It’s a film that looks like it should challenge history, but mostly just polishes it until it shines – and then tells us what we already know.
Nuremberg is a very good looking film, one that kept hinting that it might do something brave.
Plot Summary of Nuremberg (Spoiler-Free)
Nuremberg begins in the immediate aftermath of World War II, where the world is still raw, still counting the dead, and still trying to make sense of what just happened.
The Allies have decided that instead of executing the remaining Nazi leadership, they’ll try them in court, and that’s where Justice Robert H. Jackson comes in.
He’s an American Supreme Court justice tasked with leading the prosecution, and the first half of the movie follows him as he tries to convince the other Allied powers to play nice long enough to make this thing work.
Then the film shifts focus, and we see Hermann Göring, Hitler’s second-in-command and the highest-ranking Nazi still alive, who is on trial for war crimes, but before and during the proceedings, he gets psychologically evaluated by American psychiatrist Douglas Kelley.
The dynamic between Göring and Kelley then becomes the heart of the movie – two men trying to understand each other while sitting on opposite sides of history.
Nuremberg (2025) Review: Is It Worth Watching?
Nuremberg is a beautifully made movie that attempts to be deep and morally complex, but settles for being respectful and very, very safe.
Now, don’t get me wrong, there are certainly parts of this film that are genuinely gripping, and the first act, for example, had me thinking this was going to be something special, as we watch the Allies argue about how to legally try the Nazis, which was quite fascinating.
It’s political theater at its best = balancing egos, ideologies, and the ghosts of a war that’s barely over – and for a while, the film seems like it’s ready to tackle the moral gray areas: Was the tribunal actually fair? Were the Allies justified in inventing new crimes after the fact just so they could punish their enemies?
And then, it just stops asking questions.
Once the actual trial begins, the film shifts from messy and morally interesting to very straightforward and, honestly, quite predictable, as it becomes less about exploring justice and more about performing it.
You can almost feel the screenplay tightening up, smoothing the rough edges, making sure nobody could possibly misunderstand who the “good guys” and “bad guys” are, which is fine, except that we’ve seen this story before, so many times.
I kept waiting for the movie to dig into the contradictions – such as the fact that “crimes against humanity” wasn’t even a legal term before Nuremberg, meaning these men were being tried under laws written after their actions, the fact that the entire court was made up of judges from the victorious nations, and the fact that some of those same nations had committed their own atrocities during the war – the movie flirts with those ideas, but then looks away, like it’s scared of getting in trouble for suggesting anything less than total Allied heroism.
Russell Crowe, to his credit, seems to be in a completely different (and better) movie, as his portrayal of Göring is sly, layered, and occasionally darkly funny, and he’s not trying to make you sympathize with Göring, he’s just showing how self-deluded and manipulative the man was.
Every time Crowe opens his mouth, you witness the energy in the room change, and you can see why the real Göring was able to charm and manipulate people, as he’s terrifying, but also fascinating to watch.
Rami Malek’s Douglas Kelley is the calm counterpoint to this, as he’s trying to understand Göring, maybe even find some trace of humanity in him, and you can see the moral toll it takes, where Malek is quietly strong, though the script doesn’t give him much to work with beyond “observe and react.”
Their scenes together should’ve been electric, but they’re often interrupted by clunky exposition or scenes that feel more like lectures than conversations, and then we have poor Leo Woodall.
The film gives him a solid introduction, but once his character’s “purpose” is served, he’s practically erased from the story, and when it’s later revealed that his character is Jewish, it’s supposed to land like a gut punch, but instead it feels like the film trying too hard to inject emotion where it hasn’t earned it.
Visually too, the movie looks exactly how a historical courtroom drama is supposed to look. Desaturated tones? Check. Perfectly recreated period costumes? Check. Big sweeping orchestral score? Double check.
Everything is immaculate, a bit too immaculate., and it’s so polished that it starts to feel sterile, as there’s not a drop of dirt, blood, or emotion left in the frame.
Brian Tyler’s score is fine though, if a little too eager, as it swells at the obvious moments and reminds you that you’re supposed to feel something., and it’s not that the music is bad, it’s just that the story never earns the emotions the score is trying to sell.
The film’s biggest flaw though is that it’s afraid of itself.
It sets up this massive stage for moral exploration and then plays it safe, as the real Nuremberg Trials were messy, controversial, groundbreaking, a moral minefield, but this movie makes it all look like a very long, very well-lit classroom presentation.
There’s even a moment at the end where Rami Malek’s character basically turns to the camera and says, “Hey, by the way, fascism could rise again if we’re not careful, which is a nice sentiment, but by that point, I was so disconnected that it just felt forced, like the movie wanted to make sure it had a “message” before wrapping things up.
It’s not that Nuremberg is a bad film, as it’s competently made, occasionally powerful, and anchored by one truly great performance, but it’s also the kind of film that feels like it was made to win awards, and not to provoke thought.
It’s cinematic comfort food for people who want to feel educated without being challenged.
What I Liked (And What I Didn’t Like)
Pros
The First Act
The political back-and-forth between the Allied powers is sharp, smart, and very engaging.
Russell Crowe
His Göring is creepy, manipulative, and unforgettable.
Michael Shannon’s Authority
Even when his dialogue gets clunky, Shannon commands every scene he’s in.
The Courtroom Tension
There are moments when you really feel the weight of what’s happening – however briefly.
Rami Malek’s Subtlety
He delivers some quiet human empathy, even when the script doesn’t help him.
Cons
It’s Too Safe
The film avoids the uncomfortable moral questions that could’ve made it great.
It Feels Sterile
Everything looks so polished that it lacks emotional grit.
Overwritten Dialogue
Too many scenes feel like history lessons instead of conversations.
Wasted Potential
That moral complexity is hinted at and then abandoned.
Pacing
The first act flies, the middle drags, and the ending fizzles.
Predictable Message
The “fascism might come back” ending feels tacked on.
Woodall’s Character
He’s introduced like he matters and then completely forgotten.
Who Might Like Nuremberg
- Fans of historical courtroom dramas
- People fascinated by post-WWII history
- Viewers who appreciate meticulous production design
- Those who love Russell Crowe and want to see him go full method again
- Anyone who enjoys long, talky political dramas
Who Might Dislike Nuremberg
- If you’re hoping for something bold or provocative
- People who hate overly serious movies with no emotional warmth
- Viewers who get tired of “Oscar bait” history dramas
- Anyone expecting a movie that truly questions morality and power
Final Verdict: Did I Enjoy Watching Nuremberg?
I didn’t dislike Nuremberg, but I can’t say I found it brilliant, as it just plays it too safe.
The Nuremberg Trials were one of the most morally complex moments of the 20th century, and the whole idea of inventing “crimes against humanity” was groundbreaking and ethically messy – perfect for a modern film to dissect.
But instead of leaning into that, Nuremberg polishes everything until it’s safe for awards season.
But with that said. If you love courtroom dramas or you’re a history buff, you’ll find something to appreciate, but if you’re hoping for a movie that actually interrogates its subject, you’re might be disappointed.
Nuremberg Trailer
Simon Leasher
A lover of cinema for over 35 years, I have watched many films from around the world in many different genres, yet I still normally always come back to trashy slasher horror films when in doubt. More
And yes, The Godfather 2 is better than The Godfather.
Discover more from Simon Leasher Film Reviews
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Be First to Comment