Rent Judgement at Nuremberg (1961)

Challenging, Daunting, Magnetic Watching - Judgement at Nuremberg review by AP

That's a pretty OTT title, but a not altogether inaccurate assessment of my response to this film.

Three American judges, led by Daniel Haywood played convincingly by Spencer Tracy, sit in judgment at the Nuremburg triasl on four Nazi judges, one of whom is an out-and-out unremorseful Nazi and two of whom are older men with small reserves of personal moral integrity - just ordinary men, in fact, whose legal careers have gone with the flow and who were clearly too frightened by Hitler's regime to resist it. The fourth, Ernst Janner, played perhaps a little woodenly by Burt Lancaster, is a different kettle of fish. He is an internationally renowned jurist who adapted to the version of justice wrought by National Socialism, tried to moderate its excesses, but nevertheless, on the basis that a judge is an upholder of the country's laws, allowed himself to be compelled by law to condemn many to death or imprisonment.

The narrative, naturally, focuses on the trial in which the passionate American prosecutor is confronted by an equally passionate young German counsel for the defence keen to argue that if the defendants are guilty then so are the German people who allowed Hitler to come to power, as well as many other non-German parties. The legal arguments are sometimes hard to follow - a rewatching would be worthwhile, though a single watching was harrowing enough for me - and the moral arguments are too, but it struck me that the script is fashioned realistically to present the situation as dismayingly complex. Certainly, for me, Tracy displays the difficulties - legal, moral, personal and, as the film progresses, political - that a judge, who is also a human being, faces in a case like this, and the audience is encouraged to experience the same. Indeed, it is revealed after judgment has been passed on the four defendants that one judge dissented, and he is allowed to state his point of view. Justice is not easy to administer.

I mentioned Tracy's personal difficulties. These are exacerbated by his romantic interest in Mrs Berholt, played with Prussian dignity by Marlene Dietrich. She is the widow of career soldier, General Berholt, recently tried and executed. Hers is a character forged in a military family, one of personal control. She does not see her husband as a bad man, and the script allows her to make the case for a justice based on a system in which mercy tempers the strict rigour of the law. There is a telling moment when the trial is over and Tracy telephones her to say goodbye: the camera shows her resolutely sitting by the telephone, in the shadows, letting it ring. A similar technique is used when Kramer introduces Judy Garland's character, a German woman who, when 16, was convicted by Janner for breaking the race laws by kissing her Jewish landlord and sitting on his lap. Shadows perhaps represent the moral difficulties of the whole trial.

The film is a minute under 3 hours. It's rare for me to watch something that long without a break: that I did is testament to its narrative drive and the power of its acting. There is a seriousness about the performances: it's not laid on with a trowel, but the actors seem to me to have grasped that this is a drama in which you serve the script by letting it inhabit you and then it will do your acting for you.

I can't quite bring myself to award the film a 5 star 'loved it'. I didn't 'love it': I found it deeply unsettling - and that's good. But I'd give it 5 stars for what I might rather nebulously call greatness. And I'm still challenged by exactly what I feel about Tracy's final words to Janner when the trial is over. Will you be as well?

Warning from History. - Judgement at Nuremberg review by Steve

Meticulous and intelligent adaptation of Abby Mann's 1959 television play, mostly set within the single space of the courtroom. Four judges from Nazi Germany are on trial for crimes against humanity, but as the case progresses, it becomes less obvious who is actually responsible for these atrocities.

 In fact, as the Soviets enter Prague, is evident that neither side is interested in pursuing these convictions as the west needs Germany as a bulwark against Communist expansion and the Germans seek to bury their past. There is even the rather alarming insinuation that Republican politicians just want the men released and consider the trials to be the obsession of Liberal extremists.

There is a lot of talk over three hours, but it works as entertainment because the ideas are fascinating and the performances intuitive. There is a pair of raw, poignant cameos from Montgomery Clift and Judy Garland as victims of Nazi depravity. Maximilian Schell won an Oscar as the lawyer defending the judges.

The central role of the American judge was played with real dignity and authority by Spencer Tracy. He has many long passages to articulate including a lengthy summation in which he manages to remain objective to many interested parties and deliver a stirring and wise verdict. And this is that the end never justifies the means, however expedient.