Opinion ‘Nuremberg’ Review: Inside the Nazi Mind - This movie starring Rami Malek and Russell Crowe looks back at the trials and a psychiatrist who evaluated the defendants. Bonus Jewish malding: “They humanized the Nazis!”

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/06/movies/nuremberg-review.html
https://archive.is/Taehd
IMG_6780.webp
By Ben Kenigsberg
Nov. 6, 2025, 5:02 a.m. ET
Nuremberg Directed by James Vanderbilt∙Biography, Drama, History, Thriller, War∙PG-13∙2h 28m

The principal psychological contest in “Nuremberg,” a drama about the Nazi war crimes trials, takes place not in the courtroom but in a jail, where an American psychiatrist, Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek), tries to pick the brains of the defendants.

Officially, Kelley, a U.S. Army major, has the task of ensuring that these members of the Nazi elite remain mentally fit for trial. But he also has a professional interest in understanding how their minds work. “If we could psychologically define evil, we could make sure something like this never happens again,” he excitedly explains to an interpreter, Sgt. Howard Triest (Leo Woodall).
But what Kelley finds, to his surprise, is that the Nazis aren’t unusual from a psychiatric perspective — that the horrors they perpetrated cannot be blamed on a uniquely German mass psychosis. Kelley even finds himself beginning to like Hermann Goering (Russell Crowe), Hitler’s second-in-command, who explicitly confides in him as a friend.

Goering is likely playing his own mind games, knowing that Kelley is torn between his duty as a soldier — to divulge information to the prosecutors — and his duty as a doctor, to maintain his patients’ privacy. Only in the film’s centerpiece, when Goering shields his eyes with sunglasses during a courtroom screening of concentration camp footage, does Kelley seem to realize what a monster he has warmed to.

Stanley Kramer’s “Judgment at Nuremberg” (1961), based on later trials, relied on purely fictional characters to make its points. The ostensibly more responsible “Nuremberg” uses real names and places, but it leans on contrivances so heavily it might as well have gone the Kramer route. That’s a disappointment, because the movie was written and directed by James Vanderbilt, the screenwriter of “Zodiac,” adapting a book by Jack El-Hai. That 2007 film streamlined a complicated set of personalities and facts into a thrilling procedural. “Nuremberg” struggles to make dramatic sense of an even denser mass of material.

Instead, we get egregiously undisguised exposition (“Jesus Christ, that’s Hermann Goering!” an American says when Goering pulls up in a Mercedes and surrenders in the opening scene); characters conveniently forgetting their obligations (Kelley drunkenly blabs his doubts about the prosecution’s abilities to a journalist); and basic information, like Triest’s identity as a German-born Jew, being withheld until Vanderbilt can deploy it as a surprise.

The other main thread follows the Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon, in the film’s least embarrassing performance), who served as the chief prosecutor for the United States, and his efforts to establish a legal basis for the tribunal. The scene in which he personally accuses Pope Pius XII of hypocrisy to pressure him into supporting the trials is just one of many interludes that strain credulity, at least as played.

And while the real Jackson is often said to have had trouble pinning down Goering during cross-examination, even a cursory glance at the real-life transcript reveals that what took place was not as hapless as what transpires onscreen. Fortunately, Jackson has the British prosecutor David Maxwell-Fyfe (Richard E. Grant) to bail him out. “I couldn’t beat him — not without help,” Jackson tells Kelley after the Goering ordeal. Evidently, as this muddled movie tells it, the climactic lesson of the Nuremberg trials was that America had a friend, too.

Nuremberg
Rated PG-13. Footage and descriptions of Nazi atrocities. Running time: 2 hours 28 minutes. In theaters.

Nuremberg​

Director James Vanderbilt
Writers James Vanderbilt, Jack El-Hai
Stars Russell Crowe, Rami Malek, Michael Shannon, Richard E. Grant, Colin Hanks
Rating PG-13
Running Time 2h 28m
Genres Biography, Drama, History, Thriller, War

Bonus Malding courtesy of r/Jewish
IMG_6781.jpeg
IMG_6782.jpeg
 
“If we could psychologically define evil, we could make sure something like this never happens again,” he excitedly explains to an interpreter
Jews are mad about this film? It sounds like the typical Marvel movie morality that we hear about WW2 mixed with Hannah Arendt. "The Nazis are evil, but it's a banal evil you see, that's why they seem normal! Anyway we're justified in torturing and then hanging them because the holocaust." Snore.
 
After seeing so much SJW BS-ing and overuse of "Nazi" by the "woke" cult in the past decade, when I saw the headline I thought the article was gonna be about non-SJWs today.
 
From that trailer i'd say they managed to come up with something even worse than that nuremberg film from 2000 with alec baldwin that had brian cox as goering and bizarrely kept calling wilhelm keitel an admiral
 
From that trailer i'd say they managed to come up with something even worse than that nuremberg film from 2000 with alec baldwin that had brian cox as goering and bizarrely kept calling wilhelm keitel an admiral
So, your average true Hollywood movie. Inherit the wind, birdman of alcatraz, kingdom of heaven, and many many more, the number of movies I have seen that follow the book or History, I think I can count on one hand.
 
They were human? And very intelligent. If you are all about the "never again" thing, we need to understand what makes normal intelligent family people do evil things.
It’s 2025 and people have the emotional intelligence of toddlers. They need cartoon villains and revisionism like in Inglorious Bastards not nuance. Like that one Hitler tv movie where he was a dog abusing psychopath.
 
Jews are mad about this film? It sounds like the typical Marvel movie morality that we hear about WW2 mixed with Hannah Arendt. "The Nazis are evil, but it's a banal evil you see, that's why they seem normal! Anyway we're justified in torturing and then hanging them because the holocaust." Snore.
Jews were mad at Downfall for portraying Hitler like a broken down, delusional old man at the end of the war.

Anything short of portraying nazis as rabid monsters - ala The Pianist throwing wheelchair jews out of the window - causes them to kvetch.
 
Breaking news: Kikes malding because newest (((hollywood))) slop isin't just a jewish muderporn film where the fash is bashed to cope with the fact that they got raped in ww2.
 
I see they, and not just for this movie, heard "History is a group of lies agreed upon" and accelerated that to infinity.
By this time next century there won't be any factual history left- just Karen tantrums and agreed-upon taboos like in the days of religious extremism and empirical evidence being king.

The more things change.
 
They were human? And very intelligent. If you are all about the "never again" thing, we need to understand what makes normal intelligent family people do evil things.

Thats the punchline. Commies, Nazis, they're all people you pass by on the streets everyday under different circumstances. The militant antifascists are the ones who would be the manning the camps in another timeline. Outright cartoon characters are rare. Its humans who make the vast majority of history. If theres anything we should learn about from WWI-II or war in general its this and some yet some people get pissed if you say this simple truth.
 
It’s 2025 and people have the emotional intelligence of toddlers. They need cartoon villains and revisionism like in Inglorious Bastards not nuance. Like that one Hitler tv movie where he was a dog abusing psychopath.
Aside from the fact that I believe we should really have a moratorium on anything Nazi-related in the media for another 15 fucking years at least, I find it ironic that a lot of modern villains are made to be sympathetic and yet somehow if you even bother trying with Hilter, it starts the tantrum machine.

I'm not behind the idea that we should portray Hitler as sympathetic myself. Just that the modern conceptualization of villains is so laughable that it's a wonder anyone tells a different story anymore.
 
Bonus Jewish malding: “They humanized the Nazis!”
They did it back in 1945. Jews had inflicted the rapy on the world, but after WW2 whytoids turned it against them.

The prison experiment (Zimbardo was a guido) and the electroshock experiment (Milgram was a joo specifically seeking to defend Eichmann when he was being tried in Israel -- he failed, Eichmann got the rope) are deliberate antisemitic lies.
 
Give it a few decades and Muslims will clutch their pearls when Netanyau is protrayed as a twisted human being instead of a bloodthristy monster who murdered countless Palestinians. Or something like that.

Also most documentaries will simply blend out the inconveniencies. Like how Dönitz lawyer made the US navy commander admit they were operating under the exact same rules when it came to ignoring survivors of sunken ships like the Kriegsmarine did after the Laconia incident. Or how they declared the Molotov Ribbentrop pact was fake to not embarass the Soviets only to have an American newspaper publish it a day later. Heck, from my understanding, many of the points brought up were never even a thing when WW2 started. Theoretically they should have prosecuted themselves as well. But again, history is written by the victors
 
Grifter movie

We already had a mini series about the Nuremberg trial

This is just a quick cash grab aimed towards people who call anyone they don't agree with a nazi
 
i'm sick and tired of pretending like the nazis were a world-ending evil that did absolutely everything wrong over shit that is relatively tame all things considered under a historical context
what israel has done to palestine is worse but no one sensible gives a shit because they're sand niggers
no one would give a shit over that entire conflict if jews weren't the most retarded people on earth who infiltrated the most powerful governments and organizations in the world just to force mass migrations of muslims into the west, turning their supporting countries into hostile ones over time

TL;DR: The Holocaust should've happened
 
i'm sick and tired of pretending like the nazis were a world-ending evil that did absolutely everything wrong over shit that is relatively tame all things considered under a historical context
The more bad things get in the West, the more Jews and their useful idiots need to double down the "Nazis bad" narrative to maintain the illusion them winning "would have been so much worse."

Your daughter got gangraped by a bunch of Pakis? If Germany had won, it could have been so much worse.

Your father got his throat cut by a nigger chimping out? If Germany had won, it could have been so much worse.

Your son was beaten into a coma by a migrant gang? If Germany had won, it could have been so much worse.

They never tell you how it would be worse precisely, but you have to trust them, it would have been so much worse than what we have now.
 
Back
Top Bottom