12 Angry Jurors
at Archbishop McCarthy High School

Reviewed on December 2, 2018

Dylan Redshaw
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School
Submitted for publication to Florida Theater On Stage

The scene is set as the jurors crowd into the incredibly hot courtroom and the door is suddenly locked behind them. Twelve angry jurors faced with a grave responsibility. A man's life in their hands. Guilty or not guilty, the stakes are clearly high in Archbishop McCarthy High School's compelling production of "Twelve Angry Jurors".

Written by Reginald Rose in 1954, the fascinating courtroom thriller follows twelve strangers as they deliberate the fate of one individual on trial for the murder of his father. With eleven jurors agreed that the young man is guilty, the remaining juror works feverishly to explore the idea of reasonable doubt, forcing his colleagues to question their morals and values. Originally written with twelve white male roles, the play has since been updated into many diverse versions that capture the realistic style and intense social themes.

Leading the production with fierce charisma was Justin Cook as Juror #8. Cook convincingly depicted his character's courageous persona as he fought for justice against the panel of jurors and masterfully presented a multitude of distinct emotional levels. Throughout the entirety of the production, Cook remained fully committed to his compelling arguments and articulated each of his thoughts with ease. Portraying Juror #3 was Bennett Sommer, who ceaselessly fought against Cook to prove the defendant as guilty. Sommer believably embodied the juror's demanding presence, demonstrating a refined growth throughout the play that ultimately reflected the plot's profound resolution.

Furthermore, Juror #10 was portrayed by Megan Whitaker with mighty energy and bold inflections as she forcefully spoke against the defendant. Whitaker captured her character's age with poise, and her genuine engagement in the courtroom thoroughly amplified the authenticity of the production. Other jurors, such as Juror #9 and Juror #11, depicted by Cali Hinesley and Emiliana Quiceno, stood out amongst the ensemble as they thrived off of their versatile believability and captivating line delivery.

The ensemble of jurors as a whole appeared remarkably professional. The twelve actors worked incredibly together as they strikingly illustrated the intensity of a heated courtroom.

Technically, the show was executed brilliantly. Hair and makeup, by Maria Soto, highlighted the play's attention to detail and perfectly established each character's age and status in society. Stage management, by Maisy Surman, was also extremely successful with efficient organization and clear dedication throughout the entire rehearsal process.

All in all, the twelve jurors presented a provocative debate that allowed the audience to truly follow the evidence and embrace the power of democracy. While the young man was finally ruled not guilty, the cast and crew at Archbishop McCarthy is certainly found guilty of one phenomenal performance filled with powerful drama and extraordinary doubt.

Leah Tomas
JP Taravella High School
Submitted for publication to Florida Theater On Stage

"It's very hard to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And no matter where you run into it, prejudice obscures the truth." -Reginald Rose. The life of a young man hangs in the balance as a group of 12 extremely diverse jurors from a variety of backgrounds are faced with the task of deciding whether or not they will present a guilty verdict in a complex murder trial. The story follows the impact that their conflicting ideas and beliefs have on their ability as a group to express unbiased judgements. Archbishop McCarthy High School's production of "12 Angry Jurors" is a riveting depiction of the heated arguments and heartfelt moments of compassion that lead the jurors to their final decision.

"12 Angry Jurors" is based on the 1954 Emmy Award-winning teleplay written by Reginald Rose entitled "12 Angry Men." 50 years after the teleplay aired on CBS, "12 Angry Men" premiered on Broadway with the Roundabout Theatre Company on October 28, 2004 starring Boyd Gaines as Juror 8 and Philip Bosco as Juror 3. The production was nominated for the 2005 Tony Award for Best Revival of a Play, and won the 2005 Drama Desk Award for Best Revival of a Play.

Justin Cook (Juror 8) led the show with strong characterization and diction. He exuded an air of calm composure and confidence. His smooth tone of voice and professional mannerisms contributed to the development of his level-headed and open minded character.

Bennett Sommer (Juror 3) provided brilliant contrast to Juror 8. His abrasive inflections and violent behavior were distinctly different from his fellow jurors, and his performance provided tension and energy to all scenes in which he played a prominent role. Jose Santana (Juror 4) and Megan Whitaker (Juror 10) exemplified strong objectives and characterization, and contributed to the progression of the story.

Though at times lacking energy and clear diction,the ensemble of jurors were cohesive and displayed a sense of community on stage. The group as a whole demonstrated diverse and unique vocal inflection among very distinct characters, and the development and shift of their beliefs throughout the production were evident. Some prominent leaders of the ensemble were Emiliana Quiceno (Juror 11), William Goehmann (Juror 12), and Sophie Vega (Foreman).

The technical elements of this production were nearly flawless. The use of lighting was subtle yet very effective, and the costuming allowed for easy distinction between characters and clear establishment of the time period in which the story takes place. The set was beautiful and detailed, and established the location very well.

Archbishop McCarthy's production of "12 Angry Jurors" is an enlightening and thought-provoking representation of the new ideas and positivity that result when collaboration and communication are utilized in the face of conflict. "It takes a great deal of courage to stand alone even if you believe in something very strongly," but this production shows that the benefits of speaking your mind when all others stand in opposition far outweigh the negative implications, and may have the power to save an innocent life.

Tyler Mackey
Monarch High School
Submitted for publication to Florida Theater On Stage

Heated arguments are not fun to be in. But most can agree it is enthralling to watch other people duke it out on whether or not an accused murder should receive the death sentence. Which is exactly why Archbishop McCarthy High School's rendition of Reginald Rose's 12 Angry Jurors was "without a reasonable doubt" a spectacular performance.

Released in 1957 as a radio drama, the story centers on a jury discussing whether or not they are to sentence a 19 year old boy to death, for the murder of his father via a switch blade knife. At first, 11 jurors are set on the boy being
guilty. But juror #8 (played by Justin Cook) believes there is reasonable doubt the boy is innocent, and he starts a thought provoking wave of discussion.

Throughout the entire performance the actors and actresses assure the play lives up to its name, and the tension is thick. With Juror #3 (Bennet Sommer) causing the audience to gasp with fear as he becomes so engulfed in rage he threatens to kill another member of the jury. What helped with the mood was the realistic feeling that was set with Maisy Surman's skillful blocking. The juror's movements very much reflected the plot development. With certain members moving closer to juror #8 as they began agreeing with him. That and other brilliant movements kept the flow going steady throughout the entire show. Each juror having their own unique and stand out personality

As Juror #8, Justin Cook was the lead actor, and he stayed in character for ever like delivered, with no faults at all. He was the first one who believed the accused was not guilty, and that belief reflected in his calm and thoughtful delivery of his lines. The one who most opposed him, Bennet Sommer as Juror #3, always had a powerful presence on stage, whether he was angry or disrespectful, he boldly delivered lines with vigor and passion.

All the jury members did a wonderful job propelling the story arc. Megan Whitaker (Juror #10) delivered a powerful monologue that caused the entire jury to turn her backs on her. You could see her exasperation as she stood towards the wall afterwards. Jose Santana (Juror #4) also perfectly encapsulated his role as the rich and reasonable mediator, accompanied by a snobby slicked hair do by hair and makeup artist Maria Soto, who did a great job giving each juror a unique look that matched their character.

The entire cast and crew did a wonderful job delivering a performance that portrayed the 12 angry jurors, how they should be. Thoughtful, relentless, and most of all, angry.

Alan Halaly
Deerfield Beach High School
Submitted for publication to Florida Theater On Stage

The tension in the air is almost tangible as twelve irate jurors debate whether or not claims against a 19-year-old who seemingly murdered his father are "beyond reasonable doubt." If proven guilty, the boy will be killed. In this sweltering adjudication room, it seems as though the defendant's fate is sealed until new analysis of the evidence is presented, perhaps suggesting the obvious is not as cut and dry as it once appeared. Archbishop McCarthy High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors proves to be a rousing drama that explores the complexities of the criminal justice system and capital punishment.

First seen as a teleplay in 1954 written by Reginald Rose, the story soon was adapted for the stage, and in 1957 was made into a highly praised feature film. The 1996 West End production held at the Old Vic Theater gained the play international recognition with renowned playwright Harold Pinter as the director. Since first premiering as 12 Angry Men, the script has been converted into adaptations such as 12 Angry Women and 12 Angry Jurors to provide a female perspective.

The first to courageously challenge the assertion that the defendant was guilty was Juror #8 played by Justin Cook. Acting as a catalyst in the spark of debate, his maintenance of a rational, yet passionate tone helped his argument seem realistic and believable. On the opposite end of the spectrum stood Bennett Sommer as Juror #3, who adamantly asserted the defendant's guilt. Often resorting to raw emotion rather than rational argument, his violent outbursts were expertly executed. His intonation and body language perfectly communicated his age, and he was able to effectively showcase a complex range of emotion and vulnerability.

The ensemble of jurors must be commended for the difficulty of their roles, as all of them were on stage for the entirety of the show. There was not a moment that did not seem completely believable, thanks to the ensemble never breaking character and always reacting to what was going on around them. It's the little character quirks such as Juror #2 (Laura Cullen) constantly checking her watch that create the distinction between someone playing a character versus someone literally becoming their character. Standouts in the ensemble were Juror #10 (Megan Whitaker) and Juror #11 (Emiliana Quiceno). Whitaker powerfully delivered a racially-charged and hateful monologue through bold choices in her voice and mannerisms. Quiceno's difficult Russian accent carried throughout the production, and there was never a time where she was not understood.

Technical elements of the show effectively crafted a simplistic office setting. Certain characters meant to be older portrayed their age thanks to expert makeup and hair design executed by Maria Soto. As a whole, the sophisticated and calculated blocking provided great pacing throughout the show, and the little regard for the audience in staging provided a heightened sense of realism.

The message of the show can be summed up in a simple quote: "It takes a great deal of courage to stand alone." However, I know I am not being radical in thinking that Archbishop McCarthy High School's production of 12 Angry Jurors delivered a compelling reminder of the importance of courage and integrity. There is no "reasonable doubt" in my mind.

Peri Harris
Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School
Submitted for publication to Florida Theater On Stage

Questions are left unanswered, pressure is boiling through the roof, and innocence becomes controversy, as the fate a 19 year old boy is in the hands of Archbishop McCarthy High School's "12 Angry Jurors".

Written by Reginald Rose, "12 Angry Jurors" juxtaposes the decency of human nature, and revolves around the deliberations of a jury. Trapped in a room with the summer heat and a pending death sentence, the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" is lost in arguments of hostility. The group almost comes to a unanimous decision about an alleged first degree murder, but they slowly begin to internalize the possibility of "reasonable doubt", as one juror is determined uncover the mystery of the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. One man is already dead, but why should one more be ruthlessly killed for the wrong reason, and more importantly, why should this decision be made by racially biased strangers?

Justin Cook portrayed "Juror #8" with calming line delivery and persistent character. Cook's performance reflected on his deep understanding of the "courage to stand alone", as his desire to save a man's life overcame any obstacles. As the antagonist of the production, Bennett Sommer (Juror #3) greatly conveyed the short temper and fiery instigation of his character. Together, Cook and Sommer developed a distinguishable feud, as each of them felt strongly about their stance on the final verdict, and the development of their relationship only grew more tense.

Emiliana Quiceno (Juror #11) took on a challenging foreign accent with ease, as she spoke clearly and consistently throughout the production. Quiceno impressively utilized this dialect, and made sassy remarks to lighten the energies of the holding room. With strict determination and an intimidating stage presence, Megan Whitaker, (Juror #10) provided a sharp contrast to the subtleties of the other personas onstage. Her harsh demeanor and impatience was showcased throughout the entirety of the production, as she was always in disagreement with her peers.

With clashing personalities and groundbreaking commitment, "The 12 Angry Jurors" ensemble did a phenomenal job of conveying the messages of the story. As "the life of a man is at stake", the group of 12 are put through the stress of analyzing fate and fantasy. Even when they weren't the main focus of the scene, the actors still managed to be fully engaged, having side interactions with their opposers.

The technical aspects of the production were simple, yet effective, as they were an appropriate enhancer to the already captivating performance. The old age makeup and hair by Maria Soto added a sense of realism to the production, as the age of the characters was easily differentiated by their appearance.

Archbishop McCarthy High School's production of "12 Angry Jurors" was none other than truthful; the actors flawlessly dissected the meaning of honesty, and proved that there is always another side to every story, and even if it takes some investigating to find it, the outcome can change any initial mindset .

Kimberly Sessions
JP Taravella High School
Submitted for publication to Amp Magazine

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a fair and speedy trial, by an impartial jury of the state." (Amendment 6) While in some situations this can help or hurt a victim, it no doubt proves how fortunate we are in America to be able to have trial decided by our peers, as many other countries do not have that right. This right is fully displayed in Archbishop McCarthy's compelling production of 13 Angry Jurors.

This play, based on the teleplay by Reginold Rose, was first staged in London in 1964, then transferred to Broadway 50 years later in 2004. Originally written as 12 Angry Men, it has been adapted in 12 angry women and 12 angry jurors to accommodate a wider cast. If follows the story of 12 jurors who are challenged with deciding the fate of 19 year old boy, who is accused of murdering his father. It revolves around the true meaning of democracy and whether a person is truly "guilty beyond a reasonable doubt," with reasonable doubt being the key words in the play.

Overall the cast did an incredible job as en ensemble. They were constantly engaged in the conversations and were always listening and responding to each other, resulting in appropriate reactions and an absolutely engaging show. They created a truly realistic situation and their performances came off as very natural and not staged. As a high school student, playing a middle aged character is extremely difficult and the actors did an incredible job of displaying this age through their physicality. Each actor also developed distinct characters which brought the show to life. While the tension could have been a bit higher in order to raise the stakes, and the pacing could have been a bit quicker they did a good job establishing the heat and stuffiness of the room.

Leading the show, was Juror #8, the man who shakes up the room by claiming the boy is not guilty, played by Justin Cook, who displayed a calm, but strong presence and soothing voice. Juror #3, the antagonist, who swears the boy is guilty, played by Bennett Sommer, developed a strong, tough character, aided by his deep, loud voice. Together the two created many poignant moments. Juror #11, played by Emiliana Quiceno, stood out due to her consistent and accurate accent, where she was always able to be understood.

The makeup and hair aided in establishing the time period and helped differentiate between the characters. While there were no set changes and not very many cues, the stage manager seemed to be very organized and ran a smooth show. The set, while not built by students was incredibly detailed and helped set the scene, of this 1950's jury room.

Archbishop McCarthy's production of 12 Angry Jurors leaves you wondering, "If a life is at stake, what really is a reasonable doubt?"