12 – Twelve (2007)

Directed by: Nikita Mikhalkov | 153 minutes | drama, thriller, crime | Actors: Sergei Makovetsky, Sergei Garmash, Aleksei Petrenko, Yuri Stoyanov, Sergei Gazarov, Nikita Mikhalkov, Mikhail Yefremov, Valentin Gaft, Aleksei Gorbunov, Sergei Artsybashev, Viktor Verzhbitsky, Roman Madyanov, Aleksandr Adamaashevyan,

It is no easy task to re-film a famous classic like ’12 Angry Men’. In a typical Russian style, ’12’ has become a fairly accurate, yet completely unique version, which is definitely worth seeing. The result is magnificent. This intriguing court drama lasts no less than two and a half hours and that time flies by, a joy to watch. Director Nikita Mikhalkov did not copy Sidney Lumet’s original from 1957, but gave it his own interpretation, tailored to the Russian circumstances. He rivals the original and may have even surpassed it.

In Michalkov’s version, ’12′ largely follows the small-scale set-up of the original, but includes the personal lives of the twelve judges – who come from all walks of life – in the story. In this way he succeeds in offering a black humorous view of contemporary Russia and in sketching a penetrating portrait. The Russians are wrestling from the communist past, a laborious process that uncovers many painful memories. Corruption, racism and alcoholism appear to be widespread, the morale of the citizens has been damaged.

Initially, the jury members think they can quickly figure it out. Just vote by raising your hand and the job is done. The Chechen boy, according to the indictment, murdered his adoptive father with a knife. The deliberation about guilty or not guilty need – they expect – to last no longer than about twenty minutes: “after all, isn’t that unreliable Chechen just a dirty murderer and a witness could have seen everything, right?”

The jury deliberations are less smooth than expected and fierce and emotional discussions eventually arise when there is – initially – one jury member who, not to want to decide too quickly before the form, doubts for a while about the question of guilt. At his request, subsequent ballots will take place on paper, so secret. The follower who does not conveniently fit in with the majority must therefore give his own opinion. Each of the twelve judges is the embodiment of a certain type of person. The anti-Semite, the peasant from the countryside, the new businessman, the (Jewish) scientist, the philosopher, the old party boss, the xenophobia, the fear of everything that changes….

For example, Michalkov manages to bring together all the views that exist in society in this jury deliberation and he plays with the prejudices that everyone has in them. However, the director has skillfully avoided the pitfall of the clichéd types. Each and every one of the jury members has been portrayed as extremely credible as a human type. However, a special role is reserved for the chairman of the jury. He leads the meeting semi-clumsily, but turns out afterwards to be playing a sophisticated strategy game. He shows little of himself, but plays the whole thing in an intriguing way. His role will ultimately have a significant influence on decision-making.

During the deliberations, the story regularly jumps to the history of the boy and the Chechen uprising. The location is beautifully chosen, the jury meets in an old gym because the courthouse is being renovated. The atmosphere of that room, the light, the equipment and the circumstances gradually play a role in the discussions. The camera work is superb, the lighting even more so.

The story develops slowly, but carefully. The film is therefore less suitable for fans of fast action, but all the more for those who like a careful build-up. The characters of the 12 jury members are beautifully developed and are always subtly deepened. The game is magnificent. The tension is nicely built up and the judges’ opinions sometimes seem to change quickly, for sometimes very opportunistic reasons. A nice supporting role is played by a bird that flutters around in the room and that has a playful and atmospheric contribution to the story. ’12′ is a superbly constructed film. Despite the film length, the time flies by surprisingly fast.