Nuremberg (2000)

The trial of Nazi war criminals following the Allied victory in Europe in World War II is dramatized in this uneven TV movie starring Alec Baldwin as Robert Jackson, a U.S. Supreme Court justice who served as the chief prosecutor for the Allies. The gravity of the controversial concept of having a war crimes trial, and the political maneuvering between Britain, France, the United States, and the Soviet Union that made it possible, is explained fairly well in the early portions of the film, even if Baldwin at times delivers lines that seem to have been lifted from a high school history textbook. Scenes of Nazi officers being rounded up and jailed are evocative, as are scenes of a ruined Germany. But a subplot involving Baldwin's character having an extramarital affair with his secretary, played by Jill Hennessy, seems utterly extraneous. Perhaps the intent was to show that even someone taking a moral stand on a global stage can be flawed, but Baldwin's Supreme Court justice faces no consequences from his infidelity. Baldwin dominates the courtroom scenes as the outraged prosecutor, while Hennessy has little to do beyond looking great in her 1940s wardrobe. And as the film progresses the brilliant performance of Brian Cox as Hermann Goering simply seizes all attention, as Hitler's deputy is uncannily portrayed as a brilliant manipulator to the very end. Nuremberg is consistently interesting, and to its credit it does contain much serious material on the Nazi war crimes, but it is in the end a flawed production. --Robert J. McNamara Amazon.com

 effective, historically accurate production
As a Holocaust educator, I found "Nuremberg" an accurate and compelling look at the pre-trial events and the trial itself. Knowing the accuracy of the movie makes it quite worthwhile. Another bonus is the fact the actors that portray the Nazi defendants look almost like their real life photos. And, just to view it as an interesting story, one would find it entertaining as well. May 5, 2008

 Excellent flick
I've watched this movie several times. I can't speak completely to the accuracy of all the details since I haven't studied that trial, but the producers, director, actors, etc seems to have done a great job of taking a VERY complicated subject and reducing it to its basic themes within a couple of hours. Baldwin, the guy playing Goering, and Christopher Plummer (as an elder statesman/barrister) are great.
Would have been interesting to see more focus on the more obscure Nazi leadership, but thats probably unrealistic in a film like this. So the focus tends to be on Goering and Albert Speer. The settings are realistic and proper attention was paid to uniforms and background fixtures. Also, the courtroom scenes where film footage of concentration camps is played for the court reminds that the trial is a true story about a real tragedy...
I usually don't care for "lawyer movies" but this one is exceptional in my opinion. August 30, 2007

 Great Mini-Series = Great Movie
Better than I expected, this is (for my money) TNT's best ever production. It worked as a mini-series. As a movie, it is LONG (over three hrs) and absorbing. If you like great courtroom drama, here it is. Brian Cox is fantastic as Goering. The rest of the cast -- esp. those portraying the Nazi war criminals -- shine like stars. August 22, 2006

 Much better than expected
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.
July 28, 2006

 Well made, historically accurate
The primary complaint about this will probably be "it's too long". The actual Nuremburg trials went on for much longer than three hours, however, so imagine how much had to be left out!
Brian Cox is brilliant as Hermann Goering, portraying him as the vain and egotistical, yet clever and often easily likable person he could be, despite his history as one of the most horrible people of all time. Nuremburg goes beyond showing him as the faceless Nazi monster; as a proud soldier and pilot (he was head of the Luftwaffe during WW2, and in WW1, had been a decorated pilot himself), and a man capable of humor and kindness. Particularly powerful scenes include one towards the beginning when he entertains a group of GI's by playing the accordion and singing, and another towards the end, when his wife asks him if she can take home some of the food that had been provided for what would probably be his last meal, and he very "normally" says, "I don't see why not," and looks for someone to ask. The last scene must be viewed to fully understand what I mean.
The movie seems to have been made with historical correctness in mind. Small bits of fact that never would have been included in a big budget hollywood picture make it here, like the scene in which the defendants give their pleas, and Goering attempts to make a statement but is cut off by the judge. Also historically correct is the way in which Goering initially made the prosecutors, representing the allied forces, look like idiots, while he endeared himself to everyone in the room with his witty remarks.
The friendship between Goering and the American soldier "Tex" is also completely true, and the movie insinuates one of the two most popular explanations for how Goering got the cyanide ampule into his cell, despite the fact that it and he were searched regularly. Nuremburg seems to say that Goering asked his friend to retrieve a bag of personal items for him to go through and give away. The other belief is that the American knowingly brought the ampule to Goering, rather than Goering tricking him. The reality will probably never be completely known.
For history buffs, this is a must see. Probably for everyone else too...
March 17, 2006

More reviews at Amazon.com ...