Today we're looking at:
Nuremberg (2025).
This movie about the first Nuremberg trial is based on the 2013 book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist by Jack El-Hai. The script is written by the director James Vanderbilt who also directed the rather good Suspiria remake in 2018.
We open the movie with Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe) surrendering to American soldiers. Next we meet US Army major and psychiatrist Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) who has been tasked with assessing the mental health and competency of the surviving top Nazis, particularly whether they are a suicide risk. Dr. Kelley is assisted by Sergeant Howie Triest (Leo Woodall) who speaks fluent german. Kelley is immediately fascinated by Göring who is highly intelligent and completely charming, and starts planning a future book.
At the same time, US Supreme Court Associate Justice Robert Jackson (Michael Shannon) is pushing to set up the Nuremberg trials, arguing that they can't just kill the top Nazis without a trial. He encounters severe opposition from several directions, as there is not only no legal framework for prosecuting foreign nationals but a real fear of losing such a trial and thereby legitimizing the Nazis. It is no spoiler to state the trials do go ahead, and Jackson is aided by the British barrister Sir David Maxwell Fyfe (Richard E. Grant).
The real focus of this movie are the actors. They are all amazing. Malek is good, but it is Crowe and Woodall that really shine for me. Russell Crowe especially does a great job going from affable and charming to monstrous and cold in a heartbeat. He goes from pleasant old Hermann to Reichsmarshall Göring in a blink and it is quite spooky.
Production wise, the movie is also really good. Nothing feels fake or out of place. Uniforms, sets, hairstyles and everything else all look and feel fine.
However Nuremberg has a big balance problem. Clocking in at a massive 148 minutes it still manages to rush through important parts while focusing on other less relevant bits. The big gotcha moment in court falls completely flat, I think it needed a lot more build up. At the same time we are treated to Kelley's arguments with fellow psychiatrist Dr. Gilbert (Colin Hanks) along with other scenes we don't need at all. Scenes of Kelley drinking in a bar do nothing except show he has a drinking problem, which isn't relevant either and leads to one of the biggest events that didn't happen in real life. (No spoilers).
The whole “can we even have a trial” part is really interesting and deserves further exploration in my opinion. Likewise, the discussions between Göring and Kelley are fascinating and we deserve more. We get practically nothing from the other Nazis which could have been used for Kelley's investigation into whether the Nazis were different somehow. It is all somehow rushed through with other bits crammed in that don't add anything worthwhile to the movie.
So, do I recommend this movie? Yes, ultimately I do think Nuremberg is worth watching at least once. As I said, it is very well made and the actors are wonderful but be aware of its flaws. Oh, and a warning: during the trial scene, they show real footage from the extermination camps, and while this is important in order to hammer home the full horror of the Holocaust, some viewers might not be able to handle it.
That's that and all that. Join me again next time and until then, have a great week!