The 1957 version was obviously the strongest, but this 1954 was done live without retakes - all by memory - it was a play. The actors here were also a great batch of character actors of the same time. They had to memorize their roles for an act that lasted almost 1 hour without mistakes. Vincent Gardenia was the unaccredited role as the bailiff - of course he himself became a great comedy and serious actor.

This is probably the most performed version of the story, especially for small community theaters as it only runs an hour. However, the screenplay for the movie best sells juror 3's motivation. I was Juror 3 in a 2013 production and it was difficult having to make a huge 180 degree turn at the end. Franchot Tone does an extraordinary job selling that turnaround.

Vincent Gardenia is the court officer. It's great to see these old programs and to try to identify the performers, some of whom went on to long and productive careers.

Being 57 and from Holland, I missed this whole episode of television's infancy. Watching this 69 years later, it still captures me very strongly. Not only the fact that it's television history, the restauration of the original picture/frame rate, also the case itself presented as a television play is something to watch. We can learn from this. All of us...

Thank you for posting this. I'm 68, and I remember seeing programs like this. Even at 10 years old, I was fascinated. I don't think that there will ever again be live broadcast dramas like this. It was like being in the front row of a Broadway Theater.

I love the 1957 film, but this live tv version is awesome! I so wish network tv would rediscover its roots and try this again. That’s of course without the unnecessary vulgar language and content present in today’s shows. I felt like I used a time traveling tv because the commercials were left in this program! I loved those commercials as much as the show itself. Thanks very much for this wonderful video, that I just happened to find.

I like that in the movie the old man does not use glasses, saying he has a good vision 20/20, yet in this version he uses glasses. I love the movie and this live performance was good too

The 1957 movie with Henry Fonda is AMAZING, and I highly recommend it. But it's good to see this version also!

Originally telecast on September 12, 1954. Yes, for years, only the FIRST half of the program was available for viewing, because no one knew where a copy of the FULL episode was. ONE of them was eventually found in the possession of someone in the legal profession......

Man, these Westinghouse products are pretty neat!

This might sound odd but I enjoyed the commercials just as much as the film! 😊

For teachers out there...end of Act I is at 24:00, end of Act II is at 36:00. It follows the Sherman Sergal play adapted from the TV show pretty closely.

This is one of the best performances for early television I have ever seen. It was a new medium, and for real it had to be pretty hot in there under the TV lights--and you needed A LOT of them back them. And they had to do it end to end, in real time. I found the acting to be pretty realistic--surprisingly so, since most of these guys were not used to TV. Great post. Great job.

These are great restorations. The Museum of Television and Radio should hire you.

My theater prof made me watch this. Had regrets at first but it turned out to be really good.

I've seen two productions of this play - one in the US when I lived there, and the other here in England. Both were tremendous and gripping.

These old Television program restorations are awesome. The cleaned up picture combined with the 60fps frame rate, this is exactly what these programs would look like if they were viewed on a videotape reel as opposed to a kinescope film-reel. You almost can’t tell the difference! I hope you end up uploading more in the future. :)

This is the first time I'd seen this version of this story about racism, prejudice and bigotry. It still stands up rather well Sixty six years after its live filming. Personally I preferred the Sidney Lumet version, which has been regarded as the 2nd greatest courtroom drama of all time .Despite getting academy award nominations it lost out to 'The Bridge on the River Kwai' which won 7AA's. But if you want to see the greatest courtroom drama of all time then 'To Kill a Mockingbird' is a masterpiece of the genre. It's also one of my favourite films of all time. If you've never seen it before - make it a must see.

Pleased to see that juror #9 is the same three years later.

As a broadcast engineering professional and a fan of golden age live television, I am utterly shocked and delighted by the results of this restoration. I've seen another kinescope of this program. When you consider how much visual data is lost between the old 60Hz/30FPS B&W broadcast and the 24FPS kinescopic transfer, it's amazing that you were able to recover that much detail. It's even more interesting if you were working off of a videotape original, which was most likely a down-generation copy that was recorded on a later color NTSC system that was interlaced 262 lines, rather than the original B&W progressive 525 lines. I could go on and on. The typical geometric distortion caused by the convex shape of the CRT tube (which makes all kinescope "bulge" in the center) seems like it has been corrected in the graphics suite. I can't figure out how you suppressed all of the bloom and flare that seems unavoidable in those old live productions with the harsh lighting and primitive pickup tubes of the age. This is truly amazing. Very well done!

I love it when the lost becomes found again. : )

I saw this originally at the Paley Center; their copy is kind of a mess (to say the least) compared to your work here. Thanks so much--this is a joy to watch thanks to your work.

"nobody wears their glasses to bed that's crazy!" Me: *slowly glances sideways and laughs*

Thank you so much for posting this and all of your effort, it's awesome.

Thank you so much. Really appreciate your efforts. This is so great.

This is amazing. Thank you so much for sharing, I've wanted to see this version ever since I heard it existed.

Thank you for the restoration and posting.

Watching this amazing production of TWELVE ANGRY MEN on September 24, 2019.

This is great! Thanks for restoring it and putting it up.

Excellent job and great show,,Nice to see Norman Fell in that ......Buzz

So well done. Thank you for posting.

Thanks a TON for this upload

Brilliant! Thank you for this upload and keeping the advertisements, which I loved! “You can be sure...if it’s Westinghouse!” 🥰

I was only 7 days old when this was first telecasted. John Sweeney and George Voskevec were in the original 1957 movie with Henry Fonda.

I think I've seen close to a dozen different versions of this done by now, and no matter which one it is, #4 and #11 are always my favorites

Fabulous restoration!

Edward arnold a truly wonderful actor

Always, Always a great movie, with top actors

Acting and script definitely needed improvements and Reginald Rose made it so. The movie version is so much better. But it is interesting to watch this earlier version to see where revisions were made and to compare the acting. Thanks for this upload.

Im Angered because i have to watch this for School. But it is a cool restoration.

That briefly glimpsed bailiff is Vincent Gardenia, uncredited!

Demonstrating the fine quality of live television broadcasting available in the early 1950s. A stage p!ay presented for you in your own living room. Live performance not only requiring a cast of stellar actors but an expertise in the technical aspects of camera work and lighting. Some of the actors appearing here also appeared in the later movie version. Robert Cummings does fine but doesn't transmit the self-confident authority of Henry Fonda who played that role in the movie. All in all, this TV version well worth watching.

Having seen the film version so often, I think that the changes Rose made in his screenplay were well-advised. Among many other alterations, the changing of juror #3's vote is dispensed with quickly, the justification being that his courage was questioned by juror #9. An admirable effort by all, certainly. However, the movie is a masterpiece.

Excellent Excellent movie. Thank you

I went to The Museum of TV and Radio to watch as many of these old kinescopes as I could before launching my own project of theatre on live television. It was very difficult but felt great when things went well.

The stage play and film that Rose expanded from this is vastly better. "You open your mouth again and I'll split your skull is a terrible line, a terrible tactical mistake. In the longer version his otracizing by silence was much more devastating, if a bit too schematic, like a ballet.

Being made only a few years before the 1957 Henry Fonda film, these two adaptations are ripe for comparison, even though it must be taken into consideration that the limitations of the television medium at the time puts it at a natural disadvantage. I think the movie is superior, but not really because there are too many things that can be faulted in the TV version; it's just that all the great things in the TV version (including excellent performances) are also present in the movie. Some changes for the movie that I liked include: 1. A greater emphasis on the characterisation of each juror, including backstories for most of them. This is especially noticeable for Jurors 1, 2, 6 and 12, who don't really have separate identities in the TV version. The TV version compensates slightly by having 2 and 6 responsible for the revelation about the woman's glasses (done by Juror 9 in the movie but not feasible in the TV version as Joseph Sweeney wore glasses). 2. Ed Begley's initial introduction as a more jovial, comical character in Juror 10, before he increasingly becomes hostile as he realises others don't share his views. 3. The conversations in the bathroom, most significantly between Jurors 6 and 8, where Juror 6 asks an unanswered question: What about if they're about to exonerate a guilty man? 4. More emphasis on the cause of Juror 3's antagonism in relation to his own son. It's brought up in the TV movie, but Lee J. Cobb's acting at the end...unforgettable. 5. Making Juror 5, as opposed to Juror 8, responsible for the revelation about how the knife was used. His background made this a more appropriate choice. 6. Further emphasising Juror 7's indifference to the goings on with his constant baseball references. The change from his having theatre tickets to baseball tickets is a minor one, but it allows for a lot more talk without it getting repetitive. 7. The brilliant use of camera angles in the film to make it increasingly claustrophobic. This is, of course, much harder to do in the live TV medium (some of the cameras are even visible here), but those angles in the film are masterful. 8. The extra running time. I don't know if Rose had written the script for the film first and then cut it down for the television play, but I feel the pacing is a little off in the TV version, but I'm not convinced that my opinion isn't just being coloured by the film. Even with the longer running time, there doesn't seem to be a moment in the film wasted. Just some thoughts. You'll note that I don't have too much criticism for the TV version. It really is good and deserved its Emmys.

nice to see a couple actors in the film that were in this tv show as well

Excellent. Thank you.

Who is watching this in 1958? Yikes! My time travell worked!!

my school made me watch this, it was very tough finding this tho, all of the ones I found where the 2 other ones released. gotta be honest, nice vid

I just want to watch 1950's commercials from now on.

Excellent work.

Considering this was live the camera work was great & the editing helps to maintain the viewer’s focus.

Thank you

Share this link far and wide, fans, because the 4K version of the 1957 film hits street on Tuesday - and it does NOT have this or ANY of the other extras that are on the previous Criterion Blu-Ray release. Incidentally, there can be absolutely nothing more 1950s than that opening Westinghouse ad.

Many people would enjoy a restoration the 1958 presentation "The Other Place" on Studio One. Please someone, put it on KZfaq.

Checked IMDB. Edward Arnold died a year befor the Lumet/Fonda movie was made. Damn it.

This restoration is amazing.

Thanks to Terry Teachout, theatre and cultural critic for the Wall Street Journal, for his excellent column on this version of TWELVE ANGRY MEN in today's paper.

Thanks a lot!

I have to watch this movie for a class but I genuinely like this movie now. Great restoration, amazing job!

Betty Furness Westinghouse commercials too! Wow! I remember her on ch.4 news in nyc as their consumer affairs commercial. She was also nyc consumer affairs commissioner.

NBNT, Thank you for another great restoration! I look forward to more, especially the Playhouse 90s. Also, is it possible to restore any programs from different genres? there are very few soap operas that survive from this era at all, as most of the tapes were wiped and reused and the kines recycled for their silver. Is there any chance of restoring any episodes? Tales of Tomorrow is another show that might be worth considering. It was an adult sci-fi anthology which probably influenced The Twilight Zone, and one episode of Tales is based on the same story as a a TLZ episode. And then there's the kid stuff, Tom Corbett and Space Patrol, kids' sci-fi, although Space Patrol had a significant adult crossover viewership. Space Patrol had an almost incalculable influence on Star Trek TOS. Virtually every device and concept on TOS was on Space Patrol first. At least one series of SP episodes, "The Androids of Algol," bears a striking (if not suspicious) resemblance to the TOS episode "What are Little Girls Made Of." Just my 2 cents, ANY restorations will be greatly appreciated by me and, I'm sure everybody else. Thanks again.

2:12, Norman Fell, the original foreman of the jury in this film. Three years later, his rival Jack Klugman was in the film as the juror that grew up in the slums. I couldn't imagine Fell taking on the foreman role in the 1957 film and working with Klugman.

"I speak from experience" ouch

Seeing work like this is remarkable and frustrating all at the same time. Remarkable because the results speak for themselves...frustrating because the rights holders should see the value of this!! Can you imagine the Honeymooners lost episodes, the Sid Caesar broadcasts, and other kinescope-based programming being upgraded in this way? It would be a revelation!

This looks amazing! I once tried similar techniques on Tales of Tomorrow, but it took hours to do even one shot and it still didn't look as good as this.

the ironic thing about the commercial at the beginning is that Westinghouse is now known as a cheap brand that isn't nearly as reliable as it's mostly asian competitors. For instance, My grandfather was given a Westinghouse Smart TV for Christmas two years ago. I got one of the same model. Within 3 months his had bricked itself while mine had a defect to begin with where the remote didn't work no matter what. When he tried to use the warrenty, he discovered 2 things. 1. you have to pay for shipping both ways and for a TV that size, it'd be several hundred dollars. Their warranty also left so many loopholes that they could basically look at it and , without looking at it say that it isn't covered and send it back unrepaired. 2. Westinghouse filed Chapter 11 or 7 bankrupcy only a week before, so they're already pretty much out of business anyway

Thank you much so much better than the 1997 version

You're doing fantastic work! It'd be great if you'd also restore some Golden Age Live Television Comedy...Sid Caesar classics like "This Is Your Story", "Aggravation Boulevard" & "Gallipaci"...a Dean Martin & Jerry Lewis Colgate Comedy Hour...and how terrific it would be to see an early Texaco Star Theatre with Milton Berle looking live again! Hope you'll be getting around to those soon.

Even the 1997 remake was just as good as the orginal film version. I watch it all the time. Its staked with great actors as well.

In a comment on a clip from the 1957 movie, I stated that in no other film was the acting more critical to the film's success, since it must create the drama, emotional and psychological tension and suspense that are usually produced in part by music, scenery and special effects. Seeing this version, that becomes all the more evident, because the difference between the two is so immense due to the far superior actors in the movie, in particular, Henry Fonda, Lee Cobb and Jack Warden. The shorter time also leaves less room for personality developments that add to the interpersonal tension and the psychological aspects that lead them to change their votes. Here, the vote changes make zero sense, especially the last one, where he seems to give in just to end his holdout, rather because they force him to acknowledge that he is taking out his anger at his son on the defendant. The later TV movie, with an all-star cast, incl. George C. Scott, Tony Danza, Jack Lemmon, Edward James Olmos, Hume Cronyn and James Gandolfini was also far superior, though I still give the medal to the film version.

It's really nice to see this with less flicker and the frame rate restored by interpolation. It would be even nicer if the specks of dust, appearing as random black and white marks, were removed; if the distortion from aiming a kinescope at the curved face if a CRT were corrected; and if a little noise reduction were applied to the sound.

Juror #11 (portrayed by George Voskovec) is my favorite juror in this 1954 teleplay version of 12 Angry Men since I admire his politeness and intelligence and he’s a true American patriot even as a European immigrant. Good for him chastising that jerk Juror #7 who is rude, careless, and full of cluelessness.

Omg I just watched another one of this and this one is better quality omggg 😭😭😂😂

Fun Fact: The Actor, Joseph Sweeney, who played Juror #9, was also in the 1957 version of 12 Angry Men, Playing Juror #9

As Archie and Edith used to sing, "those were the days."- a time when the American television viewing public had the class, patience, good taste, and open-mindedness to watch an hour program with no shooting, no car chases, no special effects, no stupid jokes.

watching this for my "theater homework" from home because of Covid, oop

Hey, where can I get one of those open handled Westinghouse steam irons?

Could you put a link to the steam iron in the description please.

WHEN ACTING WAS ACTING !!!

This is the CBS Television Network.

Kinescope has always fascinated me. To your credit, it doesn't look like a Kinescope.

Norman Fell, aka Stanley Roper as the jury foreman, if you need him. I think he was in over his head...

This is the weirdest episode of Three's Company I've ever seen

pieza de arte.

Most of this does just enrich my appreciation for the interpretations that came after, the ending especially, but the one guy definitely snuck armor under his suit, cause after the angriest man goes to stab him my brain almost thought the hole in his vest was from the demonstration and not for a button.

Is that first juror Mr. Roper from Three's Company? :)

Yikes. That frame rate conversion from 24 to 60 produced a lot of digital artifacts from the optical flow process. I find it rather distracting. But, this is still easier to watch than the 240P version on KZfaq.

That westinghouse fridge from 1957 is better than any I've ever owned

Very good. I watched the Tony Hancock version of this and hadn't realised it had been done before. Of course the Hancock version had a twist at the end.

29:42 ha, you can see the TV camera :)

NBNTelevision: A great reproduction. I showed it for a class that I taught last year and they really enjoyed it (It was a continuing education course, so reminisced about the Westinghouse commercials and the nature of live television). Do you know who holds the licensing rights to this production? I've tried to contact CBS, but they do not get back to me. Are Studio One public domain now? Any help you can give would be appreciated...

I am most likely in the minority, but while I think most of the characters are better in the 1957 movie version (yes, I know that two of them are the same), I think the guy who played #8 in this version did a better job of portraying the character than Henry Fonda. I think he is more believable as a person who sincerely thinks the accused may be not guilty. Fonda seems to come across some times as a person who is more interested in just getting his way and thus "winning" the fight, although Fonda's attitude may have helped the overall success of the movie. It would have been nifty, though, to see how the TV #8 would have done in the expanded 1957 movie version.

Looks so much like videotape.

That $17.95 iron from Westinghouse in 1957 would be $163.75 in 2019 dollars adjusted for inflation.

Joseph Sweeney played his part again in the famous Sidney Lumet movie.

I've only discovered your channel and love these restorations! Are you only restoring American plays? There are many light entertainment programmes from the time that deserve such wonderful restoration work and the same can be said for many UK programmes too!

Big props to these guys for doing it straight through on live TV. If we didn't have the 157 film version, in comparison to which everything else falls short, it could even be called a classic. If I had to be picky, I'd argue that Lee J. Cobb's Juror #3 is far superior to Franchot Tone's performance here. Perhaps, given the restraints of the production, Tone just doesn't have the latitude to develop and flesh out the character, but with Cobb, you can see a profoundly damaged but fundamentally decent man dealing with a terrible personal trauma, and that's what's warping his judgment. Tone's character, far as I can see, is just an asshole.