With Judgment at Nuremberg director Stanley Kramer doesn't shy away from tackling a difficult and controversial subject that to many others would seem impossible to justly address, he isn't afraid of asking the important questions or delving into the intricate, grey areas that seem to have no way out. His view remains simple, clear and unabated but at the same time encloses the many different nuances and variables at play, without diluting and overshadowing its fundamental principles.

Based on the Judges' Trials that took place in Nuremberg in 1947 right after World War II as part of a series of military tribunals against followers of the Nazi regime, Abby Mann's screenplay is a magnificent showcase of the power and importance…

The most important film I had never even heard of before.

"There was a fever over the land. A fever of disgrace, of indignity, of hunger. We had a democracy, yes, but it was torn by elements within. Above all, there was fear. Fear of today, fear of tomorrow, fear of our neighbors, and fear of ourselves."

While the question at the core of this three-hour historical courtroom epic is what blame could be placed on four German judges for the atrocities of the Nazi regime ... it also paints a much broader picture of this critical period in world history. How could the systematic extermination of millions of people and a world war be carried out under one nation's…

“Judgement at Nuremberg” is a reconciliation of the unanswerable. 

Director Stanley Kramer’s film asks questions it knows will produce a response that pleases nobody. It instead seeks understanding of incomprehensible suffering through the personal; via a legendary roster of actors who have no shortage of their own experience with pain. 

Spencer Tracy leads the film as a judge who must rule on the fate of his peers; Nazi jurists charged with crimes against humanity. “Nuremberg” unfolds as a series of testimonies presented to him by the victims of the Third Reich’s unfathomable evil. 

Montgomery Clift’s appearance must be the first to single out. Arriving on set nervous, in the grips of late stage alcoholism, and willing to work without a…

Staying at my grandmother’s place while recovering from shoulder surgery and we’ve just been cranking through classic film after classic film. She loves the new Nuremberg movie but had never seen this one, so I decided we needed to change that.

I know so much of is grandstanding, but I don’t care. I fucking love this film. I love the cast. I love the monologues. I love the philosophical debates surrounding Nazi acts that most people today aren’t even aware happened. I love the sympathetic yet grounded look at normal German civilians post-WWII. But most of all, I love Maximilian Schell giving what may legitimately be the greatest onscreen performance of all time. I could watch him browbeat commoners and…

“it ‘came to that’ the first time you sentenced a man to death you knew to be innocent”

we weren’t part of wwii (thank god) so it’s taught pretty superficially here. not like ww1, where you learn every battle and every front. because of that most of what i know about the war and its consequences comes from movies and i won’t lie i haven’t done much research beyond that

watching this film you think ‘at least someone was held accountable’ then you read more and realize real life didn’t really work that way. the idea that politics can outweigh human lives has always horrified me. if i were in charge i wouldn’t have stopped at the judges, i’d have…

‘Iconic actor gives an all-timer monologue’, but make it every other scene. A completely silent-until-his-big-moment Burt Lancaster wipes the floor with all of them, naturally. I kid. Or do I? Usually with massive ensembles like these, you’d think it were by the book to waste the talents of some overqualified actor or two. JUDGMENT AT NUREMBERG puts this trope on trial in favour of affording every character their moment to shine.

But calling them characters is a misstep in itself. Worthy of the gavel. The reason Stanley Kramer’s historical courtroom epic soars so loudly to this very day, aside from an unerring watch-ability that flies through its scene after scene of arguments, speeches and conversations, is how deeply human it…

There's a fine line we tow when exposing Nazis and fascists in our outreach. In order to expose them, we often have to feature images of them - Azov Battalion with their insignias, for example - but we also keep in mind that many people barely give our media more than a glance. So, we make sure that when we show these images, it's clear to anyone only glancing at it that we are not endorsing the imagery. It's a pain in the ass, but it's important.

I had this in mind as I watched the opening shot of this film. It's a long, mostly still shot of a stone swastika atop some building. I couldn't help but think it…