus for some.
Overall, there were some standout performances, but every actor should be proud of what they accomplished on stage.
by Mark Thompson of Phoenixville Area High School
------------------------------
Law and order never looked so intriguing, until shown with twelve jurors faced with an arduous decision to either condemn a boy to die, or let a murderer go free, in Jenkintown High School's riveting production of the 12 Angry Jurors.
Although the original show was first adapted in a 1954 teleplay, many of today's issues were explored through personal biases, stereotypes, and the overall theme of guilt versus innocence. The show begins with an almost unanimous vote of guilty, until the dissent of one juror leaves a hung-jury, and 11 angry people. The room intensifies throughout, as the jury tries to determine guilt or innocence based off of reasonable doubt, without the role of personal beliefs crowding in the way of justice.
The entire cast exhibited professionality and a true dedication to their characters, which was effortlessly played on stage, and ultimately drew the audience into the agonizing task of coming to a unanimous verdict. Juror #8 played by William Carter II, portrayed the wise, rational dissenter; his impassioned insisting for sense from his other jurors added to the overall intensity of the show. Charlie Mangan, as Juror #3 was a strong presence on stage, and caught the audiences throats during his heart wrenching monologues as he yelled, stomped, and shed tears, as his own moral standards were questioned and convicted. Juror #4, played by Caitlin Frazee, impressed the audience by her performance as the neutral go-between archetype, proving both through her character and grey costume that the justice system cannot be so easily manipulated into not-guilty, vs. guilty. Juror #7 portrayed by Mattie McNamara displayed what is wrong with the justice system in her overall haste to conv
ict without reason; her commitment to her character was well demonstrated through her incessant bickering, and gum chewing, but overall it added to the ironic flaws that were well illustrated in the show.
The production team aided the entire show, both through their beautiful minimalist set design, (Charlie Mangan) to the costumes that reflected each of the characters impeccably, (Marielle Zakrzwski), and the creativity that the student director Emily Dubin so wonderfully displayed in the production of the show.
The final decision of not-guilty, even after it was given and the lights dimmed the audience was still left in their seats with pounding chests, somehow the show was not over. Jenkintown High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors proved that justice cannot always easily be served, but only to that hope that the decisions that are made are the right ones.
by Rachael Hesse of Phoenixville Area High School
------------------------------
The tension could have been cut with a switchblade during Jenkintown High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors. Through constant conflict and confrontation the cast performed a captivating portrayal of humanity.
12 Angry Men was first written by Reginald Rose in 1954 as a television play. It was adapted to the stage in 1964, and a female version, 12 Angry Women, came out soon after. Jenkintown grafted the two versions together to accommodate for a mixed gendered cast. Their production still followed the same intense storyline of 12 jurors, each with distinctly different backgrounds, faced with the task of determining a boy's guilt.
The cast may have only contained a mere fifteen people, yet each performer brought with them a unique energy and a strong commitment to character. Through a focus on individual character development by the student director, Emily Dublin, the twelve person jury ensemble navigated the challenges of continuous stage time admirably by acquiring characteristic fidgeting, traits, and motions that were maintained throughout the production.
William Carter II, Juror #8, and Charlie Mangan, Juror #3, foiled each other's characters well. William Carter II displayed the respectable calm of Juror #8 in nearly every encounter with the rest of the characters while Charlie Mangan presented the volatile attributes of Juror #3 in his interactions. Mangan also did a commendable job of portraying his character arch, taking advantage of every moment given to him in the script to present his deep set emotions due to his backstory.
Caitlin Frazee, Juror #4, achieved giving a convincing performance of an upstanding small business owner, and she managed the delicate process of dissenting while maintaining respect. Yusra Ali, Juror #9, gave another notable performance with strong commitment to character physicality.
Marielle Zakrzwski creatively costumed each actor in clothes that gave hints to both a character's background and their personalities such as a red blouse for the bigoted Juror #10 and a gray suit for the even minded Juror #4. Student Director, Emily Dublin, overcame many of the challenges associated with 12 Angry Jurors including strategically blocking her actors to assure that the continuous scene that makes up both acts did not fall stagnant.
Jenkintown High School put on an intense performance of 12 Angry Jurors presenting timeless examples of humanity in its rawest.
by Xandra Coleman of Phoenixville Area High School
------------------------------
It takes great commitment, focus, and determination to pull off a show like 12 Angry Jurors. Jenkintown High School proved to be more than capable of making their production a success!
They were able to portray a more modern version of the original play that takes place in 1954. Written by Reginald Rose, the story begins late summer in a court Jury room. The 12 Jurors are held there until they have a decision or until they are declared a hung jury. The selected people must decide the fate of a boy accused of murder. Tensions among the strangers progress as one member stands alone to prove that the boy may be innocent beyond reasonable doubt.
An impressive accomplishment achieved by the cast was their ability to remain in character even when the show's focus was not on their character at the time. This is especially impressive because the actors remain on stage the entirety of Act I and Act II.
William Carter II (Juror #8) greatly portrayed his character's calm sense of playing the devil's advocate. His body language and thoughtful facial expressions helped sell the realness of his character. Charlie Mangan (Juror #3) worked very well with Carter especially during the scenes where their characters contradict each other. While Carter played a more level-headed character, Mangan portrayed the opposite by playing a man with an anger management problem and pent-up resentment toward his son.
The costume design done by Marielle Zakrzwski, played a huge role in the audience understanding each character. The costumes successfully highlighted information about characters such as their views on themselves, where they come from, their age, and their social class. The set also played a big part in the success of the show. Although simple, the set was able to bring the idea of a fairly small, hot jury room to life. The set included small things to really bring out the realness like the bathroom, the water cooler, and tissue boxes.
All in all, Jenkintown High School's cast and crew put on an amazing production of 12 Angry Jurors. From the high energy to the small details, the show proved to be one worth watching.
by C'Mone Smith of Upper Darby High School
------------------------------
12 Angry Jurors was originally written as "12 Angry Men," a teleplay, in 1954, and was adapted for the stage the following year. It was then produced as a film in 1957. Jenkintown High School put on a wonderful rendition of this play with a mixed cast of guys and girls. Under direction from the student director Emily Dubin, this show is one to remember.
The 12 Jurors are all on trial for a young man who has been put up for murdering his father. The jurors all being lead by the Foreman of the Jury, played as Henry Gifford, need to decide if the young man is guilty or not guilty. At first it was a 11-1 in favor of guilty, but Juror #8, played by William Carter ll, wanted to give the guy a fair shot. One by one he would try to convince the other jurors to change their minds. Each of the jurors had their own reasons to why they thought that way but the one who took just a little extra time was Juror #3, Charlie Mangan, he was taking what was happening with the trial and using it against his own son.
Actors in this play have to keep their heads strong with everyone's personal opinions being said at any moment. Juror #5, Maggie Farr and Juror #9 seemed to try to be the peacekeepers within the group. On the other hand Juror #3, Charlie Mangan and Juror #4, Caitlin Frazee wanted to have their opinions heard no matter what. Everyone tried to work together, with some setbacks, but when all is said and done they came together as a jury to let the young man walk free.
The set was very simple, but it was perfect for the time and setting of the play. The set had two windows that opened and looked out onto the scenery behind it. Also, three tables with adequate chairs were in the middle of the room. They added a bathroom and a water cooler to add the extra movement within the play itself. Costume designer, Marielle Zakrzwski, used some as more of a time period and others more modern, which seemed to work together very well.
All together, Jenkintown's rendition of 12 Angry Jurors has made a great impression on my point of view with the play and hopefully many others. It shows that if we just work together as one to give everyone a fair shot, we can all come out on top.
by Emma Patterson of Upper Darby High School
------------------------------
Step into the courtroom at Jenkintown High School and witness a tale of modern prejudice and an example of the tension in a jury deliberation. 12 Angry Jurors has been adapted and grown greatly over the years, but it stands as one of the most timeless plays of our time, as it speaks on issues that will never go away.
12 Angry Jurors is a revision of two earlier stage productions, 12 Angry Men and 12 Angry Women. However, before both stage productions, the former was a television special before it was adapted for the stage, and into the production seen at Jenkintown.
Overall, the production was enjoyable, that of an average high school. The production was mainly anchored by two of its visual technical components: the costume design and set design. The set was simple yet elegant, and the costumes were flattering and were consistent with character personalities, giving the show a visually appealing flair.
All actors and actresses did a fair job in the portrayal of this intense story, but those who stood out most were Juror #3 (Charlie Mangan) and Juror #4 (Caitlin Frazee). They provided energy and prevented the show from feeling stagnant while also staying very true to their characters.
Additionally, the jurors did a fine job of playing off each other and reacting as a diverse but unified ensemble. Though at times the energy seemed to be dwindling, it never fell short for long, and performers were always very clearly focused.
Aside from the aforementioned clever set and costumes, student director Emily Dubin took on a great undertaking when directing this show. Under her direction, the blocking was done fairly well, aside from a few awkward moments, but overall added a special flair to the production.
From the opening line to the final bow, the cast of Jenkintown High School's 12 Angry Jurors gave their best efforts and put on an admirable show.
by Gabi Greco of Upper Darby High School
------------------------------
The act of being a juror is a civic duty, but the undertaking of deciding the fate of a young boy while in a hot building causes tensions to run high. 12 Angry Jurors as performed by Jenkintown High School tackles the morality of jury duty and the dangers of letting personal prejudices get in the way of the truth.
12 Angry Jurors, originally 12 Angry Men, was based on a popular tv show in from the 50's. The play chronicles one evening in which a group of jurors debates whether to let an innocent man go to jail, or let a criminal walk the street. Due to quick judgment, eleven out of twelve believe the young defendant to be guilty of killing his father, however, one juror holds a reasonable doubt and bravely argues to have him acquitted.
This play is extremely difficult in the sense that all twelve jurors are on stage for all or most of the show, and while some actors may find this to be a challenge, the actors of Jenkintown High School used it to their advantage by giving their characters unique quirks on stage. Some characters took a break from the heated debate by using the fake bathroom on stage left, and while this creative choice gives the actors a minute to relax, it proved to be distracting for the audience.
Juror #3 is a man who lets his own personal life dictate his opinions in the courtroom and Charlie Mangan's impassioned performance not only revealed this depth of this character but also drove the show.
The play features many arguments and long monologues, Juror #10 (Laura Dibble) never shied away from a difficult and fervent speech. Juror #8 (William Carter II) took his time while delivering his lines which, while slow at times, added to the character's pensive and fair personality. Tensions run high throughout the play, leading to various arguments, and while most lines were easy to hear and delivered with zeal, some seemed unnatural.
Taking place in a courtroom, this play's set doesn't need to be difficult, however, the hanging windows, designed by Charlie Mangan, gave this production an effective open concept and a creative touch. The costume design, executed by Marielle Zakrzwski, was simple but effective, each piece highlighting the character's personality.
There are no easy decisions in a jury room, but, through the actors' portrayal of stress and tension, Jenkintown High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors did justice to the play's message of overcoming prejudice.
by Isabel Hunt of Upper Darby High School
------------------------------
When the fate of one man's life rests on the shoulders of 12 others, tensions swell up. With the heat of the summer as well as the heat of the crime, twelve jurors try to make one tough decision.
The inside of a jury room is not a common setting to most people, especially one with such high stakes. Twelve Angry Jurors captures the essence of human nature showing that we all are ticking time bombs with our own opinions and ways of being convinced. Throughout the play many of the jurors change their opinion displaying this.
Jenkintown's production of Twelve Angry Jurors was fueled by dedication from all areas with many members involved in multiple areas of the show. The creative aspects of the show, led by student director, Emily Dubin, really made it unique. As an audience member, it felt as if you were right there in the court room yourself.
Struggling as the the only not guilty vote in the jury, Juror #8, played by William Carter II, is relentless in his performance, never giving up on what he believes in. Juror #3(Charlie Mangan), equally as dedicated to his beliefs, dueled #8 with his words. Mangan was able to portray the anger in his character naturally and not forced.
Finding a balance between guilty and not guilty is difficult in such a risky case but Juror #4, played by Caitlin Frazee, is able to. Frazee is able to calmly express her own opinions and keep the other jurors in check throughout the play. Juror #9(Yusra Ali) shows courage when she steps up when the verdict seems certain. Ali portrays the physicality and worry of an older woman admirably.
There is not much tech needed for this show, but the simplicity worked in tandem with the script to provide a more natural performance. The use of simple appliances like a bathroom and water jug added to the show's concept.
Jenkintown showed that the simplicity in a show can still teach and give a lot to the audience. With dedication from all sides of the production team, Jenkintown put on a fantastic production.
by Tom Geiger of Upper Darby High School
------------------------------
Tension rises as the theatre lights lower, talking comes to a silence and a small crowd enters, directing all attention to the stage. Jenkintown High School students call out to the audience and plead for them to be the witnesses of their wonderful performance of 12 Angry Jurors. However, in court we must be civil, so please remain calm as the emotion builds and controversy strikes throughout the courthouse and perhaps the audience too.
12 Angry Jurors, written by Reginald Rose is an intense story, surprisingly, about 12 Angry Jurors. The twelve jurors are sent into the jury room where they are put to the challenge of deciding the fate of a nineteen year old boy who has been accused of stabbing and murdering his father. One juror, however, finds the boy to innocent and by picking the evidence and facts and emotions apart he slowly, one by one, convinces the rest of the jurors that the young boy is crimeless and innocent.
The character that begins the tale of these twelve jurors is juror number eight, played by William Carter II. Carter demonstrated the constant persistence and calmness of Juror number 8's character as he tried to convince the others of the innocence of the boy. On the other hand, we have Juror number three portrayed by Charlie Mangan. Mangan does a phenomenal job of demonstrating aggression and the hidden emotion of his lost and scared character who fears the lack of relationship with his son.
Mattie McNamara created a comical appeal to the dramatic and depressed tone of the show, She received laughs from the audience as she portrayed the heartlessness and the desire to leave and go home of her character as well as her "I don't care" attitude. In addition to Mattie McNamara, Jeremy Todaro, playing Juror number eleven had the audience cackling with his witty remarks and relatable awkwardness in the serious topic of the play. However, I would have loved to see him enunciate the fact that he was an immigrant by adopting an accent, and creating an even more comical appeal to his character.
As an ensemble, I thought the jurors worked very well together on stage, bouncing their thoughts and emotions of each other's opinions and perspectives on the ordeal. Although, Juror number two was a notable character played by Sophie Pettit. She showed hesitance and shyness in all her lines and actions, even just her posture!
The wonderful production was accompanied by the technical aspects of the show such as costumes, I believe the costumes added to the show wonderfully and portrayed each person's character while taking away from the performance on stage. In addition to costumes, the set created a simple appeal allowing the focus to be on the stage, but while watching the show, I lacked to discover the purpose of the bathroom as it didn't advance the plot and created a distraction seeing as how my eyes were immediately directed the bathroom door as soon as someone opened it.
With deep emotion, demanding evidence, and a young boy's life on the line, I had chills from my seat. The cast crew did a phenomenal job of creating a specific mood and feeling throughout the theatre and portraying such a difficult show!
by Gaia Scott of Upper Dublin High School
------------------------------
One watercooler, two windows, 12 jurors, and a decision that could potentially end a man's life all in one room. Tensions are high and patience is low in Jenkintown High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors.
Originally titled "12 Angry Men", this play written by Reginald Rose takes place following the closing arguments of a murder trial. For the nineteen year old boy on trial to be acquitted, he needs a unanimous vote from all twelve jurors for "not guilty". Initially, eleven of the twelve jurors think he is guilty, but one juror believes that there is reasonable doubt. As the temperature in the room begins to rise, so do the tensions of the jurors and personal issues soon threaten this boy's shot at a fair trial.
Leading off this talented cast is William Carter II (Juror #8). His portrayal of the skeptical character was as intense as it was raw. Playing opposite him was Charles Mangan (Juror #3), our main antagonist. Mangan perfectly captured the multilayered character and had very impactful line delivery, whether it be dramatic or comedic.
Other standout performances includes Mattie McNamara (Juror #7) who had a strong stage presence and kept consistent mannerisms throughout. Likewise, Caitlin Frazee (Juror #4) was able to take control of the stage as well as be a vital part of the ensemble if characters. All in all, the jurors worked seamlessly together as one diverse unit.
As for the technical aspects of the production, everything on the stage was truly representative of the characters and setting. The set design, headed by Charles Mangan, was simple yet very effective. Each piece of the set was utilized well and served a meaningful purpose. Additionally, the costumes, designed by Marielle Zakrzwski, were very detailed and tailored to each character's individual personality traits. Finally, the show was student directed by Emily Dublin. Her blocking choices were very mature and the scenes were never less than lively.
The only thing the cast of 12 Angry Jurors is guilty of is an incredible production beyond a reasonable doubt.
by Lauren Taylor of Upper Dublin High School
------------------------------
What happens when only one juror out of twelve on a first-degree murder trial votes not guilty? An evening of intriguing and suspenseful theatre! Jenkintown High School's production of the classic play, "12 Angry Jurors," had audience members on the edge of their seats as if someone's life was truly on the line.
Reginald Rose's play, originally titled "12 Angry Men," is a famous drama about a tense room of jurors deciding the fate of a 19-year-old boy accused of murdering his father. While multiple signs seem to prove him guilty, one juror holds a reasonable doubt, creating fiery conflict and turning the entire jury room around.
Leading the cast in the classic protagonist vs. antagonist conflict was Charlie Mangan as evil sadist Juror 3, and William Carter II as good guy Juror 8. The two actors had passionate conviction, and contrasted each other extremely well. Mangan had a solid hold of his intense character, as he used a loud and intimidating voice throughout.
Other standouts among the jury were bigoted Juror 10 (Laura Dibble) and sassy Juror 7 (Mattie McNamara). Like Juror 3, Dibble had a strong hold of her villainous character, and added a nice intensity to the dynamic of the group. McNamara's attitude, on the other hand, was also a solid addition to the crew.
As a group, the jury of 12 worked together to create a hilarious hot mess of personalities. Onstage for the entire show, all 12 actors and actresses stayed present even when they were not the focal point of the scene. Each had an evident dedication to their respective role, and there were clear relationships shown among the different characters.
Additionally, Jenkintown's technical work really enhanced their production. Exhibit A was the simple yet effective courtroom set, designed by actor Charlie Mangan. The various features of the set brought a nice reality to the stage. Exhibit B, Marielle Zakrzwski's costume design was extremely well done, as each character's look had its own specific style, while still being able to work together to create a cohesive overall picture.
For the final verdict, Jenkintown High School's "12 Angry Jurors" was entertaining, with moments of both serious drama and hilarious comedy. Talented actors created a variety of characters that called for an enjoyable production without any reasonable doubt!
by Sam Spirt of Upper Dublin High School
------------------------------
The Cappies Automated E-mail System
webmaster@cappies.com
------------------------------
Support The Cappies by shopping at AmazonSmile.
When you shop at AmazonSmile, Amazon will donate
to The Cappies.
No comments:
Post a Comment