Nuremberg (2025)

Nuremberg is an old school Hollywood Oscar-bait epic, the likes of which we don't see as often as we used to. An A-list cast, sweeping direction, and an important subject matter, with some historic inaccuracies thrown in for dramatic flair. In those things the film was emotionally stirring however it also felt a bit all over the map in terms of what story it was trying to tell. It mixes two main threads; the prosecution's efforts and the more personal story of a psychologist and his relationship with his patient, who happens to be one of history's worst war criminals. Not only do those threads not always come together seamlessly, the film keeps flip flopping on its mission, confusing a lot of what it is trying to say. Still, it is big and grand and reminiscent of the kinds of historical epics Hollywood used to make more of. 

I am not an expert in Nuremberg and cannot comment on its accuracy but I have some background in international criminal law and the events covered in Nuremberg are certainly an important stepping stone to the development of the concept of war crimes, human rights law, etc. The film has a little bit of a war crimes 101 feel, especially at the beginning, but as I said it sort of gets lost not figuring out what it wants to be. Is it a critique of methods of the first big coming together of nations to try war criminals, a justification for some of those missteps, an endorsement of the attempt to move post-war justice into the court room and out of the hands of the victors, a personal story? It feels like it is sort of trying to be all things and doesn't quite do much of it really well. 

Having said that it does manage to do some of it competently and there are moments it pulls off some real entertainment and perhaps even reflection. There is a moment in the middle, where the film choses to show real footage of the true evil of the concentration camps, that is rather unflinching. It is a moment that refuses to let you look away and get mired down in the legal details. It highlights the true horror that is being put on trial. 

But the film ends with a more ambiguous ending. I am okay with ambiguity but here it feels less intentional and more due to the film's true identity crisis. The ending feels rather anticlimactic. It both tries to revel in the triumph over evil and question the effectiveness in a way that a better film may have pulled of strikingly but here just feels confused. It feels like it wants to be more straight forward that it is. 

Yet again, the film isn't a failure in this entirely. The final denouement is chilling. It all but holds our hand and tells us that we should be worried about all this happening again. This part is quite effective and, honestly, rather correct. I just wish the film had found a way to build to this message a little more cohesively, more organically.  

Nuremberg

Starring: Russell Crowe, Rami Malek, Leo Woodall, John Slattery, Mark O'Brien, Colin Hanks, Wrenn Schmidt, Lydia Peckham, Richard E. Grant, Michael Shannon 

Writer/Director: James Vanderbilt