Opiniones de usuarios

Saw an early screening of Nuremberg with the Regal Mystery Movie. Honestly, I was expecting another standard WWII film. There are two storylines that interweave. The first being the obvious, the relationship between Douglas Kelly (Malek) and Herman Goering (Crowe). And the story of trying to get the trials set up with Robert Jackson (Shannon).

Positives!

+Some of the most genuine conversations I have heard on film.

+Great set and costumes.

+Fitting Score.

+Interesting interpersonal relationships. Show what it means to put humanity before hatred.

Negatives!

-Some historical inaccuracies.

-Gimmicky black and white news reel moments.

-Rami Malek doesn't always match his words to his face.

Nuremberg is a great film. But not a documentary. Your enjoyment may vary because of that. But Russell Crowe knocks it out of the park for sure. No heavy handed themes. Just factual footage from the camps.

--GremlinLord615.

-Full Review on Youtube.

7.7/10 (Recommend)

First reaction is that this movie deserves to be commended on more than saying the acting was good, the story was heavy, and the pacing was decent. All three of these things ring true, but it was also more than that. It was thought provoking in its humanity, morality, and legality.

So here is my checklist of this film:

• The acting was good, but I don't think any of it was award winning. The variety of actors chosen for each role made everything feel genuine for the era. Most impressive was Russell Crowe actually speaking German. I assumed it would be him speaking English the entire time, but with a German accent. Beyond the acting feeling authentic the sets felt real too. There wasn't just a ton of close-up shots trying to convince you that you were in war torn Germany. They gave you brief avenues to truly see.

• The story was heavy. You know why they're in Nuremberg, and you know the atrocities that took place. But you know when you don't hear a single crunching of popcorn or rustling of snacks, and there's a collective holding of breath, then you know the director has reeled you in. (Humanity) Emotionally it was more pain and hurt seeing the atrocities and not just tear jerking.

• The pacing was good. Despite its 2.5 hour runtime, the pacing was enjoyable. There's very few moments of down time. I would recommend not going to see the film if you've either been sitting all day, or are tired, or both. I was restless throughout because of both of those things.

• The legality and morality of Nuremberg was not something I ever really considered before. These trials were unprecedented and so the cases had to be built from the ground up. It only shows a partiality of this, but it goes just deep enough to give you a sense.

Overall, this is a movie I'd recommend seeing in theatres. The sound quality is spectacular and the visuals are great on the big screen. This isn't an award winning film by any stretch of the imagination, but it does its job well enough to say "these were some of the first men to be tried in Nuremberg. We try to humanize them, but in the end they are evil." It might be long for some, but for others it's good entertainment and possibly the beginning of a knowledge quest.

That's it for now. Thanks for taking time to read my review. Happy watching and enjoy the show!

Wow, saw this at TIFF. Powerful film. Russell Crowe, Rami Malick, Michael Shannon were all fantastic , as well as the rest of the cast. Harrowing scenes of the Final Solution. You could hear a pin drop in the theater when they were showing actual scenes of Nazi atrocities. Highly recommend watching this film!

Do not listen to the want to be Historians on this site. Was the movie 100% accurate, absolutely not, but neither was Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Fury, etc. However, this movie was very well done and told another side of the Nuremberg trials. My wife is not someone who watches WW2 movies, but she was captivated by this movie. Russel Crowe did a wonderful job playing Goering. Do yourself a favor and go watch the movie and enjoy it. It really is a movie that will stick with you for awhile.

This film was incredibly good. The soundtrack was spectacular, in the cinema you could just FEEL the historic weight of the events the film centers around. The pacing was also perfect, for a historic drama, its 140 minutes felt incredibly short. The cast and the acting was great as well. But most importantly, the deeper meaning and the messages of the film are just so important, and were delivered spectacularly. You just walk out with a pit in your stomach.

I still had some minor problems with the film, for example that it has some of the classic Hollywood US-centrism. I appreciate that the film was based mainly on a book, focusing on the relationship between the american psychiatrist and Göring, but I would have loved some more focus on other important figures. We didn't hear one single word from a russian or french judge or prosecutor for example. Some moments also felt a bit too unrealistic or theatrical for me, Jacksons meeting with the pope comes to mind, or the role and treatment of the psychiatrist in some parts. Also, it would have been great if Görings actor could have been german, but Russell Crowe makes up for it with an incredible performance, so I'll let that one go.

All in all the positives far outweigh the negatives for me though. A highly important, thought-provoking and entertaining film.

Nuremberg (2025) This film works as a gripping and well-made courtroom drama that keeps you invested from start to finish. The tension between the characters, the psychological mind games, and the weight of history all blend together smoothly. The film looks great, sounds great, and maintains a steady pace that never loses your attention.

It doesn't try too hard to be profound, and that's both its strength and its limitation. It's a solid, engaging watch that delivers exactly what it promises but doesn't quite reach the emotional or artistic heights that would make it award-winning.

Overall, a strong 7.5 out of 10 - a polished, well-executed historical drama that is definitely worth watching.

One of the best films I've seen in years, and I've seen many. Great performances across the board! I loved it! I simply couldn't stop watching! This one has awards written all over it. Malek, Crowe, and Shannon were amazing! I am so glad I went to the theater to see this film. People should not forget history.

Probably the best new movie I have seen in a very long time. Great performances and interesting plotlines. The "cat and mouse" relationship between Malek and Crowe is ever changing and complex. Very timeless story of the ascent of evil rings very true today. Much different than Judgment at Nuremberg, and maybe not as good, but still a must see movie.

As a person who has , rather unhealthy, fallen down the rabbit hole of WW2 trials and atrocities, I never heard that nasty piece of work antisemitic Julius Streicher broke down and cried. It's just a fabrication this film adds to see this horrible,nasty person gets his just deserts. It was actually rather laughable.

I also could swallow Kelley had a ' connection' with Goring's wife. I appreciate he needed her to get more information on him but it felt tacked on.

Just as laughable is Rami Malek's performance as Douglas Kelley. He seems too mannered,too immature, doesn't convince as a psychiatrist. He also looks Jewish,which would have been a deterrent in the interviews he conducted with high level Nazis. The real Kelley didn't look too Jewish,maybe some dark features.

Russell Crowe steals the film as Goring. Pompous, arrogant and self delusional. His accent is flawless.

It has a rather bombastic soundtrack at times, which ,I guess, adds to the pomp of the film.

It's not bad and I would recommend especially to the new generation of younger people so they are aware of this important part of history and how intolerance can breed.

A misstep from James Vanderbilt,who wrote of the finest films of the last 25yr, Zodiac.

It's a message-laden historical drama about the 1946 Nuremberg trials. We meet Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe) when he is captured after the war, as well as a few lesser lights like Rudolf Hess (Andreas Pietschmann), Julius Streicher (Dieter Riesle), and Robert Ley (Tom Keune), who are brought to trial. One of the movie's prongs follows American Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson (Michael Shannon), who fights hard for a war crimes trial for which there is no legal precedent. The larger, second prong is the interaction between American psychiatrist Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) and Hermann Göring, which eventually includes Göring's wife, Emmy (Lotte Verbeek), and daughter, Edda (Fleur Bremmer). Translator Howie Triest (Leo Woodall) is also significant.

"Nuremberg" attempts to do too much, devoting time to Jackson's quest, but tells an incomplete and American-centric story. This is overwhelmed by the more interesting, and closer to the film's message, interaction and near friendship between Kelley and Göring, as Kelley discerns Göring's brilliance and recognizes the danger posed by narcissistic charismatic political leaders. Women have little role in this film, mostly there for "support" and decoration. Even Emmy could have been developed further.

If you're unhappy with the state of politics in America, you may like this "Nuremberg" and wonder why that country has never joined the International Court of Justice, which is modelled on the Nuremberg trials.

I saw this film at the AFI Film Fest in Hollywood. I was not aware of the psychiatrist's (Rami Malek) involvement with Goering (Russell Crowe) before and during the trial, and that was some of the best parts of the movie. Also interesting was the part that Sgt. Howie Triest (Leo Woodhall) played during the trial - I had not heard of his story before, and I have read and studied a lot about WWII. Russell Crowe is brilliant as Goering and Malek is very good but not perfect. Now for some of the issues I have the film. The portrayal of Goering on the witness stand was very good, but it was not accurate - the movie implies that it was all in one day and it was not. Also, I did not like Slattery's over the top performance as the warden of the prison. Michael Shannon's performance as Justice Jackson was adequate but not compelling or accurate. There are some other minor inaccuracies that cause me to delete a couple of points from an otherwise excellent film, but I definitely recommend it for fans of fine drama.

This is a well told story of a little known part of the Nuremberg trials. It holds your attention right from the off with a well paced script and outstanding performances throughout.

Of course there is a little bit of artistic licence but if I want 100% historical accuracy I would read a book or watch a documentary. As a drama though this works very well.

Using some b&w imagery to give more of a sense of the time, in the trial scenes when actual archive footage of the holocaust is used it all adds to the sense of watching something from the time.

There is one small aspected that irked me a little bit where certain characters are given some dialogue to shoehorn some facts and timeline. It felt a little bit as though the audience weren't trusted enough to know some basic facts. That may well be true but I doubt those people wouldn't be in the audience anyway.

That aside it is a very very good film. What makes it stand apart though are the performances from Russell Crowe and Rami Malek in particular. Michael Shannon also shines and although a smaller part there is one scene in particular where Richard E Grant stands out. I would not be surprised to see award nominations coming soon.

There are two ways to make a historical film such as Nuremberg. The first is to take some liberties (if more in time than in actual facts/events) in pursuit of drama. The second is the "just the facts, ma'am" strategy. Director/writer James Vanderbilt takes the latter approach here, which crimps the movie's ceiling but also raises its floor.

For a very basic overview, this film looks at the Nuremberg Trials largely from the perspective of Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek), a psychiatrist brought in to evaluate the German prisoners, most notably Hermann Goring (Russell Crowe). Simultaneously, Justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon) struggles to put together a war crimes trial unlike anything any justice system has ever seen.

I'll start with the ceiling-limitation on Nuremberg, which is that it's far from Spielberg-ian drama. This is a simply-made film that does not lean into dramatic flourishes. This approach renders it more "history lesson" than "fully engrossing drama". As such, it's tough to give Nuremberg the highest of marks.

On the positive side of things, Nuremberg covers a compelling story which was truly a watershed moment in the history of war and its crimes. Crowe is chilling in embodying the pompous Goring, while Malek portrays a wonderfully sympathetic adversary. The final 20-30 minutes are the highlight here, when the psychological battling and the actual trial converge.

All told, Nuremberg is a movie that deftly portrays all the themes it sets out to cover. The underlying message, that fascism isn't contained to the Nazi regime, is an important one (if frustratingly difficult to convey with high drama and still be as historically accurate as Vanderbilt shoots for here). This results in somewhat of a "take your medicine and learn your history" feel to the overall experience (eschewing manufactured drama), but the end result is still a solid flick from which at least some entertainment and many lessons can be derived.

Nuremberg is an entertaining treatment of the trial of top Nazi Hermann Goering. Its aim is to be crowd pleasing but also to touch on serious matters, and it succeeds. Russell Crowe is getting all the attention but Rami Malek worked better for me. John Slattery is commanding. Leo Woodall is attention-getting in a smaller role. He has a scene toward the end of the film that made me cry. There are some inaccuracies. Nuremberg addresses the Nazi persecution of Jews to the exclusion of other victims, including handicapped people, Poles, Soviet POWs, gay people, JWs, and others. But that's a minor complaint about a good movie that manages to both entertain and treat difficult material.

STAR RATING: ***** Brilliant **** Very Good *** Okay ** Poor * Awful

Hermann Goring (Russell Crowe), Hitler's second in command, is caught fleeing after the downfall of his evil regime by American Allied Troops, along with a group of other Nazi high commanders. Justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon) is caught in a legal limbo, unable to put the men on trial for crimes not committed on American soil, while America was not involved in the war. Eventually, a compromise is reached, and psychological analyst Douglas Kelly (Rami Malek) is called in to assess Goring, as the main Nazi chief, but ends up forming an uncomfortable relatability with his nature.

It's a jumbled modern filmic landscape we operate in, with so many premieres on the various streaming services, or more conventional subscription channels. I don't recall watching anything on Sky Atlantic before, but now this original production of theirs has wound up on the big screen, where it has some legitimacy. James Vanderbilt's sprawling account of the Nuremberg trials has been covered before, but he still delivers a worthy if not entirely fulfilling dramatization of his own.

In spite of the all star cast, all eyes are still on Crowe, in the lead role as the portly Nazi chief, and delivers an absorbing performance, nailing the accent and mannerisms of the monster, but not leaving out the charming front he was capable of putting on, humanising a beast we could all become if the moon and stars aligned, which co star Malek finds himself uncomfortably drawn in by in his role. Sadly, despite these decent performances, the script possesses a lack of dynamism in spite of the weight of the theme, with a fairly slow, dull pace at the beginning, which does become more intense and powerful towards the end.

It's easy to look at the worst of us, and disassociate ourselves from them as though they were some deadly germ, but it's equally easy to forget that they are ultimately the same flesh and blood as us, and it's important to understand them as people for this reason. Vanderbilt's film is an uncomfortable, compelling, if not entirely delivering effort, ultimately still well worth seeing. *** and a half.

This really worked for me. It felt electric, which seems crazy for the subject matter. It had a palpable energy, and so stylish. Loved the remade archival footage, Rami was mesmerizing, Possibly my fav Russell Crowe performance ever, Plus Michael Shannon?? Honestly a masterclass from everyone and I sat transfixed the entire time. Not even kidding I could've watched 5 hrs of this, first time in a long time I paused it with an hour left and was excited to see I had so much left to go. Would happily watch Rami and Crowe trade mind games for 7 business days.

The overall moral and theme of this movie was correct and I thought emphasized appropriately. Michael Shannon was well cast, but I felt not adequately utilized throughout the film, as his character was one of the more intriguing.

Russell Crowe was the true star of the film. His ability to make you simultaneously abhor and sympathize with a monster shows his true talents. Unfortunately, Rami Malek, once again, proved how unable he is to meet the task. In these two dueling performances, we see the difference between natural acting talent and what today Hollywood tells us is acting talent.

I thought NUREMBERG was terrific on all levels. Most important is that it's solid entertainment, very well done. The script was intelligent, suspenseful, and provocative. It's basically a psychological game of cat-and-mouse between two crafty adversaries, top-Nazi (now that Hitler is dead) Hermann Goering versus the Allies' top psychiatrist Douglas Kelley as they try to prepare their testimony and cross-examination for the War Crimes Trial in the wake of World War II. They come to like and respect each other while at the same time trying win at any cost. For Goering his very life is at stake, for Kelley it's making certain that the Nazis could in no way be exonerated. They are both brilliant strategists who will do anything to win. The result is a gripping movie chock-full of great performances. There's Oscar potential for both Russell Crowe as Goering and Rami Malek as Kelley. They are given sensational support by Michael Shannon, John Slattery, Leo Woodall, and my old favorite, Richard E. Grant. Top notch writing and direction are by James Vanderbilt (whose previous credits I'm unaware of). The cinematography at first bothered me because of the use of a blue-green filter that was popular about 10 years ago, but it probably did make it easier to interpolate old newsreel footage. Also must mention the excellent music by Brian Tyler, which served to heighten the emotions without being obtrusive. For me, this is a 10-best movie I've seen in a long time and I'm a frequent moviegoer.

Russel Crowe is brilliant Rami malik is also brilliant mots a great ensemble cast in including Michael Shannon and Tom hanks son - who my god you can't say he's not his dad they're so familiar! - Colin.

It's a bit long but it delves into things I've not seen before and it's really interesting the relationship malik and crowes characters have and the mind games/battles they have with each other.

Nuremberg (2025) : Movie Review -

Stanley Kramer made many good films in his career, but Judgment at Nuremberg easily surpasses them all and remains one of my most cherished films of the 1960s. While Hollywood at the time was basking in colorful romantic comedies and anti-war dramas, this black-and-white courtroom tale about the aftermath of Nazi atrocities made all those films look colorless. Reimagining or rediscovering this monumental story six decades later was never going to be easy, nor was it ever possible to match the cinematic legacy of Kramer's masterpiece. Yet, I appreciate that the filmmakers at least tried to explore something new - a psychological perspective rather than a legal one. The 2025 version of Nuremberg unfolds not in the courtroom but inside the mind of a psychiatrist. The film is told largely from the perspective of Dr. Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek), a chief psychiatrist assigned to assess the mental state of Nazi officials before their trials. This shift in focus leaves less room for the kind of gripping courtroom exchanges that defined the 1961 original - a decision that ultimately weakens the film's dramatic punch. However, despite its uneven storytelling, Nuremberg offers a few shocking and powerful moments that deserve acknowledgment.

The story begins ahead of the historic trials, as Dr. Kelley arrives at the prison to evaluate whether the Nazi war criminals are fit to stand trial. Among them is Hermann Göring played by Russell Crowe, in one of his most commanding late-career performances. Douglas, sharp and analytical, quickly finds himself drawn into a psychological chess match with Göring, who manipulates conversations with unsettling ease. What starts as a routine evaluation soon turns into a dangerous intellectual duel. The more Douglas studies Göring, the more he realizes that this man, despite being a monster, is incredibly intelligent - perhaps even one step ahead of him. Göring's every word, every smile, and every calculated silence reveal that he has meticulously planned his defense, right from his surrender to the courtroom proceedings. Douglas' challenge, then, is to find a way to outsmart him and ensure that justice prevails - ideally with the death penalty that Göring so richly deserves.

As mentioned earlier, this version of Nuremberg focuses more on the psychological warfare between doctor and prisoner than on the moral and legal debates that defined the original. The 1961 film remains one of the greatest courtroom dramas ever made, known for its striking cinematography, powerful dialogues, and moral gravity. In contrast, this new film seems visually flat and emotionally uneven. The courtroom scenes lack tension, the debates feel half-hearted, and the production doesn't even attempt to recreate the haunting grandeur of Kramer's vision.

Yet, one sequence stands out above all - the concentration camp footage. The moment those images appear on screen, the audience, much like the characters within the film, is left speechless. The horror, the inhumanity, and the raw documentation of suffering cut through the mediocrity of the rest of the film. That brief sequence alone carries the emotional weight that much of the film fails to sustain. Unfortunately, once that moment passes, the narrative returns to its middling rhythm. The confrontations between Hermann and Douglas, the prosecution's strategies, and the courtroom exchanges all lack the emotional depth and sense of urgency that the subject matter demands.

Still, the performances elevate the film considerably. Russell Crowe once again proves that he doesn't need elaborate direction or flashy writing to command attention. His portrayal of Göring is layered, frightening, and yet disturbingly charismatic. The German accent, the smug composure, and the subtle psychological manipulation - all are delivered with Crowe's signature intensity. Meanwhile, Rami Malek delivers a performance that often rivals, and occasionally surpasses, Crowe's. As Dr. Douglas Kelley, he portrays curiosity, moral confusion, and internal conflict with admirable restraint. I have admired Malek since Bohemian Rhapsody, and this role reinforces his range and maturity as an actor. The supporting cast - including Leo Woodall, John Slattery, Colin Hanks, Mark O'Brien, Wrenn Schmidt, Lydia Peckham, Michael Shannon, and Richard E. Grant - contributes solid performances that round out the ensemble.

Where the film falters most is in its technical execution. The cinematography is disappointingly ordinary - a serious letdown given the historical depth and emotional potential of the subject. The editing feels inconsistent and doesn't build tension effectively. The art direction, though passable, never immerses the viewer in post-war Germany. Even the background score feels muted, rarely enhancing the mood or atmosphere. The opening shot - a man urinating on a Nazi emblem - hints at a provocative tone, but that audacity vanishes soon after. Director James Vanderbilt keeps the story grounded in realism and authenticity, but his approach lacks cinematic fire. The pacing drags, and the tone remains too subdued for a story of such moral and historical magnitude. What's missing here is the courage to confront the darkness with full force. Kramer's Judgment at Nuremberg didn't just depict history - it made viewers feel its moral anguish. This new Nuremberg merely observes it. It's a psychological study that forgets to engage the heart. The film had the potential to be sharper, more brutal, and more introspective, but it settles for being "watchable" rather than unforgettable. And yet, for all its flaws, Nuremberg isn't a total misfire. It deserves credit for revisiting a crucial chapter of history and for attempting to interpret it through a fresh lens. Some scenes - especially those involving the camp footage and the verbal duels between Malek and Crowe - linger long after the credits roll. They remind us that beneath the film's surface lies the echo of something powerful, something that could have been extraordinary with a stronger vision.

In short, Nuremberg is a noble effort that falls short of greatness. It neither dishonors the original nor comes close to matching its brilliance. What it offers instead is a modern, psychologically inclined take on the same story - flawed but fascinating in moments. For history enthusiasts and fans of the actors involved, it's worth a viewing. But for those who have witnessed the timeless impact of the 1961 masterpiece, this new chapter will likely feel like an echo - faint, uneven, and yearning for the gravitas of its predecessor.

RATING - 5/10*

I don't think I will ever see Crowe as Crowe again. Indescribable, indelible performance as Goring. Overall a great cast but for me the other standout was Woodall, the translator for the doctor. I wish younger people would see it including in high school but I doubt they ever will in the US.

Parallels with 2025 events in the USA are very real plus now antisemitism is worldwide.