A filmmaker explores the lives and deaths of her grandparents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were executed as spies in 1953.A filmmaker explores the lives and deaths of her grandparents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were executed as spies in 1953.A filmmaker explores the lives and deaths of her grandparents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who were executed as spies in 1953.
- Awards
- 1 nomination total
Bob Considine
- Self - International News Service
- (archive footage)
J. Edgar Hoover
- Self
- (archive footage)
Joseph McCarthy
- Self - Senator
- (archive footage)
Richard Nixon
- Self - Vice President
- (archive footage)
David Greenglass
- Self - Ethel Rosenberg's brother
- (archive footage)
Emanuel Bloch
- Self - the Rosenbergs' attorney
- (archive footage)
Jenny Meeropol
- Self - granddaughter of the Rosenbergs
- (archive footage)
Featured reviews
If you're looking for a good, even-handed overview of the Rosenberg case, this isn't it, but it is nevertheless not without interest.
It's not a good overview for two reasons. First, the movie spends little time looking at the actual facts of the case, focusing instead mostly on the effects on the family left behind. This can be excused, since it wasn't the intent of the filmmaker to cover the case itself. Second, and less excusable, the movie seems essentially uninformed by much of the evidence that has come out in the last decade (e.g. from Soviet intelligence archives) which provides unambiguous answers as to what the Rosenbergs actually did.
For instance, you won't hear here that documents in the Soviet archives explicitly describe Ethel Rosenberg helping to recruit David Greenglass to pass on atomic bomb construction details from Los Alamos. Ethel may not have deserved the death penalty for what she did, but it's hard to put much weight on any opinions this movie expresses on the subject, given its reliance on the pro-Rosenberg side for its view of the case.
That one-sidedness, however, is what is responsible for one of the film's two real accomplishments: giving the viewer a clear view of the mind-set of the American left in the 30's and 40's, one in which spying for a foreign power for ideological reasons was not merely acceptable, but laudable, and one in which the bald-faced claims of the complete innocence of the Rosenbergs were credulously accepted. The interviews with the aging members of the American left alone are worth the time of a serious student of the era.
The other interesting aspect of the movie is its clear documentation of the havoc the Rosenbergs' wreaked on their family. As a number of reviewers have pointed out, this is not a polished film, but the lack of polish contributes to the effectiveness of this portrayal. The Rosenbergs' willingness to put their family through this is perhaps the best measure of the depth of their devotion to the socialist cause, and helps us understand how they could have helped pass some of their country's deepest secrets to a foreign power.
It's not a good overview for two reasons. First, the movie spends little time looking at the actual facts of the case, focusing instead mostly on the effects on the family left behind. This can be excused, since it wasn't the intent of the filmmaker to cover the case itself. Second, and less excusable, the movie seems essentially uninformed by much of the evidence that has come out in the last decade (e.g. from Soviet intelligence archives) which provides unambiguous answers as to what the Rosenbergs actually did.
For instance, you won't hear here that documents in the Soviet archives explicitly describe Ethel Rosenberg helping to recruit David Greenglass to pass on atomic bomb construction details from Los Alamos. Ethel may not have deserved the death penalty for what she did, but it's hard to put much weight on any opinions this movie expresses on the subject, given its reliance on the pro-Rosenberg side for its view of the case.
That one-sidedness, however, is what is responsible for one of the film's two real accomplishments: giving the viewer a clear view of the mind-set of the American left in the 30's and 40's, one in which spying for a foreign power for ideological reasons was not merely acceptable, but laudable, and one in which the bald-faced claims of the complete innocence of the Rosenbergs were credulously accepted. The interviews with the aging members of the American left alone are worth the time of a serious student of the era.
The other interesting aspect of the movie is its clear documentation of the havoc the Rosenbergs' wreaked on their family. As a number of reviewers have pointed out, this is not a polished film, but the lack of polish contributes to the effectiveness of this portrayal. The Rosenbergs' willingness to put their family through this is perhaps the best measure of the depth of their devotion to the socialist cause, and helps us understand how they could have helped pass some of their country's deepest secrets to a foreign power.
As other reviewers have mentioned, this is essentially an amateur effort, but I believe it is more effective for that, and that a more polished, careful effort by "professionals" would not be nearly as poignant and effective.
Though many of the Rosenberg family cling to various pieces of the puzzle hoping, or pretending, that Julius & Ethel were either "innocent" or at least deserved a lesser punishment, it is clear from the Venona transcripts (released in '95) and testimony of ex-KGB agents that they were active -- Julius much more so -- in stealing highly classified U.S. secrets and giving them to the Soviet Union, as part of an organized socialist-communist cabal. They were clearly "true believers," which is what essentially scarred their children's lives.
As this film makes quite clear, the Rosenbergs could have spared themselves right up to the day they were executed, but their refusal to implicate other spies sealed their fate. However misguided, they were true believers, willing to die rather than betray their cause.
At this late date there is of course not the slightest doubt that both were guilty of treason and espionage, and, due to their refusal to "betray" their comrades or their cause, they also inflicted great emotional trauma to their families, especially their children. One cannot help but sympathize with them, but it's hard to argue that their parents are in any way "innocent" or did not commit treason and espionage. They opted to die. One can only bemoan the fact that others in the ring deserved death far more than Ethel, but got light sentences.
Though a bit long and slow-moving at times, for someone interested in this peculiar historical incident this film will prove fascinating despite its less-than-polished production.
Though many of the Rosenberg family cling to various pieces of the puzzle hoping, or pretending, that Julius & Ethel were either "innocent" or at least deserved a lesser punishment, it is clear from the Venona transcripts (released in '95) and testimony of ex-KGB agents that they were active -- Julius much more so -- in stealing highly classified U.S. secrets and giving them to the Soviet Union, as part of an organized socialist-communist cabal. They were clearly "true believers," which is what essentially scarred their children's lives.
As this film makes quite clear, the Rosenbergs could have spared themselves right up to the day they were executed, but their refusal to implicate other spies sealed their fate. However misguided, they were true believers, willing to die rather than betray their cause.
At this late date there is of course not the slightest doubt that both were guilty of treason and espionage, and, due to their refusal to "betray" their comrades or their cause, they also inflicted great emotional trauma to their families, especially their children. One cannot help but sympathize with them, but it's hard to argue that their parents are in any way "innocent" or did not commit treason and espionage. They opted to die. One can only bemoan the fact that others in the ring deserved death far more than Ethel, but got light sentences.
Though a bit long and slow-moving at times, for someone interested in this peculiar historical incident this film will prove fascinating despite its less-than-polished production.
Ivy Meeropol is the granddaughter of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who were executed as traitors for allegedly passing the secrets of the atomic bomb to America's enemy Russia. Decades after the event she decides to try and uncover the history around their execution and sets out to interview her relatives and others involved.
As a non-American and someone who was only born in the 1970's, I was not that familiar with the subject of the film but had a vague knowledge of what this was about or at least enough to come to the film to learn more. The problem is that the film doesn't actually help the causal viewer at all and seems to assume that everyone watching it will already know the whole story. In a way perhaps this is a fair approach because the film is roundly personal and amateur, made by Meeropol for herself more than anyone else. With this in mind then perhaps it is forgivable that the film has come off this way, because it does just what the small target audience needed; however to my mind this approach is a bit careless towards the audience Meeropol could easily have built the factual story and then expanded it to be a personal exploration.
The film doesn't do this though and really the history behind the Rosenberg's and the events in America at the time are hardly touched upon in favour of Meeropol trying to get to grips with her complex family tree and the relatives who scattered when the execution took place and the children were left with no family to take them in. The interest in this material will be limited and, without the film giving you any background, the casual viewer will feel as isolated as I did which is a problem whether Meeropol thinks it is or not.
Overall then a very personal film that has a limited audience as a result. For those very familiar with the Rosenberg and the wider family then this will be gripping and touching but without even knowing the basics then how was I suppose to care about the personal story behind (after) the execution? A very amateurish and personal film that offers limited appeal and fails to make its subject more accessible.
As a non-American and someone who was only born in the 1970's, I was not that familiar with the subject of the film but had a vague knowledge of what this was about or at least enough to come to the film to learn more. The problem is that the film doesn't actually help the causal viewer at all and seems to assume that everyone watching it will already know the whole story. In a way perhaps this is a fair approach because the film is roundly personal and amateur, made by Meeropol for herself more than anyone else. With this in mind then perhaps it is forgivable that the film has come off this way, because it does just what the small target audience needed; however to my mind this approach is a bit careless towards the audience Meeropol could easily have built the factual story and then expanded it to be a personal exploration.
The film doesn't do this though and really the history behind the Rosenberg's and the events in America at the time are hardly touched upon in favour of Meeropol trying to get to grips with her complex family tree and the relatives who scattered when the execution took place and the children were left with no family to take them in. The interest in this material will be limited and, without the film giving you any background, the casual viewer will feel as isolated as I did which is a problem whether Meeropol thinks it is or not.
Overall then a very personal film that has a limited audience as a result. For those very familiar with the Rosenberg and the wider family then this will be gripping and touching but without even knowing the basics then how was I suppose to care about the personal story behind (after) the execution? A very amateurish and personal film that offers limited appeal and fails to make its subject more accessible.
6wzmb
Ivy Meeropol has produced an emotionally moving documentary about her infamous grandparents, the Rosenbergs. I liked her work in this film, however her account of this notorious trial of Russian spies and traitors, as well as the effect on both Rosenberg boys, is purely an emotional and subjective view. Julius Rosenberg was definitely a traitor and a Russian spy, operating against the interests of U.S. national security and defense. Ethel was clearly an innocent woman. Julius was arrogant, evil, and extremely selfish not to confess information that would have saved his loving wife Ethel. Obviously, the ramifications were quite extensive as to whom was involved in that espionage ring of secret agents, having smuggled nuclear weapons technology to the Russians. Ivy Meeropol's documentary of the historical events however, never answered the most important question about her grandfather Julius' betrayal of the United States...Why? Why did he do it? What made him commit himself to his loyalty and sympathy for the Russians? Why was he so strongly compelled to give nuclear weapons secrets to the evil heinous empire of Stalin and the Soviet Communist's regime? The long term consequences of Julius Rosenberg's actions are a debacle of infinitesimal proportions. Why do you think we are now horrified that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon to use against the U.S.A.? That same stolen nuclear technology, was given to the Islamic jihadist regime of Iran, by none other than Vladimir Putin and the remnants of his mother Russia!
The entire film is based on a fallacy and therefore makes it difficult to watch. Ivy basis the documentary on the misleading notion that her grandparents are not guilty of being traitors. The facts are that her grandparents were spies. Later, her father Michael says, Julius might have helped the Soviets, but Julius did not do what the government accused him of. Then another person says Ethel was only being a loyal wife.
The film is a sophomoric effort to understand the dark stain on her family. The camera work, editing, and narration are all weak.
Ivy should have created a documentary on what caused the executions. It wasn't 'red scare', or 'communist witch-hunts'. It was because Julius and Ethel were spies for the Soviets. They are both guilty of betraying their country.
The film is a sophomoric effort to understand the dark stain on her family. The camera work, editing, and narration are all weak.
Ivy should have created a documentary on what caused the executions. It wasn't 'red scare', or 'communist witch-hunts'. It was because Julius and Ethel were spies for the Soviets. They are both guilty of betraying their country.
Did you know
- TriviaShortlisted for Best Documentary Feature for the 2003 Academy Awards.
- Quotes
Ivy Meeropol: I have to be honest with you, a lot of people don't really wants to talk to me... people are afraid.
- SoundtracksUn Bel Di
Madame Butterfly
performed by Oksana Krovytska
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official site
- Language
- Also known as
- Heir to an Execution: A Granddaughter's Story
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 33m(93 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content