Judgment at Nuremberg

During the 1950s and early 60s, many wonderful teleplays were produced by "Playhouse 90" and other television programs. Many of these written for television plays eventually made their way to Hollywood and the remakes earned Oscars for the likes of Ernest Borgnine ("Marty") and Maximillian Schell ("Judgement at Nuremberg") . A few of the teleplays were remade into films that are today considered among the best movies ever made...such as "12 Angry Men". And, many of the best directors and writers got their start with such productions. If you can find them on YouTube, then you really are in for a treat!

Until I found this television version of "Judgement at Nuremberg", I assumed the 1961 film was wholly original. Regardless, however, you need to consider them like separate films, as the teleplay was extensively re-written and bears only a moderate similarity. It's not surprising, as the teleplay clocked in at 90 minutes (about 75-80 if you remove the commercials), whereas the 1961 film was nearly three hours long!! These additions turned out to be why I love the remake and only liked and respected the teleplay.

The story centers on one American judge (Claude Rains) who is one of three judges presiding over a trial of several German judges who perverted justice in order to please the new Nazi leaders as well as to 'help restore Germany'. The story begins just before the trial and ends just after the sentencing of these accused judges.

Maximilian Schell, Werner Klemperer, Torben Meyer and Otto Waldis all appeared in both the teleplay and the film. Of these, the one I repected most was Klemperer....who only had a few lines here and there but was wonderful as an amoral monster. Overall, a very well made teleplay and it would be great if you could watch it and then the movie to compare and contrast them. In nearly every way, I found the remake better...which I why I felt that film earned a 10 and was one of the best pictures of the 1960s.

I have both of these versions. Both are very good and both deserved their numerous accolades. However, I prefer the Playhouse 90 version for two reasons; it is not as drawn out as the Hollywood treatment, and the performance of Claude Rains as the presiding judge is actually superior to that of Spencer Tracy who played the role in the Hollywood version. It was the best work that Rains had ever done in my opinion. Max Schell was terrific in both versions and richly deserved his Academy Award. The film is rightfully disturbing; both films are, actually. And the term " I was only following orders" became famous after these productions. Highly recommended.

I think it's quiet funny that Maximilian Schell plays the role of Hans Rolfe in this TV-episode. Two years later, he plays it again, this time in the real movie "Judgment at Nuremberg". This role gained him an Oscar. I think it's the only time that an actor wins an Oscar for an character he previously played on TV.

But maybe I'm wrong and there is another example for such an unusual case.

Post if you can imagine one or what you think about this.

PS: Maximilian Schell was also the first German speaking actor to win the Oscar for best actor since 1929, which is also the year of the first Oscar ceremony ever.

PPS: At this time he was also the second youngest actor ever to win the Oscar after Marlon Brando in "On the Waterfront". Today he is the fourth youngest after Adrian Brody, Richard Dreyfuss and Marlon Brando.

Comparisons are odious, so let's make some. The 1961 movie is twice as long as this teleplay, so has room for Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland's husband, and a bunch of informative detail, some of it interesting, some not. The trial itself is pretty similar. Spencer Tracy is not one of my favorite actors, and Claude Rains is, so I prefer Rains here. Neither Burt Lancaster's accent nor his age makeup is convincing, but he gives a terrific performance, as does the more believable Paul Lukas. Melvyn Douglas overacts a bit; Widmark is much more intense. Albert Szabo is moving as Peterson, but Montgomery Clift is unforgettable. And Maximilian Schell, competing against himself, is brilliant both times and deserved his Oscar. I enjoyed both versions.

Judgment at Nuremberg (JAN) is an award winning teleplay by Abby Mann that was originally directed for TV by George Roy Hill. It was first presented to the public during the Golden Age Of Television in a live 1959 Playhouse 90 broadcast. Two years later, it was produced and directed by Stanley Kramer as a major Hollywood motion picture that eventually has achieved something approaching classic status. JAN continues to interest us, provoke us to serious thought and discussion, and motivate us to question the meaning of responsible behavior during a time of national crisis. The fact that we can still be drawn into its challenging issues after over 60 years of exposure is certainly a testament to the relevance of Mann's vision about a very difficult and distant chapter of post-WWII history.

The Playhouse 90 presentation was brilliant, provocative and thoroughly entertaining. It featured a spectacular cast, and is all the more remarkable when we realize that the telecast was a live event actually happening while we were watching it. When the play was later produced as a movie, Mann took his story and expanded (some believe overexpanded) it to include other plot elements that had not been considered in the television version. Three of the actors from the Playhouse 90 production were allowed to recreate their original roles for the movie---Maximilian Schell (who was lead defense counsel Oscar Rolfe in the TV play, and then renamed Hans Rolfe in the movie version), Werner Klemperer (Nazi prosecutor Emil Hahn) and Torren Mayer (Nazi judicial official Werner Lammpe on TV and Werner Lampe in the film). Schell won the Best Actor Oscar for 1961 because of his remarkable supercharged performance----beating out (among others) Spencer Tracy who was also nominated for his own lead role in JAN.

Because the Playhouse 90 episode only consumed 90 minutes (including commercial broadcast messages) while the film ran almost three hours and was therefore almost twice as long, it is difficult to compare the performances of the three different principal roles common to both presentations. With that caveat in mind, here is one person's view of the matter:

Chief Judge Dan Haywood (Claude Rains In the Playhouse 90 version v. Spencer Tracy in the film)---Rains and Tracy were two of the most gifted actors in cinema history. Rains's career was marked by the ironic underachievement of having received four Oscar Supporting Actor nominations without a win, while Tracy was a multiple Oscar Best Actor winner. Both are justly considered to be master acting craftsmen of the highest order. Rains played Judge Haywood as a solemn, dignified, principled man with a serious moral compass. It was a subtle, controlled and understated performance. Tracy seems to have borrowed much of the Rains' approach to the part in the way he also brought it to life. Because Rains was first, he should get the nod.

Minister of Justice Ernst Janning (Paul Lukas in the Playhouse 90 version v. Burt Lancaster in the film)--Lukas was a veteran romantic/character actor with numerous film credits. Lancaster created many different memorable roles during his long career. Both were previous Best Actor Oscar winners. However, Lukas delivered the better and more nuanced performance. Lancaster seemed stiff and ill at ease in trying to project a basically good man caught up in evil activities that he personally disapproved of but nonetheless supported. Lukas seemed to show us more clearly the pain and suffering such a man had to go through to face the dawn of each new day.

Chief Trial Prosecutor (General Parker-Melvyn Douglas in the Playhouse 90 version v. Colonel Ted Lawson-Richard Widmark In the film). Douglas enjoyed a long and varied Oscar-winning acting career extending from sophisticated gigalos and screwball comedians to distinguished public servants and interesting senior citizens. Widmark was a workmanlike performer, but his range as an actor was more limited---although early on, he did develop a unique capacity to convincingly play giggling psycopaths. Douglas seemed to invest the part of the Prosecutor in JAN with more substance and a greater sense of barely controlled outrage than Widmark did.

As for Schell, his defense attorney in both versions of JAN was the quintessential breakout role---one that began his long trip to celebrity and stardom.