Telling stories from the past can shine a light on today’s issues. The film “Nuremberg,” directed by James Vanderbilt, does just that. It examines the trials of Nazi leaders after World War II and invites viewers to reflect on contemporary crimes, including human rights abuses and state violence. Today, many are concerned about issues like wrongful detainment of citizens and immigrants. These themes resonate throughout the movie, sparking vital conversations about accountability.
The film’s title nods to the city where leaders from four Allied nations gathered to hold Nazi officials accountable for their actions. At that time, the laws surrounding war and crimes against humanity were evolving. The Nuremberg Trials marked a turning point, establishing that countries could be held accountable for actions even if they hadn’t signed treaties. Though controversial, this approach aimed to prevent the swift execution of leaders, which had been common practice in the past.
Drawing from Jack El-Hai’s nonfiction book, “The Nazi and the Psychiatrist,” the story focuses on Hermann Göring, portrayed by Russell Crowe, and American psychiatrist Jack Kelley, played by Rami Malek. Kelley was tasked with assessing whether Nazi leaders were fit for trial. His goal wasn’t just professional; he wanted to understand evil and explore the psychology behind the Holocaust. Interestingly, his ambition included the hope for a bestselling book.
The movie starts with Göring’s arrest and quickly introduces us to Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson, played by Michael Shannon. Jackson fights to ensure that Nazi leaders face justice. The dynamic between Kelley and Göring forms the core of the plot, with both actors delivering powerful performances. Malek captures Kelley’s inner conflict through his expressions, while Crowe embodies Göring’s charming yet sinister personality.
While viewers might remember Malek for his role as Freddie Mercury, this film showcases his depth as an actor. He portrays Kelley as a likable yet morally conflicted figure. Their exchanges reveal critical themes about war, ethics, and responsibility. At one point, Göring manipulates Kelley, using charm to gain his trust while revealing personal secrets. This highlights the dangers of being drawn in by charismatic figures, a concern that’s more relevant today than ever.
The film deftly uses humor to navigate heavy subjects. It includes moments that consider the absurdity of dark events while keeping the narrative engaging. Göring’s unhinged yet smooth conversations about past atrocities challenge Kelley’s moral stance, echoing today’s debates about accountability for war crimes. His claim that “American bombs also kill civilians” adds complexity to the dialogue, reminding viewers that moral judgments can be murky.
Expert historians suggest that understanding these complex issues helps combat modern-day fascism. A recent survey by the Anti-Defamation League found that a significant portion of Americans believes authoritarianism is on the rise, making stories about accountability increasingly vital. Films like “Nuremberg” encourage viewers to reflect on their own societies and the roles they play.
The movie does cover many characters and issues, but it can feel rushed at times. At two hours and twenty minutes, it can’t delve deeply into everything. Important figures like British counsel David Maxwell Fyfe, played by Richard E. Grant, and other Nazi defendants receive less attention than they deserve. However, the film remains earnest in its purpose, aiming to educate as well as entertain.
Ultimately, “Nuremberg” strives to be an accessible historical drama for everyone, regardless of prior knowledge about the trials. It emphasizes collective responsibility, insisting that the “people made it happen” and that standing up against injustice is crucial before it’s too late. With its blend of history and current relevance, the film invites meaningful conversations that resonate far beyond the screen.
