Judgement At Nuremberg

After hearing witnesses who often were tortured, mamed by sadistic doctors, and had their loved ones murdered, I can not grasp the fact that the majority of those on trial were released after serving minimal prison terms. Some of them are still among us, while millions of victims lie in their graves at the hands of an evil minority!

Stellar performances by an International cast. Most noteworthy are Montgomery Clift and Judy Garland as testifying victims, Maximilian Schell as Prosecutor (Oscar Winner), Marlene Dietrich as wife of a defendant, and an elderly Spencer Tracy, trying to make sense of it all.

Effective use of B&W photography, first rate sets and costumes, along with many other production values, make this a timeless Classic. Although considerd over-long by some, I recommend this film to be shown to high school classes as a reminder that these things happened in a not so distant past.*****

Back in the pre-Schindler era, this film possessed considerable mana as one of the most effective of the early films dealing with Nazi war crimes--rather surprising, considering it was produced and directed by the mediocre Stanley Kramer, auteur of any number of simplistic '50s "social problem" pictures.

Part of the film's power comes from its narrow focus: it deals with the little-known 1948 "judge's trial" rather than the earlier trials of the regime's big figures, allowing the film to concentrate on matters of justice rather than more sensational aspects.

But most of the credit goes to the actors, who do an outstanding job virtually without exception, easily overcoming the film's slow pace and Kramer's obvious directorial failings. Of the principals, Tracy and Dietrich turn in effective variations of their customary roles of the period, the low-key man of decency and the aging but still potent high-class femme. Widmark is very fine here; this is one of his few "good-guy" roles that allowed him to utilize the obsessive qualities apparent in his sociopath portrayals. Too bad he didn't do more like this.

But the two outstanding performances are Clift and Lancaster. Clift plays a man driven mad by his suffering under the Nazis, in a portrayal that is excruciating to watch (with our knowledge that it reflects Clift's own personal agonies) and utterly unforgettable, for all that it lasts a total of fifteen minutes or so. Lancaster, as Dr. Emil Jannings, is another matter. He says almost nothing for the first hour-and-a-half of the film, but his presence dominates proceedings all the same. And when he at last speaks, his portrayal of a man clinging to the last shreds of dignity, knowing he has not earned them and does not deserve them, is nearly as harrowing as Clift's. Beginning with "All My Sons" in the 40s, Lancaster did a number of pictures on this level when he wasn't playing acrobats or cowboys. It would be nice for some Amazonite to put together a List.

(It should be noted that this is probably your sole opportunity to see William Shatner in a role in which he does not overact. In a just world the secret behind this, which Kramer kept to himself, would have been turned over to the UN for distribution to the international film community.)

In the end, "Nuremberg" does not match its subject. No film could, but Kramer's implication that his particular brand of earnest liberalism is the antidote to government terror comes across as especially inane. It didn't help in Germany, and it wouldn't help anywhere else. But revealing what doesn't work paves the way toward discovering what does. On that level, at least, "Nuremberg" is a worthwhile effort.