There is no shortage of films and documentaries already made about WWII and the holocaust, so the trick for filmmakers is to find a fresh angle to tell the story. James Vanderbilt found his angle for Nuremberg via a book by American journalist Jack El-Hai’s The Nazi and the Psychiatrist, which highlights the relationship between American psychiatrist Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) and Hermann Göering (Russell Crowe).

While Stanley Kramer’s Oscar-winning classic Judgment at Nuremberg (1961) depicts the legal and political drama of the International Military Tribunal, this film explores the psychological and personal side of the proceedings through Kelley’s eyes, though the trial itself is depicted in the third act. The film began with Göering surrendering to American Forces in May 1945 in Austria as he was fleeing his home in Bavaria.

Crowe depicts Göering as a captivating character, showcasing both his charm and menacing nature. However, anyone possessing a basic awareness of WWII history can see its dreadful legacy. He was a crucial figure in the establishment of concentration camps, the exclusion of German Jews from the economic framework, and the execution of the systematic “Aryanization” policy that took over Jewish properties and enterprises.

There is almost a 20-year age gap between Göering and Kelley, represented accurately by Malek and Crowe, who are 17 years apart in age. Kelley served as the young army psychiatrist assigned to assess the mental competence of the German defendants set to be tried at Nuremberg. In contrast, Göering was the highest-ranking Nazi facing trial there. It’s both intriguing and disconcerting to observe how calm and composed Göering appeared during his trial, especially when contrasted with the other war criminals who showed clear signs of distress.

From the very beginning of his assignment, Kelley was evidently captivated, even charmed by Göering. Initially, he had a translator with him, Sgt. Howie Triest (Leo Woodall), but as Kelley rightly suspected that Göering was proficient in English, he began to leave Triest out of their discussions. Their talks became rather intimate, fostering a sense of trust for Kelley. The tale of how Göering was named after a Jewish businessman and a long-time family friend is intriguing yet unsettling, as an early betrayal could have ignited his hatred towards the Jewish people. Triest himself holds a secret that’s revealed in an emotional scene with Kelley towards the end.

Crowe and Malek are the film’s leads and MVPs. The ensemble cast is packed with respected and skilled actors, yet not everyone is particularly memorable. I can’t help but chuckle when I first saw  Michael Shannon in the trailer as he played the villainous General Zod to Crowe’s righteous Jor-El, aka Superman’s dad, in Man of Steel; now the roles are reversed. Shannon is solid but serviceable as Robert H. Jackson, the prosecuting attorney at Nuremberg, just as Richard E. Grant is as the British prosecuting counsel. Meanwhile, John Slattery‘s performance as the prison commandant is amusingly over the top, while Lotte Verbeek stands out as Emmy, Göring’s wife, the sole prominent female character in the film.

This marks Vanderbilt’s second feature following Truth, and he has chosen to delve into another historical drama. The initial two acts, which showcase the cat-and-mouse dynamic between Kelley and Göering, are captivating. Ironically, the energy dips a bit as the narrative progresses to the Nuremberg trial itself. Similar to the 1961 film, Vanderbilt includes actual footage of Nazi concentration camps, used as evidence of the Holocaust, during the trial scenes. He presents this footage in its raw form, without any musical score to divert our attention or sway our emotions. The chilling imagery still strikes me hard—the heaps of corpses, a gaunt human figure… these are sights we must never become numb to, as history has a tendency to repeat itself.

While it’s crucial to highlight the horror of the Nazi atrocities, the presentation of the footage also halts the film’s momentum. It would be inappropriate to label this a buddy drama featuring a war criminal and his psychiatrist, yet the film truly shines when Crowe and Malek share the screen. Both possess a commanding presence, creating a compelling duo. We get one last scene of them together following the trial, providing a sense of closure to their battle of wits.

At nearly 2.5 hours, the film can feel excessively long and at times, quite tedious. It is handsomely mounted with period-appropriate set design, costumes, etc. Filmed in Budapest, the cinematography is both elegant and intimate. DP Dariusz Wolski’s use of close-up shots on the main characters effectively heightens the tension and creates an unexpected sense of closeness. This one is worth watching for its historical significance and Crowe’s outstanding performance. The Aussie thespian reminds us once more of his formidable acting chops, even if his German accent clearly reveals he’s not a native speaker.

While the plot may not deliver the same emotional gut-punch as The Zone of Interest, it also explores the banality of evil, suggesting that horrific acts are committed not by some supernatural force, but by ‘ordinary people’ motivated by ambition and unchecked desire for power. This theme is chillingly relevant in today’s political environment, with the rise of fascism and authoritarianism.

Nuremberg’s release amidst a hectic award season could potentially cause it to be overlooked, but I sincerely hope that viewers will take the time to watch it on streaming.

What are your thoughts on NUREMBERG?