"Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)" Movie Review Essay & Film Analysis

Heavy film, I'm not at all the films I write reviews. Only to those that offend to the core and the film "Judgment at Nuremberg" is one of the few such.
is told in the film about one of the processes, loud military tribunal on charges of Nazi war criminals for crimes against humanity. All processes are simply physically could not be removed, because they were a great many, but the tribunal itself lasted quite a long time - several years. Therefore, we were shown an episode of the prosecution of four representatives of Nazi Germany's jurisdiction - judges, who, guided by the criminal law, sent people to death or committed inhumane acts on them. The will of fate, the trial, held in the same place where the accused once they judged themselves.
And now, in the courtroom came together in an unequal battle charges representative of the prosecutor, who had seen with their own eyes the atrocities and believes that it is necessary to charge as much as possible involved in the crimes. And he opposes a young lawyer, a supporter of the ideas of one of the defendants, who believes that is already enough people have been punished and can not be accused of absolutely all, the whole German nation. But adjudication rests on the shoulders, honorable judges, the simplest judge who once went down, according to the laws and regulations of the state where he lived, and in whose objectivity seriously doubt, as in the vast experience.
seemed that It would be easier, no doubt of the crimes committed by the Nazis. No one doubts the evidence found in the archives, in the concentration camps. Yes, a lot of the places where one could find fingerprints bloodthirsty beast, the legacy he order. However, doubts have crept in the number of criminals, their degree of guilt and the fact that all of this to do. How easy it is to destroy several million people, and as hard to pick open this shit, to ensure analysis and confirm, when and who did such a monstrous crime
German people says. "We do not know." The wife of convicted and executed military said: "We were" against ", and should forget, but go ahead." One woman from the party representatives said: "We were forced to join the party." A young lawyer, a kind of prototype of Hitler, and obviously, understands his motives and objectives, says: "Blame bunch of extremists." And so everything just turns out, no one to blame, no one knew, let's all forget, go ahead and, in general, the Bolsheviks there are up to something. That's so easy. Rave! Again nonsense! On greatness shield erects people and throws it, the same people. And this people betrayed their compatriots, the opposition and those who did not support the ideology of those executed. Maybe it did not guess, drinking beer and singing their loud songs?
But how can you blame the people when explicit criminals who with their own hands, speeches condemning the innocent and sent them to their deaths, questioned the scale of the crimes, believe that the act for the good of the country, or would like to act in this way and did not repent. And even one of the four, who pleaded guilty in the depths of his soul, trying to prove to myself: "What I did not know!". Think of yourself when you are in some way offended and, it would seem, here it is the proof: a broken vase or spilled tea, and how hard it is to admit this unfortunate misunderstanding. And then, the broken lives of millions of families, and the shedding of blood liters, who wants to admit this? And then blame the whole nation? This is the psychology of the masses and the hell and nowhere on it does not go, and apply it to the rest of the world, mankind has always feared and still afraid to admit their mistakes.
rest of the world ... And the rest of the world is no better than this, inattentive and forgetful people. The world thought the right to delay the inevitable and cynically smiling executioner, as if nothing had happened. If there were no peace treaties that the Communists, that part of Europe. If not supplied weapons and do not read "Mein Kampf." Blame all (? But many were not guilty as among the Germans, and all over the world, it is foolish to deny this fact, the truth heareth these units people), the question is the other - what is the degree of culpability of each, any political motives in this lie and how to avoid the destruction of all humankind. Here it is the confrontation, not only human, but justice with the logic of thinking.
history moves in cycles. And before the Nazis were power-hungry dreamers conquer the whole world, and unwanted, according to the dreamers, could be destroyed. And who will remember? After the Nazis certainly appear like visionaries who imagined himself as the messiah, unleash war and will destroy objectionable. And because they preferred to forget.
But trying to understand message of the film, I avoid deeper and deeper into the assessment of history and those who administer it and make sentences. And in another way it is impossible. The film puts the viewer in the role of judge and offers take out the verdict. All thanks to the talented actors:. And the judge - Spencer Tracy, and the prosecutor - Richard Widmark, and the accused - Burt Lancaster, Montgomery Clift, etc. (I confess, I would be very hard to not only take on the role of a Nazi criminal, but perfectly perform its ). And I want to emphasize the ingenious game advocate - Maximilian Schell. Fantasy, when you look at his oratorical performances, played out in such a way that you do not see the actor in front of you or Hitler himself. Hand movements, voice tone, rapid speech - it should be noted, did not pass it and deserved the gold statuette "Oscar»
What verdict will make a viewer, this is a personal matter.. Judge - handed. Criminals - endured. Prosecutors - endured. Lawyer - rendered. And I also passed.
I would like to put the maximum score the film, but I can not. Heroes, we are told: "Duck what, the whole world is guilty," And let the whole, but for some reason the whole world judges only American justice? Yes, I am a supporter of the judicial system, although it is not perfect. Yes, I am not a supporter of communism and the Bolsheviks. But if you intend to judge the world, it was necessary to summon the representatives of the world, is not it? The trials were many, many judges: American, Soviet, British, French, and representatives of many other countries. No wonder it was an international tribunal. Only based on this 9 of 10 . Great movie and those who are interested in history, look highly recommend.

How to cite this essay: