Russell Crowe Shines in Otherwise Uneven Courtroom DramaNuremberg
James Vanderbilt’s Nuremberg arrives in theatres as an ambitious attempt to retell one of history’s most significant trials — but what unfolds is a courtroom thriller that struggles to find its footing. The film tries to balance weighty moral questions with cinematic drama, yet ends up guilty of confusion on nearly all counts — with one key exception: Russell Crowe.
Also Read:- Jamieson’s Ice-Cool Final Over Seals Thrilling Win for New Zealand
- Steelers and Chargers Face Off in High-Stakes Sunday Night Showdown
Directed and written by Vanderbilt, Nuremberg is based on Jack El-Hai’s book The Nazi and the Psychiatrist . It follows the complex relationship between Hermann Göring, the infamous Nazi leader awaiting trial, and Douglas Kelley, a U.S. Army psychiatrist assigned to study him. Rami Malek plays Kelley, while Crowe steps into the shoes of Göring, a role that initially seems almost absurd for the Oscar-winning actor. But as the film progresses, Crowe turns out to be the one who truly understands the tone and moral depth the story demands.
The film juggles two very different energies. On one side, it tries to echo the seriousness and historical focus of earlier dramatizations, like the 2000 TV miniseries Nuremberg starring Alec Baldwin. On the other, it leans into a stylized Hollywood version of history — the kind of overproduced spectacle where exposition replaces nuance, and even the horrors of genocide are tied up neatly with dramatic music. Unfortunately, these tones clash constantly. What could have been a thoughtful exploration of justice and morality turns into a film that feels unsure of what it wants to say.
Rami Malek, despite his impressive résumé, seems misdirected here, and his exchanges with Crowe often lack emotional depth. Supporting talents like Michael Shannon, Richard E. Grant, and Colin Hanks are given too little to do, while the dialogue they’re handed doesn’t help much. The script swings wildly between heavy-handed moralizing and awkward attempts at wit, creating jarring tonal shifts that undermine the film’s seriousness. Even the pacing falters, with several false endings and dropped storylines that make the two-and-a-half-hour runtime feel longer than it should.
And yet, Russell Crowe is the film’s saving grace. As Göring, he manages to capture both the chilling arrogance and the human complexity of the man. His portrayal carries a weight that the rest of the film never quite matches. Crowe even surprises with a convincing German accent and an unsettling calm that draws the audience in whenever he’s on screen. It’s as if he’s in a much better movie than everyone else.
Ultimately, Nuremberg wants to be a thoughtful moral drama but ends up resembling a clumsy Hollywood retelling of history. Still, Crowe’s performance makes it worth watching, if only to witness how a seasoned actor can elevate even the weakest material. The verdict? The film may be guilty of uneven storytelling, but Crowe walks free — and triumphantly so.
Read More:
0 Comments