12 Angry Men (1957) / Very Old Barton 80 Proof Bourbon

0:00 In 1957, director Sidney Lumet and star Henry Fonda gave the world a jury room drama that has never been topped and still asks the pertinent question, Is it possible? In 2023, we returned to a fan favorite brand at their lowest proof point. The film is 12 Angry Men. The whiskey is very old. Barton, 80. Proof. We'll review them both. This is the Film and Whiskey podcast.

0:43 Music. Welcome to the Film and Whiskey podcast, where each week we review a classic movie and a glass of whiskey. I'm Bob Book. I'm Brad Gee. And this week we are watching for the second time Brad 12 Angry Men director Sidney Lumet's debut feature from 1957. I think it's actually my third time watching the film, Bob. Oh, is it? First time was yeah, first time was for season 1 and I'm like 90% sure I've watched it at some point in the intervening years. Oh, so you hadn't seen it prior to us watching it the first time? I don't believe so. Wow, that's shocking. Yeah. I thought this was one of those movies that like, if you didn't see it outside of school, then you saw it inside of school, you know what I mean? It just feels like everyone has seen it at some point. As they should, as.

1:33 They absolutely should. Yeah. Part of the reason that I said that this is Sydney Lumet's debut feature is what, A debut feature, man. Oh, dude, yeah. When you talk about like best first films for a director, this has got to be up here. Oh my God. I know a lot of people would put Reservoir Dogs up there. We were a little bit cooler on it. I I don't know of many better first film introductions than 12 Angry Men. I mean, it's this and Tommy Wiseau's The Room. Right, obviously. Yeah, I thought, yeah, for sure. Well, hey, as we get into talking about 12 Angry Men, we do want to remind everybody out there that you can subscribe to us on Patreon where you get a ton of bonus perks.

2:13 We do special episodes just for our Patreon members. We have uncut, longer episodes for our patrons as well. You can find allofthisextracontent@patreon.com/film. Whiskey, Brad. I don't know that we need to beat around the Bush too much here. We've talked about this movie once. We're revisiting it. 10 out of 10 Great episode I. Was going to say if anything it's gone even higher in my estimation on 2nd watch. Yeah, yeah, it's interesting. We we don't give 10 out of 10 super often, but probably more often than some film critics might hand them out. And at this point, I feel like I need to have like a inner ranking system of like once you hit 10 out of 10, I give you like a gold medal 10 or a silver middle 10 or, or a bronze medal 10. I I don't know, we need to mix it up, I think. You know, we were talking one time with a friend of show, Patrick Williams, and he told us that he doesn't give a 10 out of 10 or A5 out of five on Letterboxed on 1st viewing. And I've kind of started to drift that way a little bit in the last couple years.

3:17 Like, there's been a few movies that just absolutely gob smacked me. And I'll give him a 10 and then go back five years later and be like, oh, OK, I was kind of a prisoner of the moment, you know? And I feel like now I try to air on the side of, like, this might be a 10. And I'm going to rank it as like a nine until I can revisit it and determine for sure if it's a 10. And this is one of those movies that every time I watch it, I don't even go into it thinking like, oh, I wonder if this is going to hold up. It's like you put it on and you are so immediately engrossed in the movie that at multiple points I was like, oh, this is a 10 out of 10. Like there's just, there's nothing that that changes it for me.

3:58 Even just the opening shot is outside the courtroom, it slowly pans up and ends on like a saying about justice at the top of this, you know, courthouse. And then the camera cuts, you're inside the courthouse looking up at the top at another quote about justice and it slowly pans down as you see people entering the courthouse. Then it pan like turns to the side and follows like 4 different people slowly into the courtroom and I'm like the like the cinematography in this is. Incredible. You know what? Like, let's, let's start there. Actually, no, let's not start there. Let's start with our favorite segment, Brad explains. Brad's going to give us the movie plots with only 60 seconds taken on the clock, so let's go ahead and do your take with this little segment that we call, Brad explains. Brad explains is America's favorite segment this is where Brad breaks down the plot of the movie that he has just seen often for the first time.

4:56 This is Brad's apparently third time watching 12 Angry Men. Brad, I don't really know that there's. I feel like you should change what you say from often for the first time to often for the. Second time for the second time. Just for this season. I was going to say, I don't know if it's even possible to fill out a full 60 seconds explaining the plot of this movie because like a short one sentence synopsis pretty much covers exactly what this movie's about. But we give you a minute, so if you want to pat it out with just personal opinions on things, you feel free, man. You have one minute on the clock to completely spoil this movie and everything that happens inside of it and go.

5:37 Do do you want me to, like, tell you about what I had for dinner last night? Do you have a personal opinion about it? It was delicious. There you go, I made AI made a lemon chicken orzo with with bacon and oh man, it was incredible. You guys do lemon chicken orzo quite often, don't you? I. Would say it's like at least once a month. OK, nice type of meal. All right. How many? How much time do I have left? Like 35 seconds. OK, so 12 Angry Men is a film about a jury trying to decide if a boy is innocent. One juror is convinced that there is a shadow of a doubt, the rest of them are not, and he has to prove them all wrong. There you go, that's it.

6:18 I like how you asked for how much time you had left and then spent 4 seconds. Well, let me tell you a little more about my lemon chicken or so Bob. All right, so important context to add to your, Brad explains. It's not just that they're deciding if a boy is innocent. I mean, they are, but it's a murder trial. This boy is on trial for his life. He's going to get sent to the electric chair if found guilty, and they're determining whether or not he murdered his own father. The boy grew up in what is referred to many times as the slums and the jurors. He's just a dirty Italian, Bob. He's. Truly man, I'm surprised we didn't hear some very insensitive epithets thrown his way. I was going to say for 1950s they do a very good job of being racist without being overtly like like using.

7:06 Actual slurs, right? I was going to say it's, it's overt. It's just like, you know, I don't know what's, what's the word, I was going to say polite racism, but it's not that either. You know, that polite version of racism that nobody minds? All right, so anyway, all of the jurors, or most of the jurors I should say, bring their own personal baggage into the room with them, and one by one they are convinced that the boy may or may not be innocent. And Brad, this is just a really good movie. Yeah, yeah, this movie is incredible. I think it comes from the fact that this might be Drum roll, Please.

7:48 The best script we've ever had on the. Podcast. It is a perfectly structured script and. And not just for the dialogue and the flow and and all of those things which work incredibly well. I don't know if I've ever seen a script with at least I would say like 9 of the 12 jurors have incredibly well fleshed out histories and character quirks. And like, you know, there's one or two of them that don't quite get as much screen time. But overall, almost every single character in this film is deep and rich and intriguing.

8:29 And I like, I want to know more about them. And then you put their performances on top of that. I like this movie is incredible Bob. Yeah, just from a structural standpoint, let's talk about this script a little bit because one of the things it does so brilliantly is every time there is some sort of a blow up or a vote or a new piece of evidence is introduced and you can tell it kind of shakes that room to its core. Then there's always like a lull. There's always a calm after the storm and before the next storm. And it's in those moments that they do a really good job of introducing character quirks. So for example, like one of the jurors, I think it's juror #2 he's a really stuck up, stuffy, like stockbroker guy.

9:10 And that's three. That's three. Yeah. Oh, OK. And because number 2 is Lee J Cobb. Oh, OK. I thought he was three. OK, Anyway, so the the stockbroker guy, it's in one of these walls and someone sits next to him and everyone's remarking on how hot it is in this room because it's the 50s and they don't have air conditioning in this room. And someone asks him, don't you ever sweat? And he just goes, no, I don't. And it comes back later in the script. You know, he, he kind of gets put on his heels a little bit and you see this one drop of sweat start dripping down his brow and you're like, they got him. And so just just structurally, it's, it's so brilliant because it gives itself room to breathe and it gives the audience time to catch its breath.

9:53 But it's not simply doing that just for the sake of having ebbs and flows. It uses the ebbs like as well as it uses the flows to establish character and pay offs for later on in the movie. Yeah, for. Well, First off, I have to tell you something, Bob. I was wrong and you were right. Hey, Lee J Lee J Cobb was juror #3, and juror #2 was played by John Fiedler. Yes. Just just in case anybody needed to know that. John Fiedler. Fun fact, Brad, I hope this is not one of your two facts and a falsehood. Did you recognize his voice from anywhere? I did. I'm the whole movie. It was him and the the baseball guy at the end of the table. I think number six or seven.

10:39 Yep, Yep. His voice. I was like, I have heard his voice before, but I can't place it. Well, we will. I think maybe we should go around the juror table and kind of talk about each one. But before we, no, you know, let me just finish my thought on, on juror #2 John Fiedler, the voice of Piglet in Winnie the Pooh. Really. And as soon, as, as soon as you think about it, you're like, Oh yeah, that's Piglet. That's 100% Piglet. Can we talk for a second how incredible the original Disney Winnie the Pooh movie is? It's very good. It's so good. It's got that like classic kids movie acid trip in the middle of it, which, you know, obviously makes the movie what it is. But man, oh man, Piglet, who would have known? All right, so let's start at the head of the table. Juror number one of the foreman is played by a great character actor named Martin Balsam, who we have seen in a couple other movies for this podcast, Brad, most notably in Psycho. He is the detective in Psycho that gets stabbed. Right in the forehead.

11:43 Falls backwards down the steps. Yeah, I remember that vividly. The thing about this movie is, you know, Henry Fonda and Lee J Cobb are, I guess ostensibly the stars of this movie. And if you're breaking down, you know, who gets the most words spoken versus who gets the least words spoken. They they definitely are the two biggest roles. But something that really stood out to me on this watch, Brad, is how evenly spread out everything is in this script. And so I don't have a lot to say about each actor, but I think it says a lot in itself that every single one of them essentially holds down 112th of this movie. And I don't really know that there is a a weak link in the cast.

12:27 Everything works really well for me. I, I would mostly agree with you, I think that the older gentleman juror #9 I believe I, I struggle with him. He like, of all the jurors, he's the one that feels most like somebody who is hamming it up because he knows he's on camera and, and there's just a few moments where he's overacting and, and just really beyond his scope. I feel like, but other than, other than him and, and here's the thing, I actually still love his character. I think that the way he interacts with everyone is funny. I think he also gets kind of not, not screwed over, but I, I don't think the camera does him any favors because there's like three shots early in the film where every other shot has been, there's been some close-ups.

13:19 But then they, they get up into his face like they're trying to like zoom in on a family sitting on his nose, like they are right up in his business and he's just got this goofy like look on his face. And I, and so I, I think those are a few small moments that I'm kind of like, OK, like this movie's not perfect. But even all that being said, I love the older gentleman. I, I don't even know what his, what his name is, the actor. His name is Joseph Sweeney, and we can get back to him when we get around the table. But let's let's go back to OK. So jury #1 Martin Balsam. Very good. I have no no real notes on him, Do you? He's one of the two or three that I'm like, he's there. Yeah, they don't flush him out very well for sure. They give him a little monologue about like being a high school football coach, and you think that story's going somewhere. And then it just doesn't.

14:13 Like his story just ends with. And then it rained and I'm like, oh cool, thank you for. That's the the mom's cancer. The mom's cancer from the room. They just needed to insert like I too have seen rain before. Yeah, he's, he's playing the, you know, the famous archetype character guy who has seen rain. Yes, obviously it's a trope. Look it up on what's What's that website that has all the tropes? I think TV Tropes, I think it's, yeah, TV Tropes. All right, so John Fiedler is juror #2 he's another one that I think kind of gets the short end of the stick. He's just a very small, mousy guy who gets bullied a lot, but he has a a great couple zingers. Like when the racist guy is like, you know, where's all those cough drops? And he's like, they're all gone friend because the guy keeps calling everybody friend.

15:01 So like he has his moments. But I think, again, for me, he's probably one of the, you know, the three or so that aren't fleshed out enough. Oh, I my brain got confused. I was thinking that you were talking about the banker who is sitting to Lee J Cops left. That's I think that's why I was thinking Lee J was #2 Anyways, John Fiedler is great. We can move on to Lee Lee Cobb. Lee J Cobb is a great actor. He is known for being the heavy and movies like this. He is one of the great on screen screamers because it's believable, like the man is channeling deep rage and I. Was going to say, I feel like Jack Nicholson probably bit off a lot of Lee J Cobb in his performances.

15:48 There is just such passion and vigor. And when he rips up his son's picture at the end of it, Oh my gosh, dude. What an emotional wallop. Yeah, who knew that this was going to be a father son drama by the end of it? They all are, Brad. They all are. Every single one. So the thing about Lee J Cobb's character is, you know, he is the last one at the end of the film, spoiler alert, to vote not guilty. And it's really brilliantly set up and we'll talk about why, but his is the most personal reason. His is it's not logic based, but it's kind of hidden behind logic. And so as you watch the last three or four people kind of convert, you know, it becomes like the really racist guy and then the guy who is the most logical. And then it's Lee J Cobb because his is the closest to home. He had a falling out with his own son. And he is clearly bringing the guilt that he feels about it into the deliberation room with him. And you're right, man, when when he rips up that picture at the end of the movie and you just see him kind of like whimper, he goes like, and then you hear him cry into his own arm like, no, no.

17:02 You know, it's one of those things that at the end of the day, despite all of the walls that he's built up with his son, it's the fact that he refuses at the end of the day to completely give up on his son and his relationship with his son and his love for his son. And that's the only reason that he comes back around and says not guilty. It's a really touching and beautiful moment. Well you can tell that he is so incredibly angry with his son that he wants to murder their relationship and when it comes down to it, he can't. And like that like dude, what a script all. Right. Let's talk really quickly about Lee J Cobb, though, because he is, like I said, one of the great screamers on screen, one of the great big tough guys. And I have never seen a more seamless transition than this of like, he handed the baton off to George C Scott and then George C Scott took it and ran with it in movies like Doctor Strangelove. And it's so funny because their names are so similar that you can almost confuse them for Lee J Cobb, George C Scott, they play the exact same type of character. You know, this movie actually gets remade in the late 90s as an HBO drama.

18:14 And the Lee J Cobb character is played by George C Scott in that movie. So it's like they share this kind of spiritual DNA with each other. And and I think sometimes, like we forget about guys like Lee J Cobb because they're always the bad guy. They're always the heavy. But what always stands out to me is how believable he makes his characters. I'm going to be honest with you, I I don't remember who George C Scott is. He's the guy from Strangelove that was like the gum chewing. Like not the general, but the guy that was talking about the Ruskies. Yes, yes, yes, Buck, I think his name was. I think so. Yeah.

18:55 OK, that that clicks for me. Yes. Lee J Cobb and George C Scott are wildly similar at Yeah. I'm not helping you in your point, Bob, because I don't know of him and anything other than Doctor Strangelove or how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb. So. Well, there you go. There you go. And we will leave Mr. Cobb alone now and move on to EG Marshall juror #4. He is the guy who is the stuck up stockbroker and I think he does a really good job. But once again, it's like, that's just who he is, you know what I mean? Yeah, 100%. I, I think that throughout the film, the nuance I love for him is how he is staunchly on the guilty side, but he doesn't want to be identified with the crazy people on the guilty side. And I, I think that in that character, you've, it's easy to find yourself in there in a modern world where it feels like everyone and like, I'm talking about our current culture at this point, it feels like everyone wants to stereotype everyone else into like, you're a crazy right wing person or you're a crazy left wing person.

20:07 And as with everybody, whether you're left wing or right wing, you have your reasons for being over there, but you don't want to get lumped in with all the, you know, wild, crazy people on your side. The Fringe. Yeah, exactly. And like, I think you can see that in his character. And the nuance there comes out a little later in the film. But it made me appreciate his character and his acting a lot more. There's a great moment after Lee J Cobb has one of his first big blow UPS and he's kind of off to the side. I think it's when the the jury split 6/6 and the stockbroker comes over to get some water and he's like, I Can you believe, you know, I'm sorry, I got a little flustered, but he's just trying to bait me. I can tell he's just trying to bait me. And he doesn't even make eye contact and just says, well, he certainly did a good job.

20:59 But they use his character so well because especially at the end of the movie when it's like they're the last two, Lee J Cobb and him, they actually framed the shots where Lee J Cobb is sitting behind him in the shot. And he's basically telling Henry Fonda, like, look, you've made some really compelling points. Here are the things that I'm still hung up on. And it's a great visual representation of what Lee J Cobb has been doing the whole movie because every time he needs to reiterate facts or, you know, he needs something in his corner, he taps that guy on the shoulder and says, hey, you tell him. You tell him exactly, you know, And then he'll say something. And he goes, yeah, that's the thing that I believe, too. And it's just a great picture of how he's hiding behind the logic without actually using it.

21:44 You know, yeah, 100%. And I, I think it also serves to be, you know, this is in the mid to late 50s. We've just come off a period with lots of dictators. I, I think that Lee J Cobb kind of serves to represent a Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin type of personality that there's not a lot of facts behind what they're saying, but man, oh man, are they loud and persuasive and brash. But when you actually sit back and and you're a little more cool headed about it and ask questions it, you know, people kind of fall away from them eventually. All right, juror #5 is played by Jack Klugman, who goes on to have a really successful career, especially in television.

22:27 He is the original Oscar in The Odd Couple TV show. I'm pretty sure he's an Emmy winner. I think he's absolutely great in this movie, man. He, he plays the kid from a rough neighborhood who is still very sensitive to that topic, and he plays it so, so well. Like, they don't give him a ton of lines, but you can see his discomfort as people talk about kids from the slums until he finally speaks up. And what this movie does so well, both from, like, Henry Fonda and the Old Man and Jack Klugman, is these people are very polite until it's time for them to take their kind of principled stand. And they're not always pushy with it. But when it's their turn to speak, they say, no, no, no.

23:09 Listen, I need you to understand this. There's something about my own experience that you need to hear because you're clearly not factoring that in right now, and his character is a great example of that. Yeah. And I I think that what Jack does so incredibly well, it is that moment where he and Lee J Cobb get into it because Cobb thinks that he's changed his vote. And and then you get the 1st, a close up of the old man saying that he was the one who did it. But it. But it's moments like that where you can tell this man is conflicted. This man is struggling with what he believes, and he's willing to listen to arguments on both sides.

23:52 And in the midst of all that you can, you can feel the inner turmoil of like this kids just like me. And I, you know, his guilty vote might not just be against the kid, it might be against himself as well. And like the fact that you can read all of that from his facial expressions and the way he delivers his lines. I think Klugman. Klugman is incredible here. Jared number six is played by Edward Binz. He is also a pretty underdeveloped character. And yet I will say he gives one of my favorite performances of anybody at the table. He does a really good job of embodying like the blue collar worker. I think he they say that he's a painter, like he's a contracted painter and he does a great job of sticking up for like the old man. I just really wish there was more of his character in this movie because I believe Brad, he's the one that goes in the bathroom with Henry Fonda and had that great line where the stakes of the movie shift dramatically because, you know, Henry Fonda is is doing his principled thing and turning people's opinions.

24:54 And I think it's like a nine to three vote at that point. And he just, he asked Henry Fonda the question, like, hey, suppose you convince us all that this kid is innocent and he really did murder his father. And then he just walks out. And it's the first time that possibility has been introduced. Yeah. So they use his character really well. But the performance I thought was just excellent, man. Yeah. And, and I think that he and, and Klugman are like the examples of how this film, you know, doesn't give all of the jurors an equal chance. And yet because of their acting performances, they raise those two characters to a level that the script might not naturally give them.

25:37 And so it, it is this pairing of like, yes, they have some, some good lines to help them establish character, but it, there's so many scenes where they're saying nothing, but they're, you know, just off center from the camera and you can feel the energy radiating off of them that I, I, I just think, man, like they got the perfect cast for this film. Yeah, man, let's breeze through these last few. And I guess we could even hold off on talking about Henry Fonda for a bit, if you want. Jack Worden is juror #7. He plays guy who wants to go to baseball game and he plays him very well. I do think that there are times where his like the accent he's trying to do and the kind of dumb guy thing he's trying to do get a little distracting.

26:20 Like he gets cornered by the the European watchmaker and he's like, no, no, you have to tell me why you think he's not guilty. And he goes, I don't, I don't think he's guilty. It's just the way he says it. It's like very Yogi Bear sounding, you know what I mean? And it's fine. But I think that his is probably one of my less favorite performances here. Bob, all I care about at this point is why do I recognize his voice? I don't know why. Oh. I, I thought earlier when I said it, you said we'd get to him later. I thought you had like an answer like, oh, he was Eeyore in in the Winnie the Pooh poofie. No, I mean, he was a a really well respected character actor. He was in a lot of TV shows and a lot of movies, but I don't, I'm looking at a bunch of TV shows that he was on and I don't know if you've watched any of them so. Oh man, yeah, that that's tough.

27:16 He is somebody that 100%. I recognize his voice. I'm going to have to get on on the old Google after this and see if I can figure it out. All right, we'll skip Fonda for now. Juror #9 the old man we've kind of already touched on. I think the performance is better than you do, and I think they do a really good job. You know, Lumet likes to use these extreme close-ups in these moments where people are being the most confrontational and also the most vulnerable. And the first time they cut to one of those type of close-ups is when the old man is having his confessional about the other old man who had testified and basically accusing that guy of just wanting attention.

27:57 And not in a bad way, but just because when you're old and lonely, that's what you're looking for. And you don't realize as he's building his argument that he's talking about himself. And you get that great realization a moment later. But yeah, for a guy who has the camera 3 inches from his face for a lot of his performance, like, yeah, I, I think he does pretty good, man. Yeah, I I think overall his character is well written. I think that his performance is like the only like B minus performance in the film. And that's totally fine. Like it still works. My least favorite performance here is juror #10 Ed Begley, who I actually think is a really good actor. His son, Ed Ed Begley Junior is really popular actor that you would probably recognize from some things. Brad, he is.

28:44 He's good and his character is necessary. He's just the overt racist in the group. But it's like when he stands up and gives his big impassioned plea at the end of the movie that like none of these people are any good. And everyone 1 by 1 gets up and turns their back on him silently. And then he the realization sets in and he goes off in the corner and never says anything again. That's the most strained moment of the movie for me. Like it no one really is acting like they would in real life in that moment. And it just feels more like, oh, this is my visual representation of how we end racism. Do you know what I mean? I just like, no one interrupts him.

29:25 No one's like, ah, this guy. They just all silently move away and like it looks cool, but it just, it was the one moment that didn't feel real for me. Yeah, no, I, I that was like kind of a note that I took while I was watching it. There. There's something about that where you can feel Lumet's voice stronger than at any other point in the movie. Does that make sense? Like, like through the camera work, through the blocking of where the actors are walking, you're like, oh, I get it, Lumet. We're just, we're just all turning our backs on racism now. Go America and, and, and I don't know, that sounds weird to say because we're all against racism. It's bad.

30:08 We all should turn our backs on it. But there there was something about it that felt preachy compared to the rest of the film. I do appreciate, though, that it's like it's the most drastic reaction of the group because everyone else has their little personal peccadillo's, you know, like, yeah, like the holes get poked in them and they get kind of turned. And then I think the argument like, mad. What's that? Just like the father. Yeah, exactly. And I think that the point Lumet's trying to make here is this guy doesn't really have a personal reason and other than he just doesn't like these kind of people. It's like there's there's no, he's formed an opinion and he just hates people.

30:53 And I think it gets to the point sometimes where there is just no humanity to appeal to the way you can with the Lee J Cobb. And so at that point, the only thing you could do is just tell him to shut up and sit down, which is what the stockbroker does. Yeah, yeah. I will say that's another moment where like if all the turning around and, you know, turning their backs to him is kind of a little bit cheesy. The the way the stockbroker delivers that line is so cutting. And like, man, he cuts him straight out at the knees and he's done for the rest of the movie. And I that that's probably the one part of that scene that I'm like, yeah, you get him. All right, we have two more jurors, and then we'll take a break. George Voskovac plays juror #11 the European watchmaker.

31:37 He's pretty good. He's also one of those ones that it's like, oh, we're going to use this character as a way for us to talk about the goodness of America. Like he stands up and, and does the whole like, what are the things that I, I longed for in the old country? And it's OK, man. Like we get it. Democracy is great, you know. Also, I think you have to be Eastern European to call it the old country. I don't know if you're allowed to do that from France. Oh, OK, well, there you go. France. France, very famously not an old country. Yeah, yeah, exactly. I, I like him a lot. I think he does a good job with what he's asked to do. I think one of the funniest lines of the movie is when he he corrects the racist guy's speech.

32:24 That man. Because like the the French guy does not speak for like the first 80% of the movie pretty much except for that one line and it's in that one line. I just about lost it. So he has some good moments for sure. Juror #12 is a slick ad executive played by Robert Weber and Brad. I think you. I think you mispronounced beautiful as slick. He's a good looking man. He's well built, incredible. He's got that Mad Men suit and and hairdo going as well. The funny thing about him is that he looks like, I don't know Rock Hudson, you know, but he he's trying to behave like Jack Lemmon.

33:05 And the whole performance I was like, Oh, Jack Lemmon was too famous to be guy as juror #2 in this movie. So then they're like, Hey, you do a good Jack Lemmon. And I think it like it works. And he he is the like fast talking ad executive. But it just felt like if if I had had that movie on in the background and not been watching it and just listening to his voice, it sounded like he was trying to do a Jack Lemmon impression to me. Yeah, a little bit. I think that he feels the least real of all the characters, but at the same time I think that his, you know, script wise, his character does add a lot to the room. I think that the acting performance is just fine. It's solid if anything.

33:53 Man, it's really hard when you have 12 main characters to get through anything else on a podcast, Brad? We haven't talked about Henry Fonda and we haven't talked about Lumet and the movie making part of this. I think it's time for us to hit pause. We'll come back and touch on Fonda and then we'll talk a little bit about what makes this movie so great. What do you say we drink this whiskey? You want to touch Henry Fonda? He he touched me deep in my soul. Let's get to it, Bob. All right, so today, Brad, we are revisiting a brand that we haven't even talked about since I think season 1, maybe 2, and that is very Old Barton. Now to give just the briefest of histories here, this is a whiskey that I had like when I first got on whiskey Instagram. People were always like, you can only find it in Kentucky, and it's really cheap and it's really good for the price. Don't sleep on Very Old Barton.

34:51 And so I made a trip to Kentucky. I bought a bunch of whiskey for our podcast. And I was like, it's the one that people on Instagram know. And we hadn't really established yet that like our podcast was going to be about whiskeys people can buy everywhere. And so it became pretty immediately apparent, like Very Old Barton might be known by people who visit Kentucky, but not by anyone outside of that. And I feel like I kind of pigeonholed us into trying all of them because there's 4 proof points of Very Old Barton and we ended up trying them all. And fun fact, you can get this in the state of Ohio now. Oh, that's. True. I think, yeah, the 80 proof for sure. Can you buy all four variants in Ohio?

35:31 I don't I I think it's just the 80 proof. OK, so they'd make an 80 proof and 86 proof, a 90 proof and a bottled and bond version. And the bottled and bond is 75% corn, 15% rye, 10% barley. I don't think there's any reason to believe that this is a different mash bill. So we're dealing with a a high ish rye bourbon. It's aged according to the label on the back of this small plastic bottle for 36 months, Brad. So it's a three-year bourbon. I've been thinking about this lately. You know, like, first of all, I respect that they put that it's a three-year bourbon on here. Like a lot of places wouldn't even do that and I respect that at least. Yeah, but I was going to ask you like, what do you think is the age of a bourbon where you start being like? I'll drink that.

36:22 Like you don't have to give the caveat anymore. Like oh it's good for a two year bourbon. Like when do you drop the four NX year? I think that once a whiskey hits four years, I kind of stop worrying about the age, like worrying in the sense of like, like I still want to know the age if it's a six year and eight-year or 12 year. But I, I stopped worrying in the sense of like, oh, is that going to be any good? Like once you hit four years, I assume that it has aged long enough to get the character necessary to make me pull my wallet out. I think honestly though, as like, if we can transition into the nose on this bourbon, man, at three years and at 80 proof, I'm pretty shocked at how pleasant this smells. Yeah, it, it's not bad.

37:10 I got like some caramel, some peanuts, some ethanol. And then the longer I sat with it, the overwhelming, like, I could not get this out of my head. I think this smells like apple juice, Bob. Oh interesting. See I'm getting a completely different fruit, but I'm getting banana on this like a lot. I'm like fresh baked banana bread and I have a friend that makes this bread this like almost like a banana cake, but it's like a banana bread that has like a, a brown sugar kind of Maple frosting on it. And I'm getting a ton of that here. I get the banana, I get the brown sugar. I do think that like if you really go in for the nose, there are some notes that are like, oh, this smells a little bit cheap.

37:50 Like there's there's a little bit of like wet paper for me on this as well, but it's almost like it's covered up by these syrupy sweet Roma's on top of that. So it kind of masks the fact that this is like a $10 whiskey and I'm cool with that. I'm going to give it a 7 1/2 on the nose. Have you ever Have you ever taken a banana that's like, you're like, oh, I'm on the edge of whether or not I could eat this. And there's enough black spots on it that I'm a little nervous. I think that's what that's what this smells like for me. Like, I'm with you. It has a banana smell, but it's a it's like a little too sweet over a little bit like, yeah, over ripe banana. The note that all whiskey producers. Are going for?

38:34 Yeah, exactly. I personally gave this a 4 1/2 on on the nose. Out of 10. Yes. No Bob, I actually decided to switch it up this week. I'm scoring everything out of a 77.75 is my Max. Wow, I thought this was way better than a four and a half. I'm going to give it a sip. Why don't you tell us what you're tasting notes are? The taste is decent. I think that there's vanilla, there's some like just like almost a generic like heavy whipping cream. There's apple peel. I don't really get much caramel and the, the fruitiness that I experienced on the nose, that apple juice overripe banana kind of just turns into what, what would you say the the tasting note is on like an overripe banana?

39:26 Like like, I don't, I don't want to call it, you know? Yeah, it's hard because when when a banana is too green, it's kind of sour, and when a banana is too ripe, it's kind of sour. But they're different. They're very different. Yeah, exactly. So I'm like, I don't know if like sickly sweet is the right word, but it's like, it's like the wrong kind of sweet. I I think it's a decent palette. I'll give it a 5 1/2 out of 10 here. I'm wondering if if part of the reason that our notes are about to be different is because of the different nosing notes we picked up. So I had that like overly sweet Maple, brown sugar and banana. And so I was expecting a really sweet palate and I was disappointed in how not sweet the palate was based on what I was expecting, right?

40:11 So like, it's really oaky. And then for me, the rye and the malt took over. Like it gets really, really almost like a toasted oak kind of flavor, but then. It almost like sapped the like it was almost tannic for me and I think I'm the malt in the rye had a lot to do with that. I wouldn't call it bitter, but it's definitely unsweet and at 80 proof it was a little bit aggressive too. I don't know if I would say that it was like alcohol forward. It packed a punch. Like I actually think this would go really well in a cocktail because it stands up so well, but it was just not what I was expecting on the flavor. I'm going to give it just a 5 1/2. Yeah. And as I got into the finish, it, it doesn't finish well. It it kind of sours for me.

40:56 There's a little bit of a leathery like essence of leather type of feel. O day leather. O day leather, it's kind of oaky on the end. It gets a little bittery sour. I'll come back down to a 4 1/2 on the finish. Yeah. I mean, I just don't think it's anything to write home about. I would give it a six, but I don't know that I'm even that positive about it. I'm just very neutral. So I think another 5 1/2 is in order here. And that takes us to balance where, you know, Brad, we, we try to be objective about our first four categories and then if it's a cheap whiskey that is OK, we kind of reward it in the value category. I don't think this is a really well balanced whiskey. Like, I mean it, it's well balanced in that it's like just very mediocre across the board.

41:49 I guess I'll give it a six on balance. Where are you sitting on it? I'm actually at the same point. And I think for me it's not the fact that it's mediocre with like crazy different notes throughout, it's the fact that like the flavors remain pretty consistent and steady throughout there. There's nothing that like overpowers you on the nose and then disappears on the taste. And like all the flavors kind of are present. They're there. They they stay the same and I think that's fine. So yeah, 6 out of 10. All right. And that takes us to value, Brad, since this is sold in Ohio now, what is the price on a 750ML bottle? This will set you back 21 dollars. What?

42:34 The 80 proof? Yes Sir. Oh, that's crazy. Now, I don't think I've ever done this before. I can tell you for a fact that it was not nearly that expensive when I visited Kentucky just a few months ago to pick up these samples for us. In fact, I got us these 200ML tiny little bottles. They were $3 a piece. Like I'm pretty sure this bottle in a 750 was either 1199 or 1299. Yeah. So I don't really know, like I don't know how to score this, Brad, because I'm, I'm grateful that Ohio picked it up, but I was planning to score it out based on Kentucky prices because I thought it was only available there. Yeah.

43:14 I mean, looking online, I see a lot of prices in the 13 to $16.00 range. So I think it'd be fair to call this a $15 whiskey. All right cool so it's right in line with like a benchmark. I think benchmark is better than this like I think this smells better than benchmark. I think benchmarks better at 15 bucks. There are only a few whiskeys you can actually buy so like it's not the best one in the category though so I think I'm automatically going to dock it a few. I'll give it a 7 out of 10 on value because it's not unpalatable and you can't really get any cheaper for a bottle of whiskey. Yeah, I'll, I'll give it a 7 1/2 as well. I think that this is a really solid expression at 1516 dollars.

44:04 I think that even at 80 proof the the flavors remain solid throughout. It does have a little bit of pop of flavor on the palate and if you're going to spend $15 on whiskey, like you might as well spend it here. So I I think it's a solid value. Bob, I am coming out to a 28 out of 50. Where are you at? Brad, I'm at a 31 1/2 out of 50, which kind of feels high from being honest, but like that value score really boosted it. So we are at just a 59.5 out of 100 or a 29.75 out of 50. I think that's a pretty fair score. Like, yeah, this is a an extremely mediocre whiskey that is boosted by the fact that it's like 14 bucks.

44:50 Yeah, 100%. If this cost, as you said, if it cost $2122, I think it would fall off pretty quickly. But at $15 like you can't make the argument that this needs to compete with Rebel 100 like it it is a genuine lower price category. I think it does its job pretty pretty admirably. All right. Now the real question is, which juror do you think this most appeals to? I think the baseball juror #7II, I just think that this is his go to drink. Well, as long as it's not like the, you know, raging racist guy, I think that it's kind of just pick, take your pick, and then you're OK. We, we don't want to put that on any of our, our whiskey brands, Bob.

45:35 No, especially not this one. All right, man, let's get back into talking about 12 angry men. What do you say? Let's get to it. All right, everybody, That was very old Barton 80 proof, a whiskey that cost little money and will probably make little impact on your life. And that's OK, Sometimes you know it. Is yeah, sometimes you just need a whiskey that is unremarkable. You you can't appreciate the great whiskey. Without having a baseline, yeah. Yeah, if you don't have very old Barton 80. When I was a kid, every once in a while my mom would take us to see a movie and it would be a movie that usually like a movie I didn't pick, but it was like the kids movie that was out at the time and it was mediocre.

46:21 And we would leave and the the thing my mom would say as we walked out to the car was that was cute. And cute was like, you know, it was fine. Even like 7 year old Bob knew what she meant. Yeah, You know, like, it wasn't great, but we had an OK time. And then, you know, this, this whiskey was cute. Yeah. And that's OK. About being you. Need those exactly. Well, you know what else brings us together, Bob, and has never once caused a riff in our relationship? Is it 2 facts and a falsehood? 2 facts and a falsehood baby. Brad is going to try to stump you. Ball 2 are right and what is wrong? 2 facts and a falsehood. 2 Facts and a Falsehood is the part of the podcast where Brad presents three items to me as fact about the making of this movie, one of which is a complete lie, and I have to figure out which one that is.

47:13 Brad, there are so many directions you can go with your facts and falsehoods today. There's twelve people to keep track of, there's a great screenplay, there's a great director, and to be honest with you, I finished watching this movie like 8 minutes before we started recording. So I have not done any research and I am very vulnerable to losing today. So with that. As you are every day, Bob fact #1 as juror #8 is pacing the distance. Henry Fonda, juror #7 makes fun of the way he is pacing by whistling. The tune he whistles is called Dance of the Cuckoos, which was the theme song for Laurel and Hardy.

47:53 Fact #2 at the time of this recording, Bob, this is the shortest movie in the IMDb top ten as well as the only one in the top ten to be under 2 hours in length. It is also the only movie in the top 30 to be under 100 minutes in length. The next film to have a 2 digit runtime is actually I'm. I'm going to make you guess what do you what do you think the next film is? We have watched it on the podcast, I'll give you that. I don't know. Is it a chaplain? Hey, good job dude. Is it really? Yeah, it is. Well, what is it? Well, you have to guess the you. You guessed the director. Modern Times. No City lights City. Lights all right? That number 35, good job.

48:34 Though, man. Well, thank you. Yeah, but what if that's a falsehood though? Wait a minute. What if that ends up being a falsehood? You can't tell me. Good job if I guessed something you made-up. I I'm hey man, maybe it is modern times fact number three. Of all the jurors in this film, Edward Bin's juror number six is the only one still alive at 102 years of age. He was born in 1921 in Philadelphia, PA. I don't know, man. All right, I'm just going to assume number 2 is true just for the time being, because you, you said good job and I want to believe that. I guess something that's true #3 sounds like wild 102 years old and number one was what was #1 again.

49:24 As as Henry Fonda is pacing. Oh yeah, out of there. He's whistling the Laurel and Hardy themes. There's a couple moments in this movie where they make pop culture references, like Lee J Cobb calls somebody The Boy in the Gray Flannel suit. There was a movie called The Man in the Gray Flannel Suit, so I assumed that that tune was something that people knew. I don't know if that's what it is. So it it could be a falsehood, Brad, I'm going to just go with my gut and say that number 3 is the falsehood, but I have absolutely no basis for that. Bob, your gut has steered you in the correct direction.

50:04 That is the falsehood. Man, that's kind of sad though, because I he's dead, you know? Yes, yes, all of them. I have I. Have never unknowingly cheered at someone's death like that before. I got you. Yeah, As I was watching the film, I was looking at facts about it, and the final juror actually passed away in 2012. OK. And who was that? Right now I don't remember. What if it was the old man? What if he? Lived like 172. I was going to say, like Speaking of Chaplin films, I remember the when we watched, I believe it was Gold Rush, the they had what they think to be the oldest man on film ever in that movie because there was a guy in the movie who was born in like 1837 and the movie came out in like 1928. That's crazy.

51:04 Yeah. All right, Brad, let's get into talking about Henry Fonda a little bit. I don't know that there's too much that needs to be said that hasn't already been said. The great thing about Fonda in this movie and kind of Fonda's personality overall, he reminds me of, like, I think I've had this conversation with you before, too. One of my favorite working actors is Matt Damon because Matt Damon is never showy. He's just not a showbodie actor. And you know, I, I'm thinking about movies that he made, like he made one, I don't know if you've seen it, Brad. It's called Air. It's about like the air, the creation of the Air Jordan shoe. And he plays Sonny Vaccaro in that movie.

51:44 He is the most unassuming. Like for a guy that had a big personality in real life, Damon is so good at just taking what other actors give him and working with it. And I don't feel like he gets recognized enough because he doesn't give these big Oscar E performances. And I think Fonda's the same way. Like, yes, he has the biggest part in this movie, but so much of this performance is him just kind of sitting back silently and watching the world burn around him and, like, bidding his time and waiting to jump in and say what he needs to say. But it never once feels stagey or like he's trying to hog the spotlight. Yeah, I think he has a talent for giving the soft smile when somebody kind of turns his way and and he does it in such a way that you feel included, like you matter. And I think that's why this movie stands up so well is because it's, it's a master class in like, like, I, I have to imagine that if somebody wrote a movie that wanted to illustrate Carnegie's, you know, how to win friends and influence people, what movie would better illustrate that than this film? Like, he has this talent for being charming and yet firm and, and the way he wins people over by using their own emotions, using their own logic, not against them, but just to question what they're doing.

53:14 I like I just I I think that Fonda takes what is written on this on the script, which is great, and raises it to the next level. So the screenplay was written by Reginald Rose and it was originally developed as a teleplay like it was ATV movie before those were really a thing. And then it was developed into a full length movie. And I think to go back to the script again with Reginald Rose, one of the great things that he does is he lets people's logic defeat themselves. And he doesn't always have to under score that with people saying aha or gotcha. Like there's a great moment, I don't know, like midway through the movie, probably when they're arguing about, you know, whether the old man could have walked so far, whatever. And Lee J Cobb says he was an old man. How could he be sure about anything? And as soon as he says that, you can see Lee J Cobb go, damn it, they shouldn't have said that.

54:10 Like, I know what I just said. And everybody behind him just kind of gives a little smirk because they all know what he just did, too. But no one acknowledges it. It's just kind of like in a boxing match and you're kind of tallying up hits like it who's landing punches? Because we all know at the end of the day, like, we're going to tally them all up in the the final summation of things. But Fonda's performance kind of demonstrates that better than I think anybody else's. He's not always pouncing on people and he's letting their own words come back to kind of cook them at the end of the movie. Yeah, and, and he continually does not commit himself to his position so hard that it would push anyone away from what he believes. Like he's continually backpedaling. And, you know, they pointed out in the film, like when he goes into the bathroom, I, I don't remember if it's juror number six or if it's one of the later ones. But you know, somebody says to him, like, have you ever heard of the Soft Cell?

55:08 Because, boy, you're the master at it. And and like, it's true. He has an ability to say, look, I'm not saying he is 100% innocent. I'm just saying there's a shadow of a doubt, you know, is it, is it possible that this alternates, you know, theory could be viable instead of just what the prosecution gave us? All right, before we dive into Lumet, I do just want to take one more 2nd and talk about how good this script is because like, the first note that I took was about the way that the movie just kind of logically unfolds. I don't even know if logically is the word, but realistically, because Fonda does his whole thing where he's like, I'm the only one.

55:49 I think that there I have a doubt and it's possible. And everyone's like, you know, But then immediately people start pointing out little things that they noticed too. And after the first couple, you get people that are starting to feel personally offended by it, like, well, how dare you accuse me of this? And then someone saying I'm not accusing you of anything. And but I love that the way that it unfolds is that before anyone changes their mind, everyone gets offended first. And so there's always, there's already like these little riffs. And I think that's it's such a good demonstration of how this would actually happen in real life. Like no one would just be like, oh, you know what, you're right. I'm going to change my vote.

56:33 They they each have to personally push past their own, I don't know, pride, vanity, thought process. And because of all that, like the the first, I don't know, 20 minutes of debate between all these people. Is this kind of personal like, well, I didn't say that. Why are you putting words in my mouth for? And it just makes for. It's awkward to get through, but it's exactly how that would really happen. Well, and they also set you up for like, the social politeness factor of like, yeah, there's these big personalities in the room that just want to get this over with. And I don't want to be the guy that, like, goes against the big public voice in the room. But as soon as they do the blind vote, it's fascinating to me that the old man doesn't change his opinion because he thinks the boy is not guilty.

57:22 He does it because he has respect for Henry Fonda. And I think that even that is like a fascinating pushed by the script to say, like, people do things for reasons that do not have any relevance to, to what's going on in front of them. Like people are not always logical. Like they're there to determine the guilt of this boy. And he just voted not guilty based on nothing about the case and 100% on the fact that he's like, man, this guy's all by himself. I think I'm going to vote for him because he's he's, you know, committed. Well, and that's like the really great thing about this too, is I don't know that Henry Fonda really proves the the boy's innocence. And he doesn't have to, right? He says at the beginning, like, that's the burden of the prosecution. And if they didn't prove his guilt, then you have to vote not guilty, right?

58:10 And I think in our very first episode on this, Brad, I kind of said, like, I think if you're just talking probabilistically, like it, it does seem like a ton of coincidences had to add up to get this kid off. And so maybe, maybe the probability is that he he did kill his dad. But I think it's such a good example of how I don't know what am I trying to say. I think what you're trying to say is it's a beautiful example of social maneuvering. And I think that at the end of the day, if the jury had to reveal like the content of their deliberation, I think that their verdict would have gotten thrown out.

58:53 Like that? Like what you mean sneaking in a knife as? A. Counter evidence is not going to be allowed. Yeah. You know, I think that there's a lot of conjecture here, especially from the old man who literally like, isn't saying like, here's some facts and a reasonable thing based off of it. He's just kind of like this guy's old and I think he wants attention and, and everybody's like, I don't know about that. And he's like, Nah, I know about it. And, and everybody's just like, OK, there's enough that goes on that I'm like, I once again, this is an example of a movie that you're not looking for it to be a fully accurate description of the American legal system.

59:37 You're looking at it and, and, and counting it as one of, you know, the top 20 greatest movies of all time simply for the fact that you get to watch these people just bounce off of each other and run into each other. And it's something that I've said in running events for a long time in my personal life, that anytime you add a person into the room, right? Whether it's, you know, adding a Co worker into a into an e-mail thread to have a conversation about something. Whether it's adding 10 more people under your guest list for your wedding. Like anytime you add a person into the room, you are adding. Their childhood, their first girlfriend that dumped them, their experience with people of a different race, their experience with religion and church. And you're adding all this massive ball of, of human experiences of sadness and joy and anger and disappointment and prejudice and, and all these things. And I don't know if I've ever seen a movie illustrate that better than 12 Angry Men.

1:00:42 Yeah, I mean, if it hadn't been for each of the people in that room like this kids going to the electric chair, that's just, you know, if it was 12 ad men like juror #12, they would have said, let's throw it out on the scoop and see if the cat licks it up. And then it would have been, it would have been done. Let's let's throw it the other direction. What if it was 12 angry women? Is. Is he going to the electric chair? I don't. Know man, I'm not going to go there but all right, Brad, real quick, let's talk about Lumet because again this is his first movie. We talked in our our first episode on this about how this movie is famous for how many different camera setups he has and how there's I think there's like over 100 setups and he never returns to a shot once. He does it once.

1:01:25 And I think I mean 6 Bob, what is it? 356. That's crazy. That's so many shots. But it works really well to the point where there they had such a low budget for this film that there were certain lighting setups that worked for multiple of those 356 shots. And so they would film, you know, shot #72 of, you know, early in the film and then shot number 85 and then shot number 97. And so, like, there might be weeks in between, you know, the actual next line in the film. Because when they were actually performing it. Like, that's crazy.

1:02:06 Isn't that that's mind. Boggling. Can you imagine having to keep track of all that? That's what dude, that's what I'm saying, man. They didn't have Google Spreadsheets. They couldn't share it with everybody on the team and be like, all right, we're moving, moving on. We need this lighting set up. One, OK, so two things that I noticed AI think the obvious 1 is like the the camera gets much closer to people as the movie goes on. It gets more much more claustrophobic because it's getting more personal in the thematic content, right? Like, you know, Lee J Cobb is having his own stuff challenged, and so the cameras pushing in closer and closer on his face. But the thing that I really noticed this time is that I was expecting all these different shots.

1:02:47 I wasn't expecting how many wonders there were in this movie. Like, there's a ton, especially in the early going where it's like extended shots. And he's getting 345 shots out of each of those. Yeah, 100%. There's, he has a talent with the camera that I don't think you see in a lot of first time directors. And granted, he was a television director for a long time, like, like this isn't his first time behind a camera. But man, oh man, the, the camera movement in this not, not just like panning from one side to the other, but the, the little short dollies. And when, when Henry Fonda is limping across the floor and it follows him down the room. And even just the blocking of the racist juror being like slowly backed off by Henry Fonda's limping is incredible. But the way the camera stays close to his feet and then as he turns, it slowly pans up as it moves backwards into his face, it's just, it's just incredible.

1:03:45 Bob all. Right, man. I think it's time for us to get to our final segment of the day, which we call let's make it a double. We're near the end of the episode, so thanks listening to the film and Whiskey show. Let's have another film with this one, even if it's struggling. It's the final segment of the day. Now let's make it a double. Let's Make It a Double is the part of the podcast where we pick another movie to pair up with this one to make the perfect double feature. Brad, I've been thinking about this a lot. And I mean, you could go a lot of different directions. You could go courtroom drama with it. Man, I don't know. I like, I want to be deep and and do a really good pairing, but I can't get the Lee J Cobb, George C Scott thing out of my head.

1:04:28 So right now I'm just going to say pair it with Doctor Strangelove and watch two guys scream for three hours. What's, what's that movie, Bob? I didn't recognize the title. Oh, that's Doctor Strangelove, or how I learned to stop worrying and love the bomb. Oh, what a movie. Man, That's that was a good one. I'm going to go the opposite direction of you in terms of title length. I'm going to go with a one word title. I think that watching this and then watching Network would be an incredible evening of cinema. Lumet and great scripts. Yeah, that, that's what I'm saying, man. Like, I was trying to think of other, like pair it with another courtroom drama, you know, To Kill a Mockingbird would be the obvious choice. But I think that just sitting down for, you know, network is what, 2 1/2 hours?

1:05:19 Maybe not even that long, yeah. Yeah, and then watching this for 90 minutes, I think that'd be a heck of a night, man. Brad, we have done I think three 1957 movies on this podcast and they are all bangers now, like this movie Bridge on the River, Kwai and and Paths of Glory. Yeah. So you could just bring it up by year and do a triple feature and that would be awesome. That would be awesome. Another fun fact I gleaned in my research of the film, this movie was nominated for three Oscars and lost to Bridge on the River Kwai for all three of them. It was just kind of a steamroller that year, man. Yeah, it really was.

1:06:00 And like, I'll say this, Bridge on the River Kwai is an incredible movie. I absolutely love it. 12 Angry Men Is is perfect, Bob. It is. Perfect. And it's, you know, it's hard because like, listen, I I'm a prisoner of the moment sometimes and bridge on the river Kwai is one of those movies that like, I don't really blame the Oscars for not rewarding this tiny movie that flopped and rewarding Bridge on the River Kwai instead. It's not like that's a bad movie, but like this, this is a perfect movie, Brad. And and I think to tip my final score here, it is like a 10 plus. It's a it's a 10 out of 10 and then some because I can't think of a single thing about this movie that I would really change.

1:06:43 Do I think every single word spoken is perfect? No, but I don't know that I would cut a second out of this movie or add anything else to it. Yeah, like there's no such thing as a perfect movie, Bob, but this is a perfect movie. You know what I mean? Like like that. There's just nothing that I think you could change about this and make it enhanced or better. I think that what happened is the best version that we could have gotten of this film and I I'm giving it a 10 out of 10. All right, so it's a 10 out of 10 from both of us. I'm not really surprised, Brad, but I think it deserves to be restated again.

1:07:24 If you've never seen 12 Angry Men, you are missing out. And it is like 94 minutes long or something like that. It's a quick watch it, it's AI mean it breezes by. I can't recommend it highly enough. But we want to know what you think of 12 Angry Men. So reach out to us on all of our social medias. You can find us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, Tiktok, YouTube at Film Whiskey. Or you can join the angry conversation over on our Discord. You can find a link to our Discord at the end of every single one of our show notes. Next week we'll be back revisiting a Gene Kelly masterpiece, an American in Paris. From the most angry man to the least angry man. We're we're going to go sing and dance in France for a little. While the old country, if he's the old country. So join us for that one next week, but until then, I'm Bob Book.

1:08:17 I'm Brad Gee. And we'll see you next time.