Rate It
|
||||||||||||||||
Rating Averages
My Friends |
Not rated. () |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
All Flixster |
(1220) |
925 |
3530 |
Female |
(399) |
302 |
1153 |
Male |
(821) |
623 |
2377 |
More Like This
If you liked this, then you'll also probably like...
Got another recommendation for someone who liked this movie? Add it to the list!
Got an opinion? Use the buttons to vote on all the suggestions people have added.
If lots of people vote, the best suggestions will rise to the top.
| Inherit the Wind (50%) |
|
|
|---|---|---|
| The Grey Zone (75%) |
|
|
| 12 Angry Men (Twelve Angry Men) (62%) |
|
|
| Pirates of the Caribbean: At Worlds End (17%) |
|
|
| Sophie Scholl: The Final Days (60%) |
|
|
Plot: In 1948, an American court in occupied Germany tries four Nazi judges for war crimes.
Meet Other Fans
Recent Reviews
-
MCT:August 18, 2008This is a fictionalized telling of the Nuremberg Trials that took place a while after World War II. Basically, the trials attempted to determine if people were responsible for crimes committed by the state. The trial scenes are pretty good, but this movie has tons of stuff outside of court that seems to have little relevance. While it does give the characters more depth, I'm not sure it was necessary as the movie was quite long (over 3 hours). The last scenes in court were very well-done and left a good final impression, but unfortunately the movie continued for another 10 to 15 minutes which sort of soured that.
The acting in this film was outstanding. Marlene Dietrich was pretty good in a role that is probably a starring role. The film also had Spencer Tracy who was quite good and was the most important character in the film. He was nominated for best actor but did not win. The winner that year was Maximilian Schell who was also in this film. Not often does a film get two nominations for best leading actor, but they were both good. I'm not sure who I would have given it to. Schell was probably better, but less important than Tracy. The film also has Judy Garland and Montgomery Cliff who were both outstanding although their roles weren't very big. They both received nominations for best supporting actor but did not win, probably because their roles were too small.
Excellent acting notwithstanding, I wasn't particularly fond of this film. While its use of actual footage of concentration camps is historically significant as the public had not seen much of this footage at the time, the film itself is just too long and has too many irrelevant scenes for it to be great.
70/100
C-
UP NEXT: Strangers on a Train. -
MCT:June 16, 2008
Well cast and acted, plus surprising cameos (William Shatner). Excellent look at Germany post-WWII and the start of the Cold War and how different groups react. How nobody wants to take responsibility for their role with the Nazi's. Worth a watch for a different perspective on this time period.
-
MCT:June 12, 2008Inexplicably this lost the Best Picture Oscar to West Side Story. A movie about the Nazi trials, with a fantastic cast, a great screenplay, and an important message attached to it lost to an overly-long, tedious musical that only has two great performances, a couple decent songs, and a few instances of amazing choreography. I don't understand it. Was the scene where real footage of the concentration camps aftermath too much? I know it is for me. I never watch it entirely. Other than that one sequence, the movie is consistently engaging. The performances from Tracy, Dietrich, Garland, and Clift are mesmerizing. Schell won the Best Actor Oscar, but, in my opinion, he delivers the second weakest performance in the film, not that it's bad, it's just not as good as the others (Lancaster being the worst as he mistakes sulking for old age). Garland and Clift are the best though. When Garland gets so emotional that she shakes the witness stand or when Clift screams out about his being feeble minded, I am moved. I forget that I'm watching Garland and Clift and believe in them as people.
-
MCT:April 14, 2008A cast of legends and an excellent screenplay made easier for Stanley Kramer to achieve such powerful and compelling courtroom drama. A film that any person should have the opportunity to watch, especially the world leaders.
-
MCT:March 19, 2008
brilliant performances, especially a poweful one from Maximilian Schell as the defence attorney and a cameo by Judy Garland
-
MCT:November 25, 2007The films Judgment at Nuremburg and Inherit the Wind aren't so much artistic experiences as polemic ones. Although both movies hang their hat on historical events, neither film is actually about the surface events in the film. Directed by the same man and released within a year of each other, their purpose was to get audiences rooting for the forces of reason, and oppose the irrationality of the herd mentality Judgment at Nuremburg is about a fictional trial of German judges who let themselves be swept up in the ethnic hatred promoted by the Nazis, delivering verdicts that they had decided upon before the trials over violations of racial purity laws had even begun. The film was written as a reaction against McCarthyism, which had gripped America for a decade and burned out just five years before the film. The film intended to show the danger of movements of mass hysteria, and how easy it is for an entire society to commit atrocities in the name of defending their country. The movie's tactics are heavy-handed. You can almost see the defense attorney getting rabid as he uses the same vicious illogic to attack the prosecution's witnesses as he used to shred the defense's witnesses when he prosecuted defendants on behalf of the Third Reich. If that weren't obvious enough, the movie drives the point home with a monologue from one of the defendants about how the judges lied to themselves -- first to protect their country from the Russian threat, then to save themselves at the expense of innocent people. A modern American audience might be entitled shake their heads at the absurdity of Nazism and McCarthyism, if it weren't for the same phenomenon taking place today, with Muslim terrorists being the scapegoats and justification for a range of brutalities and civil rights restrictions.
Inherit the Wind is, on the surface, about the famous Scopes evolution-teaching trial in Tennessee in the 1930's. The movie paints a stark portrait of those enlightened by science and the ability to think for themselves as oppressed by those caught in the mindless vise-grip of fundamental Christianity. There is some sparkling courtroom dialog between the two leads, but the point was clearly to portray the fundamentalists as idiotic buffoons. While I'm all in favor of putting facts ahead of faith, caricaturing opponents of your viewpoint may make good propaganda, but it's terrible drama. Despite this, the movie is instructive about the constancy of this particular struggle, since it continues today, using the same arguments on both sides. In fact, the divide between the rationalists and religionists is arguably worse today, as both camps diverge on a growing number of fundamental values.
My reactions to these movies was not so much to like them or dislike them, but to despair over the fact that as a nation and as human beings, we continue the insanely destructive patterns depicted 45 years ago. It seems that we have learned nothing from our past, or perhaps, as human beings, we are simply locked into a limited set of behaviors that doom us. -
MCT:October 30, 2007
Même si je me suis mépris sur la nature de ce film, il faut dire que mon choix fut loin d'être décevant. Croyant au tout début en un assemblage de commentaires, d'extraits vidéos et de reconstitution du fameux Procès de Nuremberg, je me suis vite retrouvé sur les bras avec une histoire fictionnelle sur Nuremberg, un semblant de reconstitution qui a pris son lot de libertés face à l'histoire originale. Et, comble de surprise, ce film était 153e dans le top 250 d'IMDB.
Bien que cette reconstitution façonnée ait insinué quelques doutes dans ma mémoire historique, il faut dire que les dialogues sont majestueusement écrits, et les personnages sont définis d'une façon extraordinaire. D'ailleurs, le trio d'acteurs principal est tout simplement majestueux, et ce n'est pas pour rien l'acteur allemand Schell a emporté son premier Oscar suite à cette performance. -
MCT:October 28, 2007
Tracy plays a judge in postwar Germany who presides over the Nuremberg trials. Deitrich plays the German widow with an interest in Tracy who truly felt that Germany wasn't essentially a bad place. Heartwrenching.
-
MCT:September 24, 2007
I want to start by saying that I was immediately captured by the dialogues that take place in this movie.
Stanley Kramer is a genious! It is not only a movie where we can awe at great performances, since we can capture an enormous and interesting moral and ideological dilemma. Monologues are just splendid and totally believable, or should I say unbelievable to just how great they are. They are able to capture the viewer and it makes you not to want to let go.
But that's not all, as you watch the film and you listen to the dialogues, questions start to pop in your head, and the viewer is able to start making conclusions. It doesn't defend an specific position, it offers the viewer the choice to believe in what you want, providing us with moments of paradox, political implications and the power of persuasion.
I definitely fell in love with this movie. -
MCT:September 14, 2007
Quite brilliant. Some outstanding performances. An interesting look at German post-war consciousness.
-
MCT:August 19, 2007
Not only is Stanley Kramer's 'Judgment at Nuremberg' the best film regarding the subject matter of the Nuremberg Trials, but it is also a true classic and still one of the finest films ever made. The direction is especially brilliant, producing all round superb performance especially from Spencer Tracy and Burt Lancaster. This 3-hour long classic chronicles the events that unfolded at the Nuremberg Trials of 1948, when an American court tries four Nazi judges for war crimes against humanity. A retired American judge named Dan Haywood (Tracy) has a daunting task ahead of him. Of course the film is a true story, set just after the conclusion of World War II when Germany finally falls. Classics like these never get old. The performances are all sensational, the direction superb, and the production design is especially terrific. 'Judgment at Nuremberg' is a brilliant film; it is crafted so perfectly and is a compelling experience. My only complaint would be the overlong running time.
-
MCT:June 24, 2007
Great movie that shines with its social contect, direction and SPECIALLY with its performances: Burt Lancaster in particular gives one of the very best performances I have ever seen as repented lawyer from the Third Reich.
-
MCT:June 15, 2007
A group of German jurists are placed on trial for their collusion with the deceased Nazi regime. What is right, and what is wrong? When should one speak out?
-
MCT:June 6, 2007
This is perhaps Stanley Kramer's most complicated and outstanding cinematographic achievement in his entire filmic career. The film itself is very thematic and hard to watch, but undeniably has a strong political atmosphere greatly built and shown through top-notch realistic performances and a very well-settled historical context. Perfect movie. Eye-opening. Brilliant.
95/100 -
MCT:May 30, 2007
One of the best courtroom dramas ever -- with an incredible array of performers giving the performances of their careers!
-
MCT:May 28, 2007
Watching this movie gave me goose pimples. Shows the ambiguity surrounding justice and political expediency. Excellent acting by Spencer Tracy.
-
MCT:May 8, 2007
Very Heavy. About the heaviest subject around. Terrific acting but not everybody will want to watch this movie.
-
MCT:April 27, 2007
The one movie every person should be forced to see, just so they can understand how terrible human beings can be.
-
MCT:March 6, 2007
What a delightful surprise. I was not expecting much of the film when it came on TV but it is a great court room drama and it has Bill Shatner in it as well!
-
MCT:February 6, 2007
This captivating film is not only a historical reference to the famous trails that rocked the Germans to the core, but is in fact a star studded film that brings to the screen some of the most talented artists of the era. Kramer's semi-docudrama is brilliant and the realism that he tries to convey is ever present.
-
MCT:February 2, 2007
At face value one could walk away from this film with the simple realization that Stanley Kramer likes star-studded casts and zooming in on his actors' faces. But this film is a lot more than that. Excellent performances all around and a very tasteful reflection upon war atrocities and where the blame actually lies. It is much more sinister than Inherit the Wind--Nuremberg has no comic relief (except for, perhaps, recognizing Shatner) and few reprieves from the questions the film poses right from the start.
-
MCT:January 27, 2007
I caught all but the last two minutes but I really liked it. It's full of great performances, namely from Burt Lancaster. It also asks a lot of great ethical questions as well. At a running time of about 3 hours its definitely not for everyone but a must for WWII history buffs.
-
MCT:January 17, 2007
almost everyone is deadbut the chief has to go help take ppl who r in crimes against hummanity, its interesting. what is his problem? everyone is hated but not as much. its a good movie its not preachy.
-
MCT:January 12, 2007
re-enactment of the 1946 trials of Nazi war criminals. Spencer Tracy plays the American judge. Burt Lancaster as lawyer from the Third Reich
My Friends Said...
Judgment at Nuremberg Recent Reviews
Register or sign-in to see your friends' reviews !
Comments
This board looks lonely. Be the first to talk about "Judgment at Nuremberg" !
