qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasd fghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx Ek Ruka Hua Faisla cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq Movie Review Factors that affected the Decision Making

wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui Process opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg hjklzxcvbnmrtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnm qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
8/3/2011 Parul Agrawal

Ek Ruka Hua Faisla Movie Review:

Produced and directed by Basu Chatterjee, Ek Ruka Hua Faisla the Hindi remake of Twelve Angry Men, is a flick with a strikingly unusual plot. A Jury of twelve people from different professional and personal backgrounds is chosen to determine the fate of the accused, a boy in his late teens, who is held on the charge of his fathers murder. The jurors are called on for the verdict on the grounds that they have no connection what so ever with anyone or anything involved in the case and hence making it easy for them to be fair and completely unbiased in their decision as there would be no personal profit or loss involved. They are supposed to remain in an enclosed room until consensus is reached on whether or not the accused is guilty. Each juror due to varied reasons has his own opinion about the murder trial. One has a preconceived notion about the cadre of people who come from the same financial background as the accused. One is aloof and totally unconcerned about the outcome of the case since he wants to finish the job at the earliest, not to miss the movie starring his favorite actor. There is one disagreeing individual who is totally convinced that the young man is guilty due to personal prejudices. And there are others who are supportive and understanding. All members of the jury, except one, strongly believe the accused to be guilty. That makes it Eleven Vs One. It is this one juror, played by K.K Raina(of Byomakesh Bakshi fame) who takes a rational approach from the very beginning and thinks that the young man should not be convicted in view of even a slightest visibility of his innocence. He analyzes the evidences and the testimonies provided by the witnesses in a truly analytical way without getting judgmental. Throughout the movie he stands firm on his belief and finally succeeds in convincing the other jury personnel one after the other that the young man is not guilty. Amongst genuinely brilliant performances, Pankaj Kapur, who plays one of the jurors, takes the cake for his absolutely stunning performance. He stands out for his highly frustrated and angry mannerisms and proves to be a hard nut to crack. The reason for his firm stand though false, being his own heart touching story of his son leaving him a couple of years back after beating him up, which he reveals at the end. Standing true to its title, the film succeeds in holding the suspense on the final verdict of the trial. Excellent screenplay coupled with truly apt and realistic dialogues. The film, not a Bollywood stereotype, is very well directed, with an extremely interesting and gripping storyline. It subtly displays how our personal biases rule the actions we take and decisions we make in our lives. It strongly brings out the significance of not being influenced by our prejudices before coming to a conclusion.

Factors hindering decision making process:

y

Beliefs and pre conceived notions: Some of the jury members had a belief that the boy was guilty of the crime as he had a record of crime in his past and was brought up in slums. They had a belief that people born and brought up in slums have no respect for life and are not reluctant to do such heinous acts of crime. They possess and indifferent and callous attitude towards life. This depicts that people keep a pre-conceived notion about the cadre of people who come from the same financial background as the accused. Clear depiction of Horn effect of forming a negative opinion of a person based on few negative traits and the Stereotyping. They were reluctant to change their opinion.

Assessing Present Based on Past Experiences: Experience shapes our attitude and attitude shapes our behaviour. Our past experience plays a significant role in our thought process and many a times are totally guided by it. Pankaj Kapur, stands out for his highly frustrated and angry mannerisms and proves to be a hard nut to crack. The reason for his firm stand though false, being his own heart touching story of his son leaving him a couple of years back after beating him up, which he reveals at the end. Based on his tragic experience he formulated a negative opinion about the young generation who pay no heed to their family. He believed the boy was guilty and that punishing him would be a lesson learnt by all who commit similar crime.

Lack of Respect for others opinions: Decisions which involve many individuals needs to be tackled carefully. It is very important for each and every member of the group to respect the other person and ponder over his views so as to build a wider prospective of the issue. The lack of this skill leads to chaos and no consensus. The jury members character played by Anu Kapoor was trying to make a valid argument about the witness eye problem, but his opinions were being thrashed initially. Also each time he tried to make an argument there were other members who were trying to suppress him and had no respect for his opinion. This was resulting in an angry confrontation between the group members and hindering the decision making process.

Ego: Ego comes into play when you perceive your group members less skilled and experienced then you. When you have a pride for your position and experience. It plays a negative role in the decision making process. It actually hampers the process of reaching a consensus. Ego can arise due to a perceived opposition or due to the non-acceptance of ones ideas.

In the movie when the character played by Pankaj Kapoor was being proven wrong each and every time he developed a hatred for the protagonist and was adamant on proving his side of the story. He never cared to actually grasp what was the protagonist and other members were trying to say. He believed that his past experience should be the guideline in dealing with this case.

Lack of Clarity: No decisions come out of a confused mind. If the issues addressed are not clear they cannot be addressed. Many of the jury members were in the same state. They lacked clarity and founded it very difficult to keep a stance. They kept shifting their votes in favour or against. In the movie the jury member (wearing white Kurta) was confused as to which option he must go for and was following the majority. Lack of clarity comes when incomplete analysis of the situation is done. When the person is not really involved in the case he comes out with incomplete knowledge and frame opinions based on his limited understanding of the situation. To be on the safe side he prefers to go with the majority.

.
y

Indifference: Some of the jury members were indifferent to the situation and were giving more importance to the other issues and tasks that they were supposed to handle. For instance a jury member had been quite vocal about a popular Dilip Kumar movie which he wanted to go and watch. He had bought the tickets and did not want to miss the movie because of any delay in reaching a decision. He dint care to participate and raise his opinions. One of the jury member was busy designing the add for cigarettes. Such callous attitude not just brought down the quality of discussion but also delayed the decision making process.

Factors contributing to decision making process:

y

Logical and Rational thinking: Keeping a logical approach means that you back your points with a sound proof or logic. They must show relevance to the topic so that the points dont go tangent and waste the time of the group and delays decision making. Some of the opinions might require research and deeper understanding. The protagonist can be said to have a logical and analytical approach. He always argued his point with rationality and even took the help of enactments to have a better view of the actual situation. He also asked the other members to back what they say with a proof and logic. Evaluation of Options : It means that you dont frame the final opinion without considering all the options available to you. You give proper weight age to all the options and then frame the conclusion. Open Mind: You need to keep an open mind and be receptive to others viewpoint to reach a consensus in a group. You need to analyse the situation keeping in mind not just your perceptive but others as well. The protagonist had a rational approach towards the problem and was looking to look at the situations with an open mind. Listening Skills: While most of the jury members did not want to discuss the issue and pronounce the accused as guilty based on their opinions, as the meeting progressed they were able to gather a lot of possibilities in the case and were able to determine a more holistic view of the situation. This can be attributed to their listening skills which either they were being forced to do or voluntarily including themselves in. Brainstorming: The best way to reach better solutions is to brainstorm. The movie is a perfect example of a brainstorming session where all its pros and cons can be visualised. It also showcases the various problems that it can arise.