Nuremberg poster 1

A One Mann’s Movies review of “Nuremberg” (2025, 3.5*, 15).

So, this was the nearest I’ve ever got to being Rudolf Hess! As regular readers of this blog will be aware, I have been known to dabble in acting and Supporting Artist work in the UK film business. Several months ago I was approached by an agency to be a “stand in for Rudolf Hess”. Sadly, my (frequent) foreign holidays didn’t fit with the dates. But now I can be fairly sure that “Nuremberg” was the film that they were casting for!

This was definitely a mixed bag for me. But overall, I have to say I enjoyed it.

One Mann’s Movies Rating:

3.5 stars (rating)
Herman Göring ( Russell Crowe) with Rudolf Hess (Andreas Pietschmann) in the dock in the film Nuremberg.
Herman Göring ( Russell Crowe) with Rudolf Hess (Andreas Pietschmann). Perhaps I also therefore look a bit like David Tennant in Harry Potter?! (Source: Sony Pictures Classics.)

Plot:

Hitler is dead. Germany has collapsed. Hitler’s second in demand, Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe), has been captured. A show trial is planned in Nuremberg by Justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon) for all the captured Nazi high-command. Psychologist Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) is brought in to analyse Göring to achieve the best chance of prosecution.

Certification:

UK: 15; US: PG-13. (From the BBFC web site: “Images of real dead bodies, Holocaust references, strong violence”)

Talent:

Starring: Michael Shannon, Colin Hanks, Russell Crowe, Rami Malek, Lydia Peckham, Leo Woodall, Richard E. Grant, John Slattery, Ben Miles, Lotte Verbeek, Fleur Bremmer, Andreas Pietschmann.

Directed by: James Vanderbilt.

Written by: James Vanderbilt. (Based on the book by Jack El-Hai.)

Running Time: 2h 28m.

Summary:

Positives:

  • Some great performances (other opinions are available!).
  • An interesting story.
  • Harrowing footage of the Holocaust atrocities.

Negatives:

  • Some OTT performances (other opinions are available!)
  • Dialogue that veers into pontification and anachronisms.
  • Some untold elements of the story.
  • A clunky US political message!
Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) sat on a station platform next to Howie Triest (Leo Woodhall) in Nuremberg.
Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) sat next to Howie Triest (Leo Woodhall), about to go for his “Oscar moment”. (Source: Sony Pictures Classics.)

Full Review of “Nuremberg”:

A moment in history.

The tale of the trials at Nuremberg has been told before in Stanley Kramer’s 1961 classic “Judgment at Nuremberg”, which this film made me want to go and rewatch. (I also note that there was a TV mini series called “Nuremberg” in 2000 with Alec Baldwin, Brian Cox and Christopher Plummer, which I’ve never seen.) Here it gets another movie blockbuster makeover, with some big star names, and – to a degree – it succeeds in being a compelling battle of wits between the narcissistic Göring (Crowe) and the unbelievably careless American psychologist Kelley (Malek).

The drama here is in Kelley getting to understand the human underneath the monstrous image and particularly in getting close and sympathetic to Göring’s wife Emmy (Lotte Verbeek) and young daughter Edda (Fleur Bremmer). There’s a frisson of attraction there between Douglas and Emmy that you feel goes a tad beyond professional curiosity. It adds to what is an interesting story of cat and mouse between the two men.

A mix of acting performances (but opinions differ!).

I saw this in a cinema in Oamaru, New Zealand with the Illustrious Mrs Movie Man and we came to different opinions about the acting here.

I’m a fan of Russell Crowe’s acting style and even in schlock nonsense like “The Pope’s Exorcist” I always think he delivers good value. Here, as Göring, he is suitably dark, menacing and quietly persuasive and I loved the performance. On the other hand, I found both Rami Malek and Leo Goodall to be a bit hammy and over the top, particularly in the early parts of the film. Goodall has an “Oscar moment” on a train platform revealing his fractured past: a monologue that whilst delivered well, really broke into the flow of the film for me and felt like a mistake.

There is however a genuinely dramatic scene between Malek and Crowe in his prison cell which I thought was terrific.

But, as I say, other opinions are available! The Illustrious Mrs Movie Man really didn’t care for Crowe’s performance but generally liked Malek and Goodall (the latter probably only because she was ‘Mad About the Boy’ after the last “Bridget Jones” movie!)

Only 4*s for “disturbing scenes”?

Viewers should be warned that the film contains graphic footage from the concentration camps, shown in film form to the courts as evidence. But this feels essential to the plot to reflect the impact that the visuals had on the court attendees. However, they are very hard to watch and contain some graphic footage that I haven’t seen before. I was curious to note that the BBFC rated the film as 4 stars out of 5 for “disturbing images”. It makes me genuinely curious to wonder what they would give 5 stars to! If the sight of hundreds of emaciated, dead Jewish corpses being bulldozed into a mass grave isn’t 5 stars on the disturb-o-meter, I really do wonder what is!?

A patchy script.

Another gripe I had with the film was the screenplay which delivered dialogue that at times came across as trite and unnatural. There was undue pontification at various points that the film simply didn’t need.

One particularly absurd moment sees Kelley stuff one of Göring’s unidentified set of pills in his mouth, chew it and then declare it was codeine. No hesitation that they might be something else like – say – cyanide!

The film also left some elements of the story tantalisingly untold. For example, what happened in the end to Emmy and Edda? Did Kelley ever reconnect with them? How did Göring manage to get hold of a certain substance? There felt like there was more of the story left to be told.

A coda to the film, years later, sees Kelley on a US radio talk show exposing how easy it is for a country to quietly adopt a narcissistic fascist leader who manages to gather a fanatical and fact-ignoring populist movement behind them. Right. Got it. We see what you are trying to do here and I can’t argue with the message. But it is done in such a blunt and heavy-handed way that is lands with an unsubtle clank.

Michael Shannon as Justice Robert H. Jackson and Richard E. Grant as British legal representative Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe in Nuremberg.
Both delivering solid supporting performances: the immaculate Michael Shannon as Justice Robert H. Jackson and Richard E. Grant as British legal representative Sir David Maxwell-Fyfe. (Source: Sony Pictures Classics.)

Summary Thoughts:

An interesting slice of history and well worth a watch, but it has some rough edges that detract from it being a classic.

I must apologise for the delay in getting this review out. I’ve just come back from New Zealand and have been suffering the most TERRIBLE jet-lag! You might still be able to find this in UK cinemas, but if not then it should be arriving on Sky channels before very long.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Where to watch?

Trailer:

The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvAy9C-bipY.

Subscribe

Don’t forget, you can subscribe to One Mann’s Movies to receive future reviews by email right here. No salesman will call!

By bobwp

Dr Bob Mann lives in Hampshire in the UK. Now retired from his job as an IT professional, he is owner of One Mann's Movies and an enthusiastic reviewer of movies as "Bob the Movie Man". Bob is also a regular film reviewer on BBC Radio Solent.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
Verified by MonsterInsights