Nuremberg (2025) – Review
Quick Thoughts:
- Michael Shannon is always good.
- I like watching Russell Crowe and Rami Malek yell at each other
- Director/writer James Vanderbilt packs an incredible amount of story into the 148-minute film. I wish he would’ve scaled back a bit and focused on fewer characters.
- Between Nuremberg, Land of Bad, and The Pope’s Exorcist, I really like watching 2020’s Russell Crowe.
- It’s worth watching as a reminder of the importance of the trials.
Synopsis – Nuremberg tells the story of the Nuremberg Trials which took place between 1945 and 1946. Instead of focusing on the entirety of the year-long trial, writer/director James Vanderbilt puts most of the focus on psychiatrist Douglas M. Kelley (Rami Malek), who was assigned to make sure the Nazi war criminals were suitable for trial. While in Nuremberg, he meets Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe), and the two engage in a battle of wits that will hopefully help Kelley define evil so he can land a lucrative book deal (and prevent future genocide).
When looking at Writer/director James Vanderbilt’s IMDb page, it’s clear that he’s been working towards Nuremberg for his entire career. The films he’s written trend toward investigations (Zodiac, Basic), murder mysteries (Murder Mystery, Scream (2022), and investigative reporting (Truth), and it was fun learning that he’s been working on the Nuremberg screenplay for 13 years (including a year of research) so he could condense the trials into a 148-minute movie. Inspired by his grandfathers, who fought in World War II. Vanderbilt dutifully studied court documents, video footage, and the 2014 book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist: Hermann Göring, Dr. Douglas M. Kelley, and a Fatal Meeting of Minds at the End of WWII, to create a film that highlights the importance of the tribunal.
Like most historical biographical films that condense mass quantities of history into a two-hour narrative, Nuremberg smashes a year’s worth of story into 148 minutes. The large cast and multiple storylines make sense considering the immense scale of the trial, but it would’ve been nice if he allowed Crowe and Malek to interact more. The idea of a psychiatrist being brought in to meet with Nazi leaders is interesting, and a great way to tackle such a sweeping court case. However, one of the major benefits of working on a script for 13 years is that Vanderbilt became wildly knowledgeable about the proceedings, which might’ve prevented him from narrowing the scope of his film. It also doesn’t help that Rami Malek, Russell Crowe, Michael Shannon, John Slattery, Colin Hanks, Leo Woodall, Richard E. Grant, Wrenn Schmidt, and Lotte Verbeek joined the cast, because they are all excellent actors and needed something to do. The end result is a solid film that is loaded with memorable monologues, solid performances, and more monologues.
Nuremberg centers around a psychiatrist named David M. Kelley (Rami Malek – clearly loving the role), traveling to Nuremberg so he can examine high-ranking Nazi prisoners to ensure they’re trial ready. The leather jacket-wearing Kelley is a bit of a wildcard as he’s using the assignment to gain fortune (book sales!) and make a name for himself as the man who “psychologically defined evil.” He’s given the assignment by the no-nonsense Colonel Burton C. Andrus (John Slattery), and he immediately starts diving into the assignment with his translator Howie Triest (Leo Woodall). His most challenging and charismatic subject is Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe), who between 1933 and 1945 became one of the most powerful figures in the Nazi Party.
While many people around the world thought the prisoners should be executed without a trial, Supreme Court justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon) doesn’t want them to become martyrs. His plan is to put them on trial to shed light on the mass genocide committed by Hitler’s army. To do this, he needed help from Kelley. It’s an interesting tale, and knowing that Kelley would later commit suicide via potassium cynandie (like Göring) makes the story more interesting. The problem is that the audience never really gets into the headspace of Kelley, or Göring, because there’s just too many characters. Courtrooms dramas typically feature ensemble casts (A Few Good Men, Juror #2, 12 Angry Men, Judgment at Nuremberg), but they focus on a specific case or moment in time. Nuremberg has to capture the essence of one of the biggest trials of all time, while helping the audience understand why evil men do what they do. It’s a lot.
On the technical front, Dariusz Wolski was the perfect cinematographer to hire because he’s familiar with arguing actors (Crimson Tide), god complexes (Prometheus, Napoleon) and duels (The Last Duel). Most of the film takes place in concrete-walled prison cells, courtrooms, and other bland interiors, yet he manages to make the film look visually interesting. Most importantly, he understood that Crowe, Shannon and Malek can hold the screen so he kept things simple and let them work. The production design by Eve Stewart (The King’s Speech, Les Misérables, The First Omen) is expectedly top-notch with the highlight being the courtroom where the legal battle occurred.
Final thoughts – It’s worth a watch because of the interesting history and solid performances from Russell Crowe, Michale Shannon and Rami Malek
Movies, Films & Flix 