Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)
This is a heavy one, so be prepared. If you’ve seen any similar films, either about Nazi Germany or Apartheid South Africa, you’ll know what to expect. Master director and producer Stanley Kramer recreated the Nuremberg trials of 1947 in Judgement at Nuremberg focusing only on four Germans stand trial for their role in the atrocities of WW2. In my favorite part, Maximilian Schell is shown speaking German to the tribunal while the translators translate into the headphones of everyone else. Kramer zooms in to Maximilian in the middle of his sentence and he switches from German to English. The rest of the movie features all English (to save time), but the actors still put on their headphones and sometimes don’t understand a translation or two.
I don’t know why the script didn’t focus on four different Germans, perhaps in direct charge of concentration camps or who signed off on thousands of executions or gathering up of Jewish citizens. Instead, the four in the movie had very weak cases against them: signing off on a sterilization of a mentally incompetent man, ordering the arrest of one man, a doctor, a judge, etc. As Maximilian Schell so eloquently states in one of his defense speeches: would it have been braver to resign their positions of power as soon as the Nazi Party took over, or to stay put, toe the line, and try to look out for their people even during terrible times? The way the script is written, Maximilian’s speeches are far more convincing than prosecutor Richard Widmark’s speeches. For the crux of his argument, Richard merely shows a horrifying film reel of Holocaust footage to compare every German citizen to Hitler himself. It’s a lazy argument that has nothing to do with the four men on trial. Of course, I’m speaking from a logical standpoint, not an emotional one.
Naturally, since it’s a Stanley Kramer movie and because his onscreen persona is noble and unbiased, Spencer Tracy plays the main judge on the panel. The others are Kenneth MacKenna and Ray Teal, but they’re not given much to do. Spence gets to wander around town, have in-depth discussions with Marlene Dietrich and his housekeeper Virginia Christine, who claim that they never knew what was going on during WWII. It’s an argument frequently used in films to make the German people seem like unsympathetic liars.
For all the talk and must-see hype about this movie, I found fault with it. Judy Garland and Montgomery Clift gave heart wrenching performances on the witness stand, but Richard Widmark seemed to lean on his “I’m the good guy here” character and didn’t put anything into his acting. Burt Lancaster was grossly miscast as the main defendant. He sits silently for the vast majority of the movie, and his “I’m in pain” grimace was just as ineffective as Spencer Tracy’s “I’m the judge” constant scowl. When he finally speaks, his German accent is practically nonexistent. Judy Garland’s accent is better than his! Why didn’t they use a German actor? Otto Kruger, Curd Jurgens, Walter Slezak, Paul Henreid, and Paul Lukas all would have been more believable and would have undoubtedly given better performances. If it was important to use an American actor with a big name and presence, why didn’t they use Marlon Brando? He’s extremely believable as a German, and his accent is impeccable.
Maximilian Schell was wonderful, though, bundling up all the heart and soul missing from his costars and spewing it forth in his incredible delivery. He came out of nowhere and wowed audiences, earning both an Academy and a Hot Toasty Rag Award. Another added bonus of the movie is to see William Shatner early in his career, rubbing elbows with all the bigwigs. If you’ve never seen this classic, you’ll probably want to, but don’t feel bad if you don’t fall in love with it. You won’t be the only one.
Want to watch it? Click here to watch it on ok.ru. And thanks "Classic Cinema Central Seleus B" for posting!
More Marlene Dietrich movies here!
More Judy Garland movies here!
More Burt Lancaster movies here!
More Spencer Tracy movies here!
More Richard Widmark movies here!
I don’t know why the script didn’t focus on four different Germans, perhaps in direct charge of concentration camps or who signed off on thousands of executions or gathering up of Jewish citizens. Instead, the four in the movie had very weak cases against them: signing off on a sterilization of a mentally incompetent man, ordering the arrest of one man, a doctor, a judge, etc. As Maximilian Schell so eloquently states in one of his defense speeches: would it have been braver to resign their positions of power as soon as the Nazi Party took over, or to stay put, toe the line, and try to look out for their people even during terrible times? The way the script is written, Maximilian’s speeches are far more convincing than prosecutor Richard Widmark’s speeches. For the crux of his argument, Richard merely shows a horrifying film reel of Holocaust footage to compare every German citizen to Hitler himself. It’s a lazy argument that has nothing to do with the four men on trial. Of course, I’m speaking from a logical standpoint, not an emotional one.
Naturally, since it’s a Stanley Kramer movie and because his onscreen persona is noble and unbiased, Spencer Tracy plays the main judge on the panel. The others are Kenneth MacKenna and Ray Teal, but they’re not given much to do. Spence gets to wander around town, have in-depth discussions with Marlene Dietrich and his housekeeper Virginia Christine, who claim that they never knew what was going on during WWII. It’s an argument frequently used in films to make the German people seem like unsympathetic liars.
For all the talk and must-see hype about this movie, I found fault with it. Judy Garland and Montgomery Clift gave heart wrenching performances on the witness stand, but Richard Widmark seemed to lean on his “I’m the good guy here” character and didn’t put anything into his acting. Burt Lancaster was grossly miscast as the main defendant. He sits silently for the vast majority of the movie, and his “I’m in pain” grimace was just as ineffective as Spencer Tracy’s “I’m the judge” constant scowl. When he finally speaks, his German accent is practically nonexistent. Judy Garland’s accent is better than his! Why didn’t they use a German actor? Otto Kruger, Curd Jurgens, Walter Slezak, Paul Henreid, and Paul Lukas all would have been more believable and would have undoubtedly given better performances. If it was important to use an American actor with a big name and presence, why didn’t they use Marlon Brando? He’s extremely believable as a German, and his accent is impeccable.
Maximilian Schell was wonderful, though, bundling up all the heart and soul missing from his costars and spewing it forth in his incredible delivery. He came out of nowhere and wowed audiences, earning both an Academy and a Hot Toasty Rag Award. Another added bonus of the movie is to see William Shatner early in his career, rubbing elbows with all the bigwigs. If you’ve never seen this classic, you’ll probably want to, but don’t feel bad if you don’t fall in love with it. You won’t be the only one.
Want to watch it? Click here to watch it on ok.ru. And thanks "Classic Cinema Central Seleus B" for posting!
More Marlene Dietrich movies here!
More Judy Garland movies here!
More Burt Lancaster movies here!
More Spencer Tracy movies here!
More Richard Widmark movies here!
Hot Toasty Rag Awards:
Best Supporting Actor of 1961: Maximilian Schell
Hot Toasty Rag Nominations:
Best Picture
Best Supporting Actor: Montgomery Clift
Best Supporting Actress: Judy Garland