25

[K-Movie Night] Juror 8

Welcome to K-Movie Night — a once-a-month feature where we microwave some popcorn, put on a face mask, and get cozy with a Korean movie from yesteryear. With so many films finally streaming (with subs!), now is the time to get caught up on all those movies we missed featuring our favorite drama actors.

Each month, we’ll pick a flick, write a review, and meet you back here to discuss whether or not it’s worth a watch. Super simple. All you have to do is kick up your feet and join us in the comments!

 
MOVIE REVIEW

Can you ever have enough Park Hyung-shik? Judging by the ratings of the Doctor Slump premiere last weekend, I’m wagering the answer is no. To that end, we’re watching the courtroom drama mystery Juror 8 — for which he took home Best New Actor and Popular Star awards — because waiting until the weekend for an adorable smile to roll around just seems like way too long.

Plus, what better way to start a new year than taking a little inventory of the past and seeing how times have changed. Juror 8 was released in 2019, but it’s set in 2008 when Korea had its first ever jury trial. It was a contentious move to allow the public to participate in criminal trials, and as we might imagine, the first run wasn’t exactly smooth sailing. Partly inspired by the real-life case and partly based on the 1957 U.S. crime thriller 12 Angry Men, the film’s combination of mystery and history sounded too good to pass up (especially when it comes with a side of dimples).

The movie starts by giving us the historical context. The judiciary isn’t psyched about this whole public involvement in courtroom decisions thing, and the press is capturing every angle. To ground the context within the characters, we meet the head judge, KIM JOON-KYEOM (Moon Sori), whose promotion depends on the outcome of this first jury trial. It’s stressful because the judges are used to having sole control — and what do a bunch of non-experts know about deciding cases anyway?

When they need to fill eight slots on the jury but only have seven, the judges are down to the final hour trying to round up a suitable candidate. Enter our protagonist, KWON NAM-JOO (Park Hyung-shik), who’s in crazy debt over some newly developed self-defense product prototypes, but who refuses to give up on his invention because it’s just too important to him. The bottom line: we know this guy’s persistent.

Nam-joo becomes Juror 8 basically by default because they just need somebody, like, right now. The three presiding judges agree he’s clueless, but they also believe this is an open-and-shut case. It’s just a matter of determining the sentence because the defendant (Seo Hyun-woo) is clearly guilty. He fought with his mother over money, murdered her, and then tried to cover it up so it looked like an accident. There would be no reason for these jurors to stir up any trouble when there’s such damning evidence — I mean, the guy already confessed.

This is the tone throughout the movie, as the judges maintain a high and mighty exasperation with each new question the jurors have about the case. Almost the entirety of the film takes place in the courthouse, first as the two sides present evidence and call witnesses, and then as the jurors deliberate. The questions begin right away when we learn that the defendant suffered a brain hemorrhage at the scene of the crime and literally does not remember whether or not he killed his mother.

This makes the confession he wrote problematic, and by the time he stands up in court and screams that he was told to write it (before backing down and saying he doesn’t remember), it becomes clear that the jury will have to decide on his guilt or innocence, not just go along assuming he’s guilty. They’ve suddenly got much more responsibility on their hands and a few of them, including Nam-joo, take it very seriously.

About halfway through, the movie picks up tension when the jurors go into a room to deliberate and cast their votes — and the film’s second half is all about their inability to come to a conclusion. Nam-joo’s characterization is what makes the story work from here on out because he’s not the smartest guy in the room, he’s only the most undecided. This is where that persistence comes back into play.

All the other jurors decide quickly on a guilty verdict, but Nam-joo refuses to turn in his ballot. This is key because the jurors don’t need to be unanimous in their decision, but they do all need to vote. The longer he holds out, asks to review the evidence, and stays settled in his uncertainty, the more he starts to make the other jurors question their votes.

Park Hyung-shik carries this off well as the hapless young man who’s not staunchly set in his convictions, and not even great at arguing or reasoning through the evidence, but is simply so unsure that he plants the seeds of doubt in all of his fellow jurors. This doubt pulls them further apart, giving more nuance to their opinions, until some of them are at opposite extremes, arguing against each other.

With so few settings and a limited number of actors, it does sometimes feel like a stage play. But those aspects are also what drive up the tension. We never get to know any of the jurors deeply, and that’s okay, because the important part is how they interact with each other in these closed up rooms. The characters are archetypes, playing out against one another and calling up what’s both brilliant and burdensome about the jury system.

The movie ends with two twists, one of them fiction and one of them fact. I won’t give away the made-up melo bit that cinches the plot, but the factual part is sort of the whole point of the story. At the end of their heated debates, the jury learns that their opinion is only advisory — it doesn’t bind the court — and the judges will still decide the final verdict as they see fit.

Luckily, the film uses this real-life information in a way that makes for a highly affecting ending. All the while we were led to believe that it’s the jurors who are being schooled, only to find out that it’s the judges who are learning.

At times corny and cookie-cutter, Juror 8 is enjoyable fare precisely for being what it is. It’s got blood without being gruesome, a light and upbeat tone even as it tackles a serious topic, and a sense of realism when it comes to the jurors, who have selfish reasons for pressuring each other to hurry their decision. Plus, it taught me some things about the Korean legal system, like for example, jury opinions are still only advisory, “not guilty” verdicts are higher in jury trials, and you never know when Park Hyung-shik might be the one sitting next to you in the jury box.

Join us in February for the next K-Movie Night and let’s make a party of it! We’ll be watching Il Mare (2000) and posting the review during the last week of the month.

Want to participate in the comments when it posts? You’ve got three weeks to watch! Rather wait for the review before you decide to stream it? We’ve got you covered.

 
RELATED POSTS

Tags: , , ,

25

Required fields are marked *

I knew that Kwon Nam-joo (played by Park Hyung-sik) was represented the 1957 film 12 Angry Men character Davis (the Juror No. 8) which played by Henry Fonda.

2
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

I fondly remember watching this some years ago and it was a learning experience.

The part of the drama that caught me the most was the judgment Judge Kim made - When in doubt, consider the interest of the defendant. I don't exactly know how that ensures a defendant gets a guilty verdict, but I liked how that thought influenced both Judge Kim's initial and final verdict.

And the question she asked Nan-joo where she corrected him on his response as to why we have the law - it doesn't serve to punish people. Is it right to punish people without standard? They could be wrongfully charged. To avoid punishing people unjustly and to set a standard, that's the law.

Although Judge Kim herself interpreted this differently from Nam-joo, and had to be reminded by Nam-joo the schooling she gave him at the beginning of the drama, it was so touching to find it guide her ruling.

I'm a fan of anything law. That's the very reason why I watched this. Plus, when I saw Moon So-ri was the head Judge on the case, I knew I wasn't going to pass it over.

On an aside, after watching several villainous Jo Han-chuls in a row, I was very skeptical about his character. And when he was exhibiting the same traits, I almost called it, again. I was so soothed when it turned out he's just a regular human having differing opinions, and the compelling argument his character made had a tangential impact during the whole deliberation process - that juror who once convinced, the other jurors would be a piece of cake. Turns out I was rightly worried for nothing.

The two bolded are my major takeaway lessons from the drama, and they've become one of the things that influence my interpretation of situations in many ways than one.

3
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

I can’t believe the first jury trial was so late in the day in South Korea. This film is not for me as I am already dreading being called for jury service in real life and having to deal with this type of case would be my worst nightmare!

Looking forward to Il mare as I watched that for the first time last year. I hope it encourages more people to watch it.

1
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

This has been on my watchlist for a year, so I skipped straight to @dramaddictally 's end comments. I guess I'll finally press play.

I saw Il Mare recently. I think it's a good choice to also watch the American adaptation The Lake House to compare the two. I will keep further comments for the upcoming post.

5
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

oooh this sounds intriguing! i'm a fan of true crime and spend way too many hours of my life watching / listening to court trials (atm it's ethan crumbly's parents being accused of gross negligence that "allowed/prompted" his shooting up the school - heartbreaking on all accounts).
plus Park Hyung-shik who is so fricking adorable :)

4
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

As far as I know, the defendant in South Korea can choose whether his trial will be composed of professional judges or a jury consisting of citizens selected at random. The presiding judge of the trial pulls out their names randomly from the pool of names. There are 3 judges, 1 is presiding judge. This was the case in the drama "Blind" (2022), where the defendant chose a jury consisting of ordinary people for a reason that is a spoiler.

2
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

It's been I while since I've watched the movie, but I remember liking it well enough. Beginning is certainly not very grabbing, but as the story unfolds, you start to pay attention and the ending hits all the right notes (even tho there's one tiny scene in the epilogue that will make you go "wait, what?"). Hyungsik is really good here - I've never seen him playing such a devoid of swag character anywhere else, even Dal Bong wasn't that much of a lovable loser lmao))) Also SHW impressed me a lot with his portrayal, I actually didn't even realize it was him until the halfway. Beware the undertones of "funny kdrama violence", I recall cringing hard through those.

3
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

A few weeks ago I used this movie to get a quick PHS fix and then like two days later it was announced as the movie for January and I was so excited!

It was fun to see him in this role because it is so un-glamorous compared to a lot of his other roles. He looks as much like a normal person as PHS can ever look, and there is nothing particularly special about him, which I loved.

I am quite familiar with 12 Angry Men, and I really enjoyed how this movie twisted scenes in that one so that they were new and surprising. The scene where all the jurors go to the apartment complex to reenact the situation and see if they can tell who the culprit is, and the scene in the courtroom when they try to figure out if the defendant can swing a hammer are great examples. I also liked that in the end, it was really about choosing compassion whenever you can, and about not condemning people prematurely.

I was surprised that the first jury trial was only this century because they seem like the default in the US, but I did some research and realized that in most countries they aren’t as common as they are here. The stats at the end about juries returning more “not guilty” verdicts is really interesting, and not entirely what I would expect. (Does anyone know the stats on this elsewhere?) So often people talk each other into being more ruthless than they would otherwise be, so in a way I found it really refreshing and hopeful that this trends the opposite way.

Bottom line: I really liked this movie and l’d recommend it if you liked 12 Angry Men, if you need a little hope in the criminal justice system, or if you just need a quick Park Hyung-sik fix. It’s great for all of those things!

2
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

of course Hung-Sik is a magnet. He is empathic and compassionate towards his character, he has a way of making people emotionally invested in their mind and heart. he is also not trying to be too witty or charming, but emphasizes the weak points of the character. I have heard of this movie but havent watched it yet

3
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

URI puppy Hyung Sik is on a roll here on Dramabeans 🎉 I’m not complaining 😏
This is another one of his works wherein I missed out on at the time of its release because of accessibility issues. A while has now passed, maybe it’s time I just try to look around again to see if I can access it somewhere. If my memory serves me correctly, I think it’s on Viki, but I disassociated myself from them a while back already

3
0
reply

Required fields are marked *

I watched Juror 8 when my family was a roll for everything Park Hyung Sik.
Whenever this movie is mentioned, something immediately pops into my mind that leaves me smiling like a loon. There is a scene where everyone is looking for Nam Joo (PHS) and someone describes him as "Have you seen this guy - average looking, wearing a blue sweater..." My younger son who was watching with us, pressed the pause button and said - "Who wrote this dumbass dialouge? He is NOT average looking. That guy is 10 out of 10!" He said it with so much annoyance that it had me rolling in laughter.
This movie rests on the simplicity of its execution. Styled on the 1957 Hollywood movie of 12 angry men, it holds in own with aplomb. And it's led by a refreshingly unassuming Park Hyung Sik and a fiery Moon Sori. PHS is adorably next door in this where he plays a simpleton, not the brightest bulb in the room, but endearingly tenacious.
Four years ago, I was a part of a Jury for a man who was indicted for a homicide in a hit and run case. Out of 12 people, I was the only one who saw him as not guilty and I was so shocked when I found I had 11 people who disagreed with me. It took me seven hours to bring everyone around and not have a hung jury. So this case resonated with me and I identified with it more than I would have if I didn't have that experience.
It's not too long, and it's engrossing, very well acted and satisfying, a depicts what goes on in a jury room fabulously. The actual case is gut wrenching. And if you are a PHS fan, you wont have any issues rewatching it.

5
13
reply

Required fields are marked *

Your son’s reaction; being so mad he had to pause the film, that had me laughing out loud, priceless😆

Wow your experience is incredible. Well done you for working the room when they were such high stakes for the accused.

3
1
reply

Required fields are marked *

Perhaps I will post it on my wall one day. It's been one of the most unique experiences of my life. Jury duty can be scary. Unlike what people think, there is a lot that ties their hands, but a lot of the verdict at the end is driven by emotions and not by logic. I was so clear why he was innocent while there were three people on the fence and rest were a detremined no. What struck me is how differently everyone viewed the same piece of information/evidence. The person who held out at the end was driven by the injustice that the man was going free of punishment. It's a scary place to be. And the movie drives it home poignantly.

3
reply

Required fields are marked *

Sometimes I wonder in what fairy land people who consider absolutely gorgeous folks "just average" or "ugly" live and how to obtain a visa there... Drama lenses are a scary thing.

2
10
reply

Required fields are marked *

Beauty can be subjective. I remember how he didn't stack up initially even in my beautymeter (no seriously, I wasn't impressed when he was the one modelling for those Hwarang dresses). This guy grows on you and honestly, once he does, he refuses to leave that number one slot haha! But yes, I do have a couple of friends who don't see him the way I do but then I also have friends who think Ong Seong Woo is handsome and I never want to borrow those lenses either.....
I know. My choice in friends can be questioned.

4
9
reply

Required fields are marked *

Very true. I have a friend who thinks he's too pretty and therefore not handsome/swoony. To each his own.

2
3
reply

Required fields are marked *

Have they seen HAPPINESS?

3

I know, seriously lol!

2

And I wish Suits was more easily available. It's one of his best works.

2

Handsomeness is one thing. Charisma is another. I'm not digging the first without a second. Luckily for him he has both)))

It's alright, I actually think having different tastes with one's friends is a good thing - less chances of... unfortunate overlaps. As long as you won't develop a side effect of others' taste twisting your own like I did...

4
4
reply

Required fields are marked *

I 1000% agree. I think with PHS it's his charisma that opens you up to his beauty. Personally I think OBY did most justice to him in regards to both. I remember this episode where he went out in the field and I was like, how in the world did anyone think he could hide in a disguise.......he shines like a beacon lol! While ppl love his goofiness, I love his tsundere take on the characters. And that he can pull off comedy without the physical routine (in fact I would love him to pull back on some of it, but I will take it). maybe it's unpopular opinion, but for me he shines in serious roles. That is why Happiness is so so so good.

4

@minniegupta1 I feel like people - intl.viewers at least - are simply more into romcoms than heavy stuff in general, esp when it comes to actors famous for their visuals/swoony roles. My own relationship with the genre is... complicated, to put it mildly lol, so I'm all for my faves trying themselves in something else. But I know I'm in the minority here))) Makes it two of us, I suppose.

He really did shine in OBY, that regal aura made his "mere scholar" disguise comically useless. Which was the point, but funny anyway)))

2

@gikata

I feel like people - intl.viewers at least - are simply more into romcoms than heavy stuff in general, esp when it comes to actors famous for their visuals/swoony roles.

I don't know if that's strictly true. Out of all the shows he has done, it was Happiness that made the spalsh, the least rom-comish of them all. Squid Games and Parasite made Korea global in ways no other country has been able to match, not even Spain or Italy which come closest to getting accolades from the English speaking audience worldwide. China made a mark with Bruce Lee , Jackie Chan and Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon but most of the breakthrough projects were either produced or backed by Hollywood studios. For example, CTHD was Columbia pictures. I remember Man From Nowhere had caught the international craze a decade back but it's didn't sustain, until Parasite and Squid Game came along. So I would venture that people are just now waking up to the beauty of a true rom com.
The problem is also that many of the great dramas and movies are not available to the inl viewer unless they stream it illegaly. For example, OBY is not available in India anywhere and the only way to watch is it illegally, with bad subtitles.

2

@minniegupta1, strictly speaking, SQUID GAME and PARASITE made splash mostly among muggles, while experienced kdrama watchers - and knetz themselves - had very divided opinions on both, esp pre big hype. Sure, some people fell down the rabbit hole afterwards, but for many that did not lead to stable interest in k-content. I was talking about people who watch dramas regularly. Nowadays it's a bit less clear, but initially romcoms and melos were THE main attraction of Hallyu.

Honestly, nowadays accessibility of dramas feels surreal to me - when I started 13 years ago there were simply no legal options. Like at all. And if you wanted subs - usually fanmade ones - you had to dig deeper than dwarves did in Moria. Or learn the language, which some people actually did. Hell, I did that, tho in my case was English! But today people's only concerns are the price of VIP subscription and which platform to spend money on... Ridiculously easy.

That's sad to hear. Why bad subs tho? Darknet options I used had decent ones...

1

Usually I'm all for legal thrillers, but having recently watched Reversal of Fortune I guess I'll forswear off all legal stuff for a while.

Also what's with K-movies de-glamorizing our shiny and soft lit K-drama MLs. 🤔

1
0
reply

Required fields are marked *