Nuremberg

There’s something very captivating and satisfying about being in a cinema and being completely immersed in the moment. Not thinking about where the storyline is going and not being able to predict what happens next.  Just completely enthralled and seized by intensity.  It’s a very different emotion from when you’re rooting for a hero or feeling as if you want the protagonist to get away when they are in a chase. It’s a complete surrender. 

Director screenwriter James Vanderbilt‘s historical drama Nuremberg did just that for me.  And yet it’s impossible to watch without thinking about today; from genocides, to wars, and state repressions happening and whether those responsible will ever be held accountable.

You will think about these crimes while watching Nuremberg, because that sort of thing is discussed at length—along with human rights violations, war crimes, and the process by which a state’s dehumanization of certain classes of citizen can lead to dictatorship, then genocide.

The title refers to where the four Allied nations teamed up to defeat Nazi Germany gathered to try its leaders. Concepts of international law and rules of war had been evolving for thousands of years by then. But the concept of crimes against humanity hadn’t been codified.

There was a large Allied faction that thought the Nazi leadership and perhaps Nazis further down the ranks as well should just be put against a wall and shot. A firing squad would have been faster and cheaper than a globally televised trial, and the architects of the first mechanized genocide wouldn’t have been able to twist media coverage of the event which included radio broadcasts to spread their ideas.

Nuremberg is based on The Nazi and the Psychiatrist, a nonfiction book by Jack El-Hai about the relationship between Hermann Goring played by Russell Crowe, the highest-ranking surviving Nazi at Nuremberg, and American psychiatrist Douglas Kelley played by Rami Malek, who was brought to Nuremberg to evaluate imprisoned Nazi leaders and determine if they were fit to stand trial.

Kelley wanted to dissect evil by determining whether members of the Nazi high command shared a psychiatric condition that led them to commit unspeakable atrocities, such as the Holocaust. He questioned if the Aryan gene was different or what made these men whose orders caused millions of deaths indeed felt or held responsibility for their actions. But his motives weren’t pure: he also figured he’d get a bestselling book out of the experience.

The movie begins with Göring’s arrest and gets us into the story by following the efforts of Supreme Court associate justice attempts to convince President Harry Truman’s administration to try the Nazis. We get details about the Nuremberg prison and the courtroom; the then-recent history of Nuremberg, Germany and Europe; and the escalation of crimes against state-decreed enemies. But the strange relationship between Kelley and Göring forms the spine of the story. Both actors are exceptional.

Crowe shows us why he’s a brilliant performer, settling into the high-powered character with complete ease, even though we know the man’s a killer.

Malek has an uncanny ability to connect with viewers’ emotions. And his work as Kelley confirms the best he’s done in a feature film.

Malek communicates Kelley’s internal struggles largely through his reactions during conversations and when he’s watching the trial unfold as a listener in the foreground where

Kelley tries to bond with Göring by providing a rapt audience for his monologues and anecdotes.  He later even becomes a courier for correspondence between Göring and his family, who are in hiding.

Malek plays the character as a smart, charming, confident guy.  He does this without overemphasizing Kelley’s earlier obliviousness or late-stage anger and shame.

Trying to make sense of the devil is a risky move. But the way Göring reels in everyone, even a man whose job is understanding psychology, shows how dictators and their minions seize power from people who fancy themselves too smart to get played.

Nuremberg confirms why, even after the trial, it was easy to draw new generations to fascism, the very thing that the Nuremberg architects hoped the public exposure and punishment of the Nazis would prevent.

I won’t go on because there is so much material that unfolds with a phenomenal cast of polished actors. Yet with the Golden Globe nominations, the film is not a contender.  Hollywood cares so much for being politically correct that they has become politically dim-witted. 

This is a solid, intelligent film: an earnest, unpretentious Oscar Movie that doesn’t try to be too complex or arty. It wants to educate and inspire as well as entertain, and it’s very effective at making a case for specific contemporary outcomes while seeming to be just a dramatization of history. At one point, a character tells us that it “happened here” because “the people made it happen, because they didn’t stand up until it was too late.” He’s talking about Germany, and in my opinion, that statement reflects the world we live in today.