Nuremberg
|
List Price: Our Price: $5.41 You Save: $14.57 (73%) Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days Buy Used: from $4.90 (click here) Category: DVD See more DVD releases |
|---|
Canada
Movie Reviews of Nuremberg
Movie Review: Nuremberg
Summary: 5 Stars
I use this film with my English 12 classes after we have read Elie Wiesel's memoir Night. This movie is great. The acting is superb and the story needs to be told.Movie Review: Riveting - A Must See
Summary: 5 Stars
I bought this for my husband for Christmas. He always missed it on TV. This is an interesting account of the atrocities of the Holocaust. A must see for all.Movie Review: Nuremberg
Summary: 5 Stars
This is actually a very good, well-acted TV movie about Nuremberg. It's not a "copy" of Judgment at Nuremberg, but it is very well-done.Movie Review: Much better than expected
Summary: 4 Stars
Frankly, I didn't expect this docu-drama to be as good as it is. Alec Baldwin has not been a favorite and I doubted what he might do in portraying Justice Robert Jackson. Nevertheless, Jackson was far from perfect himself, both personally and professionally, so maybe it's fit casting. In 60 years, no one else has had the courage to take on this important story, so give Mr. Baldwin his due, both as leading actor and co-executive producer.
Staging, costumes, and cinematography are outstanding in this made-for-TV production. Views of the bombed-out city of Nuremberg seem genuine from beginning to end. Reconstruction of the Palace of Justice is extremely well done. As an old car buff, I enjoyed seeing vehicles from the 1940's and 50's so well maintained. Big social gatherings are lavish and well-staged. In summary, this is a big-budget production.
In rating this movie I might have given it 5 stars except for the portrayal of the British prosecutors. This was understated quite a bit. Sir David Maxwell-Fife, not Judge Jackson, was the one who unmasked Hermann Goering as the psychopathic monster that he truly was. Moreover, fellow-Britisher, Sir Hartley Showcross, was given credit for the most moving summation, not Jackson. No one was cast to play the Showcross part which is unfortunate given the outstanding British actors available.
Another weakness was how the Soviets were depicted. Comrades Rudenko, Nikitchenko, and others contributed a lot to what happened at Nuremberg in the real trial, despite constant kibbitzing from Moscow. This was the only true International Tribunal on war crimes and all four prosecuting countries, the U. S., Great Britain, France, and USSR played their roles.
As to casting in the movie, one inevitably compares to the 1961 landmark movie, "Judgment at Nuremberg." That film had Spencer Tracy, Maxmillian Schell (who won the best actor Oscar that year), Burt Lancaster, Richard Widmark, Montgomery Clift, Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland, and several others of note. These even included William Shatner in his first big-screen performance. In no way does the 2000 production compare to the 1961 film in the depth of characterization and the sheer poetry of the screenplay by Abby Mann. And yet, because of the commanding presence of Spencer Tracy as American lead judge, Haywood, and the role of a lifetime for Maxmillian Schell, other performances have been overlooked.
In my view, Burt Lancaster was eloquent as the chief German judge, Ernst Janning. Several of his lines in the movie still haunt me, especially: "Were we DEAF? DUMB? BLIND?" Then, the rejoinder from Spencer Tracy at the end: "But Herr Janning, it came to that the first time you sentenced a man to death you knew to be innocent." Finally, Marlene Dietrich was remarkable in her limited role. Who can forget the scene of her sitting alone in the dark and letting the phone ring, as Judge Haywood was calling to say goodbye?
Nevertheless, there are some important performances in the newer movie that must be acknowledged.
Brian Cox is absolutely first-rate as Hermann Goering. One minute he's the jovial family man; the next, a psychopathic killer and founder of the Gestapo. I will no longer see Mr. Cox as just an exceptional narrator of World War II documentaries. As others point out, Cox literally steals the show in "Nuremberg."
Moreover, the German actor Herbert Knaup, who portrays Albert Speer, does a memorable job, as Goering's counterweight with the Nazi defendants. Speer seems sincerely repentant for his part in the war crimes and this saves his life. His final statement in court is worth watching and re-watching, as he warns mankind that the next major war could destroy the globe itself.
Christopher Plummer is fine as David Maxwell-Fife, but the screenwriter only gave him one big scene. That was where he described a Nazi mass execution in the Ukraine--a spine chilling moment to be sure. In reality, Maxwell-Fife was the star of the prosecution team, as said above, and he deserves far more credit than he got in this movie.
It's true, as critics point out, that the hanging of the condemned men did not proceed, one, two, three, as shown in this film. Rather, some of the men took 20 minutes or more, to die. Also, I agree with other reviewers who found fault with the love affair depicted between Jackson and his secretary. We could have dispensed with that in favor of some other more weighty things, including defense of the two Nazi naval officers. As it is, the movie runs 3 hours so not a great deal of time could be spent on the subject. But the defense made by Capt. Kranzbuehler, saved the lives of Admirals Raeder and Doenitz. Moreover, Kranzbuehler set precedents in international law with his defense.
In comparing "Nuremberg" with other TV miniseries on the Third Reich, I'd say it's a notch below "Hitler: The Rise of Evil" (2003), starring Robert Carlyle and "Inside the Third Reich" (1982), with Rutger Hauer, John Gielgud, and Derek Jakobi. I see "Nuremberg" on a par, though, with "The Bunker" (1981), starring Anthony Hopkins.
I would highly recommend the newer movie, "Nuremberg," despite its flaws. I got it on loan from a friend and plan to buy the DVD later for my collection. "Nuremberg" does not measure up to "Judgment at Nuremberg," but few films ever will. The newer film tells a much different story and may take literary license along the way. These points notwithstanding, it makes a contribution to our understanding the Third Reich, the world's foulest tyranny. We must try to understand it, lest we repeat it.
Movie Review: Absorbing Depiction of Trials Of Nazi ELite!
Summary: 4 Stars
To the mind of many historical observers, nothing so defines the striking manifest differences between the horrific nature of the Third Reich from the more rational and compassionate constitutional democracies that largely comprised the Allies as the way in which the defendants of the trials at Nuremberg were handled. With painstaking precision (and at extraordinary cost in terms of international arm-twisting and back-door deals), the proponents of a judicial proceeding designed to illustrate the manifest individual guilt of the various Nazi officials forged a result that still stands today as a model of a non-retributive effort in the face of extraordinary pressure. In this carefully reearched and terrifically presented movie depiction of the events, one comes to appreciate the problems facing the Allies in proceeding with the trials. And while one can hardly describe the Nuremberg trials as unflawed or perfect, they did prove to the world that the Allies were willing to subscribe to the existing canon of law to judge the actions of the Nazis. Doing so was anything but easy, Indeed, achieving a fair result that would literally convince the watching world of the guilt of the participants in the war was anything but easy, and moving toward that deliberate goal is a theme providing an interesting theme punctuating the pace of the book. Churchill wanted revenge by way of summary trials and quick retribution, while the Russians just wanted to string up the whole group in a mass hanging. Yet American Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson (Alex Baldwin) was able to resolve the differences well enough to proceed, although at times the viewer wonders if the trials will be anything like the fair-minded judicial event he has in mind.
Indeed, the back-stabbing, personal ambitions, and petty jealousies of the various factions, trial officials, and individual defendants becomes a kind of political circus that sometimes resembles nothing so much as vaudevillian showboating.
Still, the efforts at conducting a fair and open forum for the world to watch as the prosecution and defense teams clashed before the international tribunal prevailed, and the trials concluded with mixed results in terms of the results. Most of the defendants were found guilty, and many were hanged.
Yet few observers doubted that the defendants had had their day in court along with and adequate opportunity to defend their actions to a watching world. Given how little justice and liberty they collectively allowed for their tens of millions of victims, it is remarkable just how civilized and dignified a proceeding the Nuremberg trials were, with all their theatrics and subterranean undercurrents.
One marvels at the fact that after fifty years the world still stands in awe at the deliberate, careful, and methodical way in which the Allies achieved the result of a rational and fair trial of the defendants in history's most horrific modern nightmare, the terror of the Third Reich. This is an interesting and absorbing film presentation, and it is fascinating and entertaining to watch. It was also particularly interesting to me because it explores the lives of each of the defendants in looking at their individual guilt. I recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about these singular trials and their impact on history.