When I first started watching Nuremberg, I was expecting a straightforward depiction of what happened during the trials. Much to my surprise, the film went into much more depth than I originally anticipated. By lengthening the film, the directors were able to show the complicated dynamics between the Nazi war criminals and the prosecution in greater detail. I thought this aspect of the trial was incredibly important in showing the moral and legal challenges faced by both sides. Seeing the back and forth in court was extremely eye opening.
In general, I thought the attention to historical detail was also impressive. The effort they took to draw on the actual trial and create an atmosphere that would best reflect that period was noticeable. By depicting the ruined city of Nuremberg and the logistics of building the tribunal, the directors highlighted elements that often get overlooked. This attention to detail helped me better understand the complexity of the event, as well as the unprecedented nature of the trial. It felt as though this trial was the first of its kind, which it was. Likewise, I thought the film did a good job portraying characters like Goring as both reprehensible war criminals and highly charismatic individuals. This was most apparent in his relationship with Tex, where his personality hinted at what Nazi leadership might have looked like, even though it was likely dramatized for television audiences.
I also learned a great deal from the film about what it truly takes to prosecute evil, and what justice even looks like in these circumstances. Before watching, I was largely unaware of the process of setting up the tribunal in the first place. It was startling to think how much dedication must have gone into pulling off something this complex. The extent to which seemingly ordinary people were complicit in the Holocaust in general was a striking reminder of just how widespread responsibility was. As the film mentioned, a lot of Germany could have been tried for their crimes during the Holocaust. If justice was limitless, even more people should have been prosecuted.
On the other hand, there were also aspects of the film that I was not fond of. The most obvious shortcoming was the romantic subplot between Elsie and Robert Jackson, which felt like a distraction at times. I thought this relationship added nothing to the portrayal of the trial itself.
Furthermore, there was a lot of nuance and uncertainty that was either simplified or left out of the film. The importance of the Nuremberg Trials in shaping how war crimes are prosecuted is undeniable, yet the movie didn’t fully convey just how groundbreaking this trial was. I would have also liked to see more distinction between the Allied nations as well. For example, I truly find the Soviets’ role at Nuremberg to be fascinating given that one authoritarian regime is seemingly judging another.
Overall, the film really reminded me of how important trials can be in delegitimizing war criminals or politicians. The sentencing phase for example, although in my opinion not explored enough, was a reminder that each individual was responsible for the atrocities committed, even if they themselves did not kill anyone directly.
