The new film “Nuremberg,” directed by James Vanderbilt, takes a fresh approach to the historical trials that followed World War II by centering around U.S. Army psychiatrist Douglas Kelley. Unlike past portrayals of the trials, this film focuses on Kelley, played by Rami Malek, who was tasked with evaluating captured Nazi leaders to ascertain their fitness for trial, as well as to keep them alive.
Kelley is depicted as an ambitious figure who sees an opportunity to document his findings in a book about the men who committed horrific atrocities, including a long series of interviews with notable figures such as Hermann Goering, portrayed by Russell Crowe. The film highlights the evolving dynamic between Kelley and Goering, suggesting a complex friendship that develops over their discussions.
“Nuremberg,” while exploring morally nuanced territory, brings to light contentious ideas about victor-led war tribunals, yet struggles to marry its dramatic storytelling with the stark historical realities it seeks to portray. Crowe’s performance as Goering allows audiences to see him as a charismatic yet manipulative figure steeped in arrogance, though the narrative raises questions about the integrity of portraying such a controversial character without delving deeper into his past transgressions.
With a robust ensemble cast, the film weaves various narratives leading up to the climactic courtroom scenes, featuring characters like Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson. The film balances these historical elements with dramatic storytelling, yet critiques emerge regarding the effectiveness of its climactic courtroom drama—some find it leaning into clichés and missing the gravity of the subject matter.
One of the most haunting aspects of “Nuremberg” is its use of actual footage from Nazi concentration camps, which serves as a chilling reminder of the atrocities committed during the war. This juxtaposition of historical fact and cinematic dramatization challenges viewers to confront the dark realities of human nature, as Kelley’s observations revealed that the Nazi leaders, despite their heinous acts, were disturbingly ordinary individuals.
Kelley’s subsequent publication, “22 Cells in Nuremberg,” conveyed his unsettling findings of these individuals being essentially normal men—his stark warning that America could be susceptible to a similar fate adds weight to the narrative’s relevance today.
Overall, “Nuremberg” serves not only as a dramatization of a critical historical moment but also as a conduit for reflecting on complex moral issues in contemporary society. As audiences engage with this portrayal, the film sparks crucial dialogues about justice, accountability, and the historical lessons that inform our current understanding of governance and human nature. The release of “Nuremberg” at a time when discussions of historical memory and accountability are particularly timely encourages viewers to contemplate the devastating consequences of inaction in the face of authoritarianism.