Customer Reviews

Judgment at Nuremberg

5 star:		(89)
4 star:		(16)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

This is truly an astonishing movie. After seeing it one wonders that Spencer Tracy did not win the Academy Award for his performance here. Of course, another actor in the cast, Maxmillian Schell, playing the German defense attorney, did! In many ways the movie is the senior brother to "Schindler's List", acting to probe thoughtfully through the mist of euphemisms, excuses and exaggerations of the era. And sifting out some remarkable, memorable, and noble notions about what human beings should be held responsible for in terms of their social attitudes, civic behavior and public actions.

Ostensibly, the action takes place after the more sensational trials of the Nazi hierarchy, when the public appetite for blood, revenge, and harsh justice had been somewhat abated. Tracy plays a relatively obscure retired rural American judge called upon to act as one of the three presiding judges in overseeing the trials of prominent German jurists who had co-operated, collaborated, and then presided over the gradual civil drift from a nation whose conduct and laws were based on a corpus of jurisprudence to one characterized by crackpot eugenic policies, blatant racism, & officially-sanctioned violence and mayhem.

Burt Lancaster plays a pre-eminent German judge, one famed for his legal treatises and international reputation as a jurist. Through the prism of the testimony of both the judges on trial and their cross examination by a zealous American military prosecutor played masterfully by a young Richard Widmark, the viewer begins to understand much more about the slippery slope most of the jurists had unwittingly embarked upon. Add into this equation the introduction of a sensational set of key witnesses played by Judy Garland and Montgomery Clift, and the full emotional impact and profound significance of what these judges had allowed to happen truly gels.

This is an unforgettable and remarkably unique movie, truly a classic and cautionary tale based on the historical record of what the Germans did to each other, based on fact. And by the way, be sure to listen carefully to the final several scenes in which Tracy takes full advantage of several opportunities to cut through all the equivocations, half-truths, and "honest mistake" nonsense, literally electrifying the screen with the power of his monologue and his superb acting. He was truly one of a kind, too. Wow! Don't miss this

There's a serious and timeless theme to this award winning 1961 courtroom drama of four former Nazi judges on trial for war crimes in occupied Germany in 1948. It's not the story of the military leaders who had already been tried and convicted. Rather, these were the men who survived the war by following the laws that ruled the nation. There are deep moral questions here, such as what a judge's responsibility is. After all, judges do not make the laws; they just carry them out.

Stanley Kramer, the director, had great material to work with. The screenplay by Abby Mann was powerful. And the cast included some of the finest actors of the time. Spencer Tracy plays the judge, a widower from Maine with simple tastes. He's a bit embarrassed to be given a large house, formerly occupied by a high ranking Nazi officer whose surviving wife is played by Marlene Dietrich. The judge has a difficult job and he ponders it as he walks through the ruins of the city with wide-eyed wonder. How could all of the horror have happened? And who is responsible?

Responsibility, however, which is the theme of the film, is not so clear cut. And as the trial progresses, all the shades of gray involved in this concept are brought to light. Burt Lancaster is cast as one of the judges on trial, a dignified and respected man of the law. Richard Widmark is cast as the prosecuting attorney, a colonel who had personally been present at the liberation of the concentration camps. And Maximilian Schell, in an Academy Award winning performance, plays the part of the defending attorney whose outstanding legal expertise keeps shedding new light on the evidence. Judy Garland is one of the witnesses, and so is Montgomery Cliff. The entire cast is excellent. I found myself holding my breath as the twists and turns of the legal implications were examined with fine-honed brilliance.

The film takes up two videotapes and runs for three hours and six minutes and there is not one slow moment. I watched it with a sense of total involvement. I couldn't help but transpose all the legal and moral arguments to what is happening in our world today. And my own mind went though its own little debate as to the subtleties of right and wrong and the hard choices that must be made. This is drama at its finest. And a truly magnificent film. I give it my highest recommendation.

With an all star cast, Judgment at Nuremberg certainly delivers with powerful acting and great directing by Stanley Kramer.

Burt Lancaster portrays one of four-nazi judges convicted of war crimes at the Nuremberg trials. The year is 1948, two years since the main Nuremberg trials concluded and 3 years since World War 2 ended. Throughout the film, mention is made of the cold war. The invasion of Czechoslovakia and the Berlin Airlift are mentioned. Also, Emil Hahn (Played by Werner Klemperer, the future Colonel Klink) states, after he is sentenced, "...Tomorrow the Bolsheviks sentence you!" Speaking of perfromances, fine performances are also given by just about the entire cast, from Spencer Tracy as Judge Dan Heywood, to Montgomery Clift playing Rudolph Peterson, a victim of nazi atrocities. Judy Garland and Marlene Dietrich also give great performances. But it is Lancaster, Richard Widmark and Maxmilian Schell (Who won an Oscar for Best Actor) who steal the show.

In addition to everything listed above, the film's music fits it like a glove. The cinematography is also good. In addition, this version also includes the original theatrical trailer.

This is definately one of my ten favorites and deserves a spot in the collection of any film buff (It has a spot in mine).

Spencer Tracy stars as an American judge who travels to Germany in 1948 to take part in the Nuremberg trials. For eight months he chairs the panel trying four German judges, one of whom is respected scholar Burt Lancaster. Defense Attorney Maxmillian Schell makes the case that the men were simply following the law as written in Nazi Germany and cannot be held accountable for the brutality inflicted on those found guilty. Prosecutor Richard Widmark argues that the men knew what they were doing and understood the fate of those found guilty and that they acted inhumanely. Both men argue their cases well in a trial marked by emotion and great drama. Judgment at Nuremberg is a powerful movie, since it deals with atrocities and wounds that may never be completely healed. It also deals with a fundamental question that surrounds war: Are people who are simply following orders (or the law as it exists in their country) to be held responsible for their actions and the fate of those they affect. The film's screenplay is sharp, honest, and makes points on both sides, although emotion certainly affects how one answers the questions it raises. More than anything, however, this movie is about acting. Tracy is the rock that centres the film, the weight of his characters decisions ever present on his face and in his motions. Schell and Widmark have plenty of chances to set off fireworks as the lawyers, and they take full advantage of the opportunity. Lancaster is quietly strong and imposing, never getting much dialogue, but establishing a presence throughout the whole film. Judy Garland and Montgomery Clift have brief scenes as victims of Nazi laws who testify against the defendants. Both actors give outstanding performances, almost uncomfortable to watch they are so real. Marlene Dietrich as the widow of an executed Nazi general is also very strong in one of her last performances. Her scenes with Tracy are a joy to watch - two old pros who have seen a lot in their lives. Judgment at Nuremberg is a long film, but it never lags. Whether you simply watch it as a fine courtroom drama or take its messages about responsibility deeper, it is well worth watching. It deals with a part of our history we would probably like to forget, but never should.

"Judgment at Nuremberg" is Stanley Kramer's often stagy, often stoic, though never anything less than completely engrossing, post-WWII melodrama. It's high octane film making driven by star performances and masterfully scripted dialogue; a vital, tragic, yet overall life affirming message picture about the difference between abiding the law and doing what is just in an unjust world. The film stars Spencer Tracy as the honorable American Judge Dan Haywood, assigned to supervise the trial of four German justices, including Dr. Ernst Janning (Burt Lancaster) who have been accused of sending innocent men to their brutal deaths in Nazi concentration camps. Put up in the home of a former high ranking Nazi official, Haywood gains personal insight into the aftermath of Germany's political climate through his engagement of the servants (Ben Wright and Virginia Christine) and through a chance meeting with their former mistress, Madame Bertholt (Marlene Dietrich). But the real spark of this film is to be found in the mutual bitterness between passionate Defense Attorney Hans Rolfe (Maximilian Schell) and the pronouncedly defiant Colonel Tad Lawson (Richard Widmark), who serves as lead prosecutor. In a cameo appearance Judy Garland is remarkably heartbreaking as Irene Hoffman, a middle-aged frump whose fatherly relationship with a Jewish gentleman resulting in his death. Nominated for an astounding 11 Academy Awards, and winner of 2, "Judgment at Nuremberg" remains a benchmark of 60s cinema - a powerful and emotionally satisfying film for the ages.

Although MGM's DVD is NOT anamorphically enhanced, it delivers a very smooth image that will surely not disappoint. The B&W picture is remarkably clean, with minimal film grain, accurately rendered contrast levels, deep solid blacks and very clean whites. The audio has been remixed to 5.1 (the original mono is also included). The two are practically identical in their spatial separation and fidelity, though in the 5.1 mix the music track is decidedly the benefactor. Extras include a 20 minute thoroughly insightful featurette in which screenwriter Abby Mann and co-star Maximilian Schell speak of their experiences on the film. Both are so well spoken and frank that they put many a new audio commentary track to shame with their genuine ability to talk on cue. Also included is a 15 minute tribute to Stanley Kramer that is very nicely done, if all too brief. A photo gallery, theatrical trailer and promotional junket materials round out the extras.

Judgment at Nuremberg started off as television movie. It was adapted and expanded for the big screen.

Spencer Tracey heads the star studded cast as American justice Dan Haywood. The Nuremberg trials have been going on for a while and all the high profile cases have been decided. Left are the minor defendants.

What writer Abby Mann has decided to explore is where does the blame and responsibility stop. He explores it from two points of view, minor officials and the general citizens.

Dan Haywood knows that he wasn't the first choice, nor even the tenth. But he is going to take his job as serious as if he was the first choice.

The defendants are judges Emil Hahn (Werner "Hogan's Heroes" Klemperer), Friederich Hoffsteder, Werner Lamper and Ernst Janning (Burt Lancaster).

The prosecutor (Richard Widmark) is US Army and the defense attorney (Maximilian Schell) is a young German attorney/

The key witnesses are Rudolph Peterson (Montgomery Clift), a slightly slow baker's helper who was sterilized and Irene Hoffman (Judy Garland), who as a girl was sterilized for consorting with a Jew - the man was executed.

Justice Haywood tried to understand the public atmosphere through his servants and the woman who used to live at the house he is living at, Mrs. Bertol (Marlene Dietrich).

This film brings up many questions of when do you follow the law and when do you go refuse to enforce or follow unjust laws. The original teleplay was written just after the McCarthy hearings. This was a direct attack on what happened during the hearings. But it has grown to something bigger. The basic premise is when can you follow blatantly unjust laws and say you were just following orders.

In a time when people are asked to follow leaders blindly without question, this film makes you think twice.

Add to this stunning performances all around. Spencer Tracey is the greatest film actor of all time, this was one of his final films and showed that he was as still one of the best. Maximilian Schell was a virtual unknown and this made him a star in America. Burt Lancaster was at the top of his stardom and took a small but pivotal role. It was a great triumph for him and the film. But the best and biggest surprise was Judy Garland who gave a shattering performance and should have won the Academy Award.

No one who watches this film will be unmoved.

DVD EXTRAS:
In Conversation: Abby Mann and Maximilian Schell - A 19 minute interview with the writer and the actor about the original 1959 Playhouse 90 television production, the subsequent 1961 film and the 2003 Broadway production.

The Value of a Single Human Being - This is a 6 minute tirade by Abby Mann comparing McCarthyism to the Nazis. I am not saying that he does not make a lot of salient points but it loses a little bit in the presentation.

A Tribute to Stanley Kramer - A 14 minute tribute to Kramer by his wife Karen and writer Abby Mann. They principally talk about Nuremberg but other Kramer films are discussed.

4.5 stars. About five years ago I was in a Spencer Tracy mode, going out of my way to watch any film he had done, when I came across this gem of a film from 1961 called "Judgement at Nuremberg." The best aspects of this film are the incredible script, a phenomenal cast, and an inspired director named Stanley Kramer. The first time I saw this film I was in equal parts shocked and moved by all the excellent acting and enthralled with the magnificent screenplay. I cannot emphasize enough how well written the script is. Also, the cast is exceptional with standout performances from Spencer Tracy, Judy Garland, Maximilian Schell, and an amazing short scene from Montgomery Clift which got him an Oscar nomination for less than ten minutes screen time. All the actors here have their moments, the only slightly overdone performance coming from Burt Lancaster who conveys the proper emotional context to the fantastic words he is given, but he simply cannot speak properly with a German accent. Then there are a couple of moments shot on sound sateges with the actors speaking their lines in automobiles with a fake backdrop moving behind them; one of which was completely unnecessary. These two scenes standout mostly because the rest of the film is so honest and genuine and subsequently they feel manufactured and plastic. This film was nominated for 11 Oscars, winning 2 for Best Actor(Maximilian Schell) and Best Adapted Screenplay, respectively. The special features on this DVD are non-essentials. The most annoying being a conversation between Maximilian Schell and screenwriter Abby Mann where they basically praise each other for ten minutes or so for their contributions to the film. "No, no...your contribution was more important." "No, yours was more important." etc. This is a very solid film at a very good price. Just skip the special features section beacuse there is simply nothing special about it. Thank you.

Fascism is defined in the American Heritage dictionary as "a system of government that exercises a dictatorship of the extreme right, typically through the merging of state and business leadership, together with belligerent nationalism."

Burt Lancaster's character, Ernst Janning, explains in his defense that the people of Germany remained silent "for love of country", and many other of their actions were motivated by that highest regard of theirs for their country. They remained silent when their neighbors disappeared at night, when innocent people were denied their rights etc. under the Nazi's administrations. The Nuremberg trials were held over a period of four years; there were thirteen different trials in all. This movie is based on the third military tribunal which tried judges and other legislative officials who sentenced people to death, deportation, or prison because of violation of laws enacted by the Nazis. The script was written by Abby Mann who won an Oscar for Best Writing; Maximilian Schell won an Oscar for Best Actor in a leading role. The Austrian born actor had worked with Clift before in Young Lions which also featured Marlon Brando. Most of the characters in the movie are fictional, though some, Judy Garland's role and Burt Lancaster's, were based on actual persons, yet the names were changed. I highly recommend that this movie be seen and that web sites on the subject be looked at, in that there is so much material to those trials that this 3 hour long movie couldn't contain. The trials were unique in many ways. The framework for these trials was suggested as early as September of 1944 by a Colonel in the U.S. War Department. Nuremberg was where the Nazis held their war rallies and where the Nuremberg Laws regarding citizenship and race were enacted in 1935 and was the chosen site for the 13 trials; the Justice Case, which this movie is based on, was governed by Military Tribunal III in 1947.

The acting is superb in this movie; I, personally, thought Judy Garland's was the most stellar, was moved to tears by her defense of herself accused of having a physical relationship with a non-Aryan, in her case, a jew, in violation of the Nuremberg Laws. The filming is very effective too; this 1961 movie was filmed in black and white which is fitting given the mood and atmosphere of the setting; Nuremberg was in ruins, 90% of its buildings had been destroyed, and the mood of its citizens in the war's aftermath and looming trial dark indeed.

I think this film, more than its 2000 counterpart, best reveals the sentiments of the Germans post war, mainly through Judge Haywood's (Spencer Tracy) interactions with Germans he came in contact with, for example, the servants of the innkeeper who housed him during the trial. Also, the feelings of the Germans were also effectively expressed by Lancaster's character and Schell's during the trial. Judge Haywood is fair minded and commends Mr. Rolfe (Maximilian Schell), the defense attorney for the 16 Nazi defendants, for his logical skills, agreeing with some of the things he said. Yet, he then goes on to say that in consideration of the crimes "to be logical is not to be right." In meeting with Ernst Janning at the trial's end, Judge Haywood accepts the gift of Janning's court papers, yet is not swayed by the logic that Janning had no idea that millions of people had been killed the way they had been. Judge Haywood replies, "it came to that the first time you sentenced to death a man you knew to be innocent". Hans Rolfe (Schell) stated that the blame for the crimes should be shared by everyone all over the world who supported Hitler financially, materially, or spiritually, for example, the Vatican, American industrialists, and others who shared Hitler's ideology. Yet, historically, German military officers condoned the Armenian genocide of WWI and as early as 1903, funded by the Deutsche Bank, were working on completing a railway going from Baghdad to Berlin, see Sander's The High Walls of Jerusalem.

The footage shown during the trial of concentration camp atrocities was the actual film shown on November 29, 1945 in the first trial which is the subject matter for Nuremberg, the film of 2000. The list is too long to mention the many ways the Nazis terrorized their own citizens; the other testimony in this trial was of Mr. Petersen (Monty Clift) who is sterilized because the Nazis, in their Spartan approach to citizenship, would sterilize the mentally infirm, disabled, or non-Aryan, in order to obtain a pure race. (Violence against homosexuals in Nazi Germany began on June 30, 1934 when a military officer, Ernst Rohm, an SA chief of staff, was murdered by Himmler and Goring, an event nicknamed "the night of the long knives"; Clift had only one male partner all his life, so his role was fitting in that gays under Hitler were undoubtably similarly abused).

Of the 16 men tried, 10 were found guilty, 4 were acquitted. The other 2 were seriously ill, one dying before the verdict. My favorite statement of Judge Haywood, at the trial's end, was that the decisions were a result of "what we (the tribunal) stand for: justice, truth, and the value of a single individual". This movie is a MUST SEE.

I saw this film for the first time a few days ago and it will stay with me a long time. Are you embarrassed to think that you've read and seen enough already about the Holocaust? This film is only tangentially about the Holocaust. It is mostly about how morality shifts depending on who is in power and who wins the war, and how easy it is to accuse others of crimes that most of us under similar circumstances might commit or ignore. It is about standing up and saying out loud that you have made a terrible mistake. It is about not going along with the prevailing winds just because you tell yourself you'll try to do better later.

The film is in black and white, which gives it a semi-docuemtary look,
There are interesting shots, including zoom close ups used to great dramatic effect. The actors never gave better performances, including
Montgomery Clift, Judy Garland, and of course Spencer Tracy. Maxmillian Schell was fifth or sixth in billing for the film, yet he won the Oscar for the thankless role of being a defense attorney for German judges on trial in 1947 for committing crimes against humanity because they worked for and supported the Nazi regime. This was a second-string trial, the famous criminals like Hess had already been tried and convicted. Yet, Spencer Tracy's character, as head of the military court tribunal (written a little too nobly perhaps)takes this trial, and its implications, as seriously as if it had been the first time the issues of complicity and "just following orders" had ever been raised. The film is 3 hours long and yet moves right along, and there are few slow moments. I'm not sure if the Marlene Dietrich character (widow of an executed Nazi general) was essential to the story, but it was entertaining to watch Dietrich and Tracy play off each other. Watch them in the coffee-drinking scene in her apartment. This is still a great film, equally for the story and the issues it raises, and for the cinematic techniques and choices.

I have only seen this movie once, and I only wish to see it once. It is a terrific, terrific movie--one of the most unflinching and riviting movies I have ever seen. But it is a very difficult movie to watch. Once is enough; I feel as though I have been run through a ringer.

Three small things bother me: First, Stanley Kramer's directing is often times stunning, startlingly so. But in a few very prominent cases it is distracting, especially during the 360 degree courtroom shots. Second, the script has an annoying habit of tying scenes together with visual puns. For instance, there is a scene in which Marlene Dietrich begins to pour a cup of coffee which quickly cuts to another scene where a fellow finishes pouring his cup of coffee. I find this habit odd and unnecessary. This is a serious work of art--and a highly successful work of art. It does not benefit much at all from such pointless cleverness: the subject matter does not call for bludgening the viewer with visual puns. Third, I cannot stand William Shatner's performance. It is hollow and unconvincing. This is a small matter, however, in light of the rest of the movie.

Aside from these really quite small objections--annoyances, really--I found the movie to be practically irreproachable. It is a film everyone ought to see: an amazing achievement as an artwork and also as a document. It handles the complexities of these trials, and the confused emotional atmosphere that went with them, to incredible vicarious affect. I recommend this movie without significant reservation to absolutely anyone--we all must consider the questions that this movie raises if we are ever really to move beyond the twentieth century.