Object #9 - Switchblade Knife - 12 Angry Men (1957)

Dir. Sidney Lumet

This film is incredible. I've had the pleasure of watching it three times so far and each and every time I am utterly enthralled by the drama. The film could be a stage-play and it wouldn't lose that much effect. I shouldn't really say that as a film-lover, but Lumet, as a first-time director doesn't have the flair to spice up a one-room drama. Actually, that's a lie, it's almost impossible even these days in one-room dramas such as Exam (2009) and The Man From Earth (2007) to really be inventive. This is usually due to budget but then again, what can you do with a single room? The heart of the film lies in the acting and the script. 12 Angry Men doesn't disappoint.

The switchblade knife then is naturally visible and present throughout the film after it's introduced. And what an introduction! Juror #8 (Henry Fonda) is the only member of the jury who believes the young man under trial is not-guilty. He isn't sure, but he believes that the matter should be discussed before the young man is sentenced guilty, and sent to death-row. At this early point in the film the tension isn't that high, and the jury is unanimous in their guilty sentence, except for #8 of course. One piece of evidence weighed against the guilty man is that the switchblade used to kill his father is unique, with a fancy handle and unique blade-shape. This is used by the other jury members repeatedly to try and convince #8 he's wrong. That is, until #8 pulls an identical switchblade out of his pocket, flicks it open, and sticks it into the table (.gif below)

This is a great shock moment, as it validates the doubt #8 has had in sentencing the man as guilty, and shakes the faith of the other jurors in the efficiency and truthfulness of the justice system, or rather, their apathy towards the case, particularly in the case of jurors #9 (Joseph Sweeney) and #5 (Jack Klugman). It's the first concrete piece of evidence #8 gives, having bought the blade from a shop near the crime scene, thus showing that the evidence of the blade being unique is fallible. He goes on to deduce and work out other inconsistencies in the case against the young man, eventually convincing all the jurors that the 'facts' are false, or at the least, inaccurate. As he sticks the knife into the desk, he makes a statement, like a Native American pinning his tomahawk into a tree, he's ready to fight. 

What the blade also does is tell us that #8 truly cares about the young man on trial. We get this from Fonda's acting regardless, as he stares vacantly out the window, clearly in deep thought. But #8's going down to the crime scene, scoping the area for himself, all unseen to us, tells us so much about the man. In sharp contrast to juror #7 (Jack Warden) who can't wait to leave to see the ball-game, #8 took some of his own time to investigate the guilt of the man on trial. He cares, which again is a big contrast to the other jurors. A little bit of human sympathy is the key to shaking the apathy of the others, and since this is a place of law, he brings evidence to support this. 

The knife is used again through the film as a prop for the jurors' re-enactment of the stabbing. Leading to the tense scene where juror #3 (Lee J. Cobb), the 'villain' of the piece and most consistent antagonist to #8, pulls the knife back, ready to stab #8. All the men get up, ready to defend #8, a human moment uniting them all. Of course, #3 had no intention of actually stabbing #8 but it increases the tension between the two, and the trust of #8 in #3, valuing his humanity over petty grudges. 

12 Angry Men is a superb psychological drama, that peels away the layers of each man, until we see their true character, beliefs, and, unfortunately, biases and bigotry. Every single one has a character moment, with a large focus on #3 and #8. The switchblade plays a crucial part in the early stage of the film, and continues to be used throughout. The knife falls under the rules of Chekhov's gun, where of course it is used to simulate a stabbing, and it doesn't suffer for it. Another great object to add to the list. Please see this film if you haven't, it's 96 minutes long, yet feels like 60. It transcends the time it was made to become an utterly timeless film about humanity at large.