12 Angry Men is a great old "ship in a bottle" play, probably best remembered from the 1957 film headed by Henry Fonda as the juror who is - at the beginning - the only one to dissent.

A New York jury is in lock-up to decide whether a young man is guilty or not of the murder of his father. It is hot, the 12 are of disparate temperaments and backgrounds, and they must come up with a unanimous verdict. If it is "guilty", then the only sentence possible is death.

How the dynamics of the jury play out over the 90 minutes of the piece is the fascinating thing.

Only one comes up initially with a "not guilty" and that is Juror 8 (an assured and focussed performance from Isaac Reilly). The prejudices and perceptions of the others gradually reveal themselves, from the crisply delivered logic of Juror 4 (Martin Searles) to the explosively racist rant of Juror 10 (Colin Giles). Wisdom comes from Geoff Borny’s gentle old Juror 9 and Duncan Driver’s meticulously European watchmaker, Juror 11. And Rob de Fries’ Juror 3 powerfully reveals a father/son relationship that might parallel the story of the young accused.

Twelve is a big cast. The group also includes Will Huang, Glenn Brighenti, Pat Gallagher, Alex Hoskison and Cole Hilder as the other jurors, Lucas Frank as the briefly glimpsed guard and Tony Turner as the urbane foreman, quite a demonstration of there being no small parts, only small actors. Some of these roles seem barely sketched in the script but it’s impressive that almost everyone has a presence or at least a "moment".

Electing to stage it in the round in the Queanbeyan Bicentennial Hall, a barn of a place that is only slightly improved for theatrical purposes by having half the cavernous space curtained off, is brave but does not altogether come off. The jurors’ room is dominated by a large table and chairs. Placing the table on the diagonal, rather than square-on to the four banks of raked audience, might have helped to open the action more and aided audibility.

But there’s a certain amount of oppressive atmosphere generated by high windows and a stark washroom at one end, and moody lighting. There’s a sense that when these jurors look up they see the walls that will enclose them until they decide one way or another.

Why the court itself did not pick up on holes in some of the evidence in the way Juror 8 does is a good question. However, it’s the jury room detective work and the tensions of the original all male version that make 12 Angry Men well worth revisiting.