Changing Elements 12 Angry Men

As I was reading "12 Angry Men", I was thinking about how the story would change if various elements were different. The first obvious element would be having women instead of men. I think the women would add more drama to the case. If there were no stage directions, I think it would be better. To me stage directions are pointless. I'd rather vision what I think would happen. I like to create my own mental picture for myself. It helps give reading and me an imagination. If this story took place in a more modern time period, it would definitely be all over the news and the evidence would be proven more clearly due to the new technology we have today.  Another element that could have changed the whole story is Juror number 8. If juror number 8 wasn't so insisting that the boy was not guilty the boy would not have walked away free in the end. Juror 8 also caused disagreements which made juror 3 and some others mad so that made the story more interesting. If juror 8 voted yes he is guilty then it would have made the story very bland because every juror voted guilty. With all these changes I have listed and said, I think this would impact the play a lot because every little part is crucial to what makes this play so famous. To me I believe the play is best left untouched. It is fine the way it is. It was a pleasure to read. Would you change anything to this play? How do you think the play would have ended if juror number 8 voted guilty in the beginning...would the boy walk away free? 

The Theme for 12 Angry Men

There are many themes in the play "12 Angry Men". The main theme I am going to focus on is the theme of Justice. Justice throughout this story remains unclear. Is the boy guilty? Not Guilty? The jurors who are on trial are myopic. They are single minded. They automatically see the son as the murderer of this crime scene. Each juror out of the twelve have different influences and conceptions on how to handle this court case. Some are being irrational and then others are not. All twelve jurors are bias in some way. Some jurors take it seriously as if it were the real American system but others feel more personal about it because some jurors have experienced many injustices of their own in their past, so they know how the son feels being pestered with questions and judged guilty automatically. Juror eight insists the whole jury looks deeper into the evidence, while Juror three thinks he is guilty. Most jurors don't even want to be there and they don't really care about the whole situation. One juror even says "Who knows, maybe we can all go home." To enforce the theme of justice, this play shows values, ideas and prejudice towards each other but mainly to the son who killed his father.