Audience Member
An insightful fictional spin on Korea's first trial with a jury, there are many things on negotiation that one can takeaway from the witnessing the gruelling process the jurors went through as they unravel the story of the defendant and his mother through the themes of justice, negotiation, and human bias.
Through its complex characters and gripping narrative, The Juror offers a profound examination of negotiation and human nature, making it not just an engaging courtroom drama but also a rich exploration of how we navigate conflicts and strive for fairness.
Rated 3/5 Stars •
Rated 3 out of 5 stars
11/13/24
Full Review
David N
Juror 8 is an adaptation of the 1957 movie 12 Angry Men, applying the role of the jury to the South Korean context. Set in 2008, it depicted the first ever jury trial in South Korea. Through the eyes of the main protagonist, Juror 8, the audience follows as he traverses a series of negotiations with different stakeholders, all of whom have different motivations, interests, and come from different positions in life.
Juror 8 is a caution to the fallibility of human nature, where everyone is vested in their own self-interest. Even the Judge, who is supposed to be impartial, has motive to get promoted to High Court. Even Juror 8 himself, the main voice of reason, only uncovered deeper truths about the defendant while trying to submit his self-defence product for his own interest. Juror 8 is a critique of the use of a jury in court: there is too much disconnect between the jury and the defendant; the jury cannot understand the defendant on a personal level. In reality, the jury has pre-trial bias and this creates premature judgement, as pointed out in Fisher's "Getting To Yes". Juror 8 also portrays a cut-throat court scene, where public and internal pressure lock judge and jury into fixed positions. Yet, Juror 8 also imagines an ideal world with a jury that practices principled negotiation, proposing options that put people’s interests first, under objective criteria. Juror 8 gets us thinking about the jury and society in the real world, making it a must watch.
Rated 4.5/5 Stars •
Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars
11/13/24
Full Review
Magdalene T
It was truly a good watch for me, where I really enjoyed the balance of light-hearted and thought-provoking scenes in this movie. I appreciated how the characters each presented with a unique personality and how the plot escalated quickly as the team of jurors gradually united themselves and presented the audience with a heartwarming ending. Juror 8 highlights the importance of finding common ground, using objective reasoning, and focusing on the broader goals of fairness and justice. In the jury room, the negotiation style aligns with the principles of principled negotiation, transforming rigid stances into a more collaborative, problem-solving approach. Upon watching the film, I believe the core principle lies in the mindset where negotiators approach negotiations not with hostility, but with openness, humility, and empathy. Truly a movie worth watching!
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
11/12/24
Full Review
Ranier G
Juror 8 is an insightful and informative film that sheds light on the South Korean legal system, a surprising experience for me as I was unfamiliar with the fact that South Korea has a jury-based system. Through its captivating and at times humorous storytelling, the movie not only delves into a gripping legal case but also educates viewers on how ordinary citizens can participate directly in the judicial process—a perspective that was new to me and added depth to the movie’s narrative. The jury members, none of whom are legal professionals, represent the common man as they wrestle with their responsibility to deliver a fair verdict.
The film’s protagonist, Juror 8, is a powerful example of how negotiation tactics can influence legal proceedings and persuade others, even in situations of significant disagreement. Drawing on principles from the book Getting to Yes, Juror 8 demonstrates how separating people from the problem, focusing on interests rather than positions, and searching for mutually agreeable solutions can drive productive and respectful conversations in a legal context. Despite facing strong initial opposition from other jurors, he approaches the situation calmly and logically, refusing to attack the personalities or backgrounds of his fellow jurors. Instead, he separates the people from the problem, focusing solely on the facts and principles at stake.
In summary, Juror 8 is more than just a legal comedy drama—it’s an inspiring lesson on negotiation and the power of respectful, logical persuasion. The film demonstrates that negotiation tactics aren’t just tools for professional mediators; they’re accessible and impactful for the common person as well. Truly an entertaining and yet still informative watch.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
11/12/24
Full Review
Paige C
This movie seemed like a lighthearted one at the start, but as the movie progressed, the plot began to unfold and escalated really quickly. It was a really insightful movie which taught me negotiation strategies such as considering other people's interests and not positions and how to think logically admist chaos. For example, when the jury had to cast their votes, Juror 8 could not make his decision. He was not delaying the vote purely because of his indecisiveness but he was also taking the defendant’s interest into account. Unlike Juror 8, the other jurors only focused on the defendant’s position of wanting to be proven as not guilty, Juror 8 considered the defendant’s underlying interests of why he wanted to be convicted as such. This was only one of the many takeaways I had from Juror 8 and this movie.
Rated 4/5 Stars •
Rated 4 out of 5 stars
10/31/24
Full Review
R C
From the movie, I gained an insight of how objectivity leads to better decision-making. Judgment based on facts allow for fairness and personal matters should not affect one's decision-making, which is evident when juror 7 berated juror 4 for being judgmental. Juror 4 then taunted juror 7 for living in a poor neighbourhood and accused juror 7 for being biased just because they are in the same social class. However, juror 7 did not retaliate, and she calmly allowed juror 1 to continue his analysis of the case. Juror 7 did not want juror 4's comments to deviate her analysis of the case and affect her judgement. Had she reacted from juror's 4 comments, there would be personal arguments, which will cloud her judgement of the case as she will get emotional instead of being objective. This may result in a biased verdict, which is not ideal. Hence, in order to be more objective and have a clear mind to think critically, juror 7 remained calm and composed, leading to a fairer verdict given.
Rated 5/5 Stars •
Rated 5 out of 5 stars
11/16/23
Full Review
Read all reviews
>
