it feels like it has been ages since Russell Crow has been in a film of note. It hasn’t been really that long, but after films like Kraven The Hunter, The Exorcism, Sleeping Dogs, Land of Bad, The Pope’s Exorcist, and others, it is tough to remember a time when he made a good film. it seemed like he had been submitted for film jail. Nuremberg could change all of that for him. In every film he’s done,he’s been the best thing about it. Nuremberg is finally a great film to match his talent, and he’s on screen with a cast as equally talented as he. Sharing the screen with fellow Oscar Winner Rami Malek, as well as Oscar nominee Michael Shannon, Crowe is unfortunately too memorable playing a role you’d much rather despise. it is so hard to be an actor playing a bad guy, but it is even worse when that bad guy is a real person. When the villain of the story is a Nazi awaiting trial at Nuremberg for crimes against humanity, praising Crowe as a person has to be separate from any love for the character he plays. It is an uncomfortable line to walk, and perhaps one that may cost him a well deserved nomination.

Judgement At Nuremberg is basically an all-timer, so if you’re going back to the same period, and the same story, you can’t have the same approach. james Vanderbilt is careful to explore the drama beyond the courtroom here, by focusing on a doctor (Malek) tasked with making sure the Nazi officers they have awaiting trial are mentally fit for the trial, and alive. he’s warned they may choose to try and commit suicide to avoid final judgement.

There are two really great moments from Michael Shannon’s Jackson, who is tasked with leading the prosecution from the American side. Shannon first takes us into this major arena where Hitler held his bombastic rallies, a space now vacant and hauntingly quiet. When Malek’s doctor is asked to report back any information useful to the prosecution about how the Nazi’s intend to defend themselves, Malek is affronted. It’s the second part, where Shannon discusses the fallout of World War I, and how we punished the Germans then, and in less than two decades, they came back with hitler and the Nazi party. if they don’t get it right this time, they may not be able to beat them a third time.

I could draw parallels to American politics, but the truth is we’ve yet to experience the actual Holocaust. Anytime I hear someone complaining about something, and they liken their situation ton the Nazi occupation of the Holocaust, I bristle at the correlation. Much like how World War I was branded The Great War, we just have the Holocaust. There’s only one for a reason. Nothing so far has raised quite to the same level. Have there been atrocities and genocide since? Absolutely. But combine that with the expansion, invasion into other countries, and the lives lost fighting to defeat the Nazi incursion, and there truly has never been anything like it. Hopefully, there never will be.

through films like Nuremberg, we remember history, so we are not doomed to repeat it. In some ways this feels like a film from a different decade, and I think perhaps that’s why critics haven’t fully aligned with it. It is so hard to put this up against the artistic stretching we’ve seen the last few years from films like Poor Things, Everything Everywhere All At Once, The Substance, or even the design of WWII drama The Zone of Interest. the way we film now is not the same. The closest comparison I can come up with is perhaps The Trial Of The Chicago 7, but part of the reason this feels like a return to form for Crowe, is that it really feels like a follow-up to Cinderella Man. For whatever reason, when watching Nuremberg, I was more reminded of historical dramas like Quiz Show than something current, or even a war film in the combat arena like the Oscar winning remake of All Quiet On The Western Front.

There’s a classicism about Nuremberg, that Vanderbilt implores stylistically from directors like Sydney Pollack, Robert Redford, or Sidney Lumet. Instead of trying to do too much with hiss cinematography or scoring, and aiming for A24 vibes, he strives more for Paul Newman in The Verdict. If you can connect the audience to the characters, then you can connect them to the film.

It avoids being a straight courtroom drama by having several scenes between Crowe and Malek outside of the trial, allowing Crowe’s highest ranking surviving Nazi to come close to being humanized as we just simply know more about him. it can be hard to completely forget that the man with the joke, or the affable nature, is a war criminal. He claims no knowledge of any death camps, but can that really be true for someone who was essentially third in the hierarchy?

I thought Nuremberg was powerful, and delivered across the board. I enjoyed Malek, though he plays it pretty straight to allow Crowe the rom to shine. I hope Sony Pictures Classics plays it smart and runs Crowe in Supporting, because having also seen Blue moon with Ethan Hawke as a clear lead, they’d have a tough problem selling Crowe over Hawke, because he’s really second banana. Michael Shannon is typically fantastic, and this is another great role from him. Richard E. Grant represents the British side, and he has an important moment toward the end. REN Schmidt is the most visible actress in the film, and I give her kudos for feeling very “of the period”. the way she speaks feels right out of that era, something Malek struggles a bit with.

I have a feeling Nuremberg is like a September 5, in that its road to the Oscars is going to be a tough one. But, if enough people see Russell Crowe, I think it may be enough to help pull him out of the film hell he’s been living in, and get him another Oscar nomination.

Nuremberg is riveting, a cautionary tale of what was and what could be if we don’t listen, and features Russell Crowe in his best performance in twenty years. An Oscar worthy achievement.

Fresh: 8.8/10