Nuremberg (2025) Movie Review: Russell Crowe Delivers a Chilling Performance in an Urgent Historical Drama That Resonates Today

It's both sobering and infuriating that in 2025, we apparently need another film reminding us that Nazis were bad. Yet James Vanderbilt's "Nuremberg" arrives at precisely the moment when such reminders feel urgently necessary rather than redundant. This Drama about the unprecedented 1945-46 War crimes trials doesn't approach its subject with subtle restraint—it opens with a soldier urinating on a swastika and maintains that blunt forcefulness throughout. Based on Jack El-Hai's book "The Nazi and the Psychiatrist," the film chronicles two parallel efforts to hold surviving Nazi leadership accountable: U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson (Michael Shannon) assembling an international tribunal with no legal precedent, and Army psychiatrist Douglas Kelley (Rami Malek) conducting psychological evaluations of prisoners to ensure they're mentally fit for trial. At the center sits Hermann Göring (Russell Crowe in a career-revitalizing performance), Hitler's second-in-command and the highest-ranking Nazi still alive, a man whose charisma and narcissism prove as dangerous in captivity as they were in power. Vanderbilt's Thriller approach—framing Kelley and Göring's sessions as a psychological cat-and-mouse game reminiscent of "The Silence of the Lambs"—provides an intimate lens on historical horror. This 2025 Film from Sony Pictures Classics won't win points for subtlety, but its loud, earnest urgency feels appropriate for an era when the lessons of Nuremberg seem dangerously forgotten.

For more historical and contemporary film analysis, explore our complete collection of Movie Reviews.

Rating: ★★★★☆ (4/5)

Director: James Vanderbilt
Writer: James Vanderbilt
Cast: Russell Crowe, Rami Malek, Michael Shannon, Leo Woodall, Richard E. Grant, John Slattery, Mark O'Brien, Colin Hanks, Wrenn Schmidt
Genres: Biography, Drama, History, Thriller, War
Runtime: 2 hours 28 minutes (148 minutes)
Release Date: November 7, 2025

May 1945. As refugees trudge along an Austrian dirt road in the war's final days, a chauffeured limousine bearing a swastika rolls to a stop. Allied soldiers point weapons; the passenger emerges with a white flag fashioned from his wife's torn slip, impeccably dressed and radiating self-importance. Hermann Göring—president of the Reichstag, commander of the Luftwaffe, founding Gestapo member, Hitler's designated successor—requests help with his luggage. This darkly comic introduction establishes Göring's monstrous ego and sets the tone for "Nuremberg," a film about the bureaucratic machinery required to prosecute unprecedented evil. What follows is dual narrative: Jackson fighting political pressure for summary executions to instead establish international law holding individuals accountable for crimes against humanity, and Kelley entering Göring's cell for hundreds of hours of interviews, ostensibly to prevent suicides but also hoping to write a bestselling book about the psychology of evil. Vanderbilt stages their encounters as intellectual warfare, with Göring—charming, manipulative, unrepentant—gradually revealing that the Americans' assumptions about German exceptionalism might be dangerously naïve.

Story and Screenplay

James Vanderbilt's screenplay makes several smart structural choices while occasionally stumbling over its own ambitions. The decision to focus on pre-trial maneuvering and psychological evaluation rather than the courtroom proceedings themselves (which don't materialize until the film's second half) provides a fresh angle on well-trodden historical ground. We've seen Nuremberg trials dramatized before—notably Stanley Kramer's 1961 "Judgment at Nuremberg"—but rarely from this particular vantage point.

The dual narrative structure works better in theory than execution. Jackson's storyline provides necessary context about the political and legal challenges of establishing an international tribunal. Shannon gets several strong scenes arguing against expedient hanging in favor of public accountability, but these segments sometimes feel like exposition dumps dressed in period costume. The screenplay leans heavily on characters reciting information we need to know rather than discovering it organically.

Where the script truly comes alive is in the Kelley-Göring dynamic. Vanderbilt, who also wrote David Fincher's "Zodiac," understands how to build suspense through conversation. Early scenes establish what we expect: the American psychiatrist in control, the defeated Nazi prisoner at his mercy. But Göring quickly reveals himself as the puppetmaster, turning evaluation sessions into opportunities to manipulate, charm, and ultimately compromise his evaluator.

The screenplay's most provocative argument is that there was nothing uniquely German about the Nazi regime's capacity for evil—that given the right conditions (economic despair, wounded national pride, charismatic authoritarian leadership), any country could descend into fascism. This thesis, while historically sound, occasionally gets delivered through dialogue that feels written for modern audiences rather than 1945 characters. When Göring describes how Hitler "made us feel German again... like we could reclaim our former glory," it's impossible not to hear contemporary political echoes. Whether this is heavy-handed or necessary depends on your tolerance for historical parallels spelled out rather than implied.

The script's treatment of Kelley himself is fascinatingly critical. He enters the assignment with hubris, convinced he can psychologically define evil and profit from his insights through book deals. The screenplay shows his gradual compromise—delivering Göring's wife's letters, sharing confidential information with prosecutors, becoming uncomfortably friendly with his subject. It's a portrait of how even well-intentioned people can be corrupted by proximity to charismatic evil.

Where Vanderbilt's screenplay falters is in pacing and focus. At 148 minutes, the film sometimes feels baggy, with tangential scenes that don't advance the narrative. A subplot involving Kelley's wife feels particularly undercooked, as do several supporting characters who appear briefly without making lasting impressions. The female roles are disappointingly thin—women exist primarily as worried wives, desperate spouses, or journalist honeypots, with minimal agency or development.

The film's climactic courtroom sequences, when they finally arrive, deliver powerful moments—particularly when actual archival concentration camp footage is shown to the court. Vanderbilt handles this material with appropriate gravity, cutting between horrific documentary images and devastated reactions. It's the film's most harrowing sequence and its moral centerpiece, reminding us why these trials mattered.

Acting and Characters

Russell Crowe delivers his finest performance in a decade, possibly since "The Nice Guys" (2016). His Göring is a masterclass in charismatic menace—jovial, witty, intellectually formidable, and utterly unrepentant. Crowe learned German well enough to spend much of the film speaking it (with an accent that native speakers reportedly find impressive for a non-native), and he captures Göring's theatrical gestures, his way of filling rooms despite being imprisoned.

What makes Crowe's performance so chilling is how he makes Göring likable in moments before reminding us of his monstrosity. This is a man who kept a bowl of diamonds on his desk to play with, who ordered mass murder while cultivating an avuncular public persona. Crowe never lets us forget both sides of this equation. Watch how his Göring radiates confidence during interrogations, how he shifts from Germanic precision to fatherly warmth, how he weaponizes charm to destabilize Kelley. It's a performance that earns its inevitable awards buzz.

Rami Malek plays Kelley with intentional oddness—twitchy, overconfident, eager to prove himself. Some might find this off-putting, but it serves the character's arc. Kelley isn't a hero; he's an opportunist who gets in over his head. Malek captures his gradual realization that he's being played, that his subject is smarter and more dangerous than anticipated. The performance works best in close-up, where cinematographer Dariusz Wolski's tight framing captures Malek's micro-expressions of doubt and discomfort.

The chemistry between Crowe and Malek drives the film's first half. Their scenes together crackle with psychological warfare, though occasionally the "Silence of the Lambs" parallels feel too on-the-nose. Unlike Hannibal Lecter, Göring doesn't need supernatural insight—just decades of political manipulation and an encyclopedic understanding of human weakness.

Michael Shannon brings gravitas to Robert Jackson, playing him as a man of unshakeable principle fighting political expediency. Shannon's best moments come in courtroom cross-examinations, where his prosecutor's righteousness meets Göring's smug deflection. Richard E. Grant as British prosecutor David Maxwell Fyfe provides urbane counterpoint to Shannon's American directness, though his role feels underwritten.

The film's secret weapon is Leo Woodall as Sergeant Howie Triest, Kelley's translator. Best known from "The White Lotus" Season 2, Woodall delivers what might be the film's most devastating moment—a monologue explaining why the Holocaust happened in Germany. "Do you know why it happened here?" he asks. "Because people let it happen. They didn't stand up until it was too late." Woodall's delivery, tinged with personal anguish (Triest is Jewish), brought standing ovations at festival screenings and will likely leave few dry eyes.

John Slattery as prison commandant Burton Andrus provides sardonic comic relief, tasked with the ironic duty of keeping prisoners alive until they can be sentenced to death. His wry observations cut through the film's occasional pomposity.

The supporting Nazi prisoners—including Andreas Pietschmann as the addled Rudolf Hess—create an atmosphere of unrepentant evil that permeates the prison. These men aren't monsters in appearance; they're bureaucrats and military officers who happen to have orchestrated genocide.

Direction and Technical Aspects

James Vanderbilt, previously known for horror-comedies like "Ready or Not," demonstrates impressive range in tackling historical drama. Working with cinematographer Dariusz Wolski (frequent Ridley Scott collaborator), he creates a visual style that oscillates between grand and claustrophobic—sweeping shots of the imposing Nuremberg courthouse contrasted with suffocating close-ups in prison cells.

Wolski's cinematography deserves particular praise for how it uses framing to establish power dynamics. In early Kelley-Göring scenes, the camera favors Kelley, suggesting his control. As Göring asserts dominance, the framing shifts to favor him, often shooting Kelley from slightly above to diminish him. By the courtroom scenes, Göring commands the frame even while sitting in the defendant's dock.

The production design by Eve Stewart authentically recreates 1945-46 Nuremberg without feeling like a museum piece. The prison feels institutional and oppressive, the courtroom appropriately imposing, the settings grounded in historical accuracy. Costume designer Bartholomew Cariss deserves recognition for details like Göring's carefully maintained dignity through his clothing, contrasted with the shabby desperation of other prisoners.

Vanderbilt's directorial choices occasionally undermine his material. The opening shot of a soldier urinating on a swastika announces the film's lack of subtlety, and some transitions feel heavy-handed (a literal visual bridge from bedroom argument to comedy stage). There's also an overreliance on exploding flashbulbs and fake archival-style footage that creates aesthetic distance when we should feel historical immediacy.

The pacing is uneven. The first half's psychological dueling occasionally drags despite Crowe and Malek's efforts. The second half, once courtroom proceedings begin, gains momentum but feels rushed given how long we waited to arrive there. At 148 minutes, the film could benefit from tighter editing—Tom Eagles does solid work, but some scenes overstay their welcome.

Vanderbilt's handling of the concentration camp footage deserves specific mention. Rather than sanitizing history or exploiting horror for shock value, he presents it with appropriate gravity. The sequence where this footage is shown to the court—cutting between documentary images and reactions from defendants, lawyers, and judges—is devastating and essential. It's the moment when abstract legal proceedings become undeniably about human suffering on incomprehensible scale.

Music and Atmosphere

Brian Tyler's score walks a difficult line between emotional manipulation and genuine power. The music occasionally oversells moments that would play better with restraint, but Tyler understands when to step back and let silence speak. During the concentration camp footage sequence, the score wisely disappears, allowing only diegetic sound.

The overall atmosphere Vanderbilt creates is one of mounting dread despite known outcomes. We know how the trials concluded, yet the film generates tension through its psychological warfare and through reminders of how easily justice could have been derailed. There's a pervasive sense of fragility—these proceedings could collapse at any moment through political interference, prisoner suicide, or legal technicality.

The film's contemporary resonance provides another layer of atmosphere—an unspoken understanding between filmmakers and 2025 audiences that history's lessons about fascism, nationalism, and authoritarian personality cults remain painfully relevant. This creates a watching experience that's simultaneously historical recreation and political warning.

Strengths and Weaknesses

What Works:

• Russell Crowe's career-revitalizing performance as Hermann Göring
• The psychological cat-and-mouse dynamic between Crowe and Malek
• Leo Woodall's devastating supporting performance and monologue
• Michael Shannon's principled portrayal of Robert Jackson
• The decision to focus on pre-trial maneuvering rather than just courtroom drama
• Respectful, powerful handling of concentration camp archival footage
• Dariusz Wolski's cinematography that uses framing to establish power dynamics
• Authentic period production design without museum-piece sterility
• The film's contemporary relevance and urgent political resonance
• Strong ensemble work in supporting roles
• The critique of American exceptionalism and assumptions about evil
• Richard E. Grant's urbane British prosecutor

What Doesn't:

• Unsubtle opening and occasional heavy-handed messaging
• Uneven pacing with some dragging first-half sequences
• Underwritten female characters with minimal agency
• Some exposition-heavy dialogue that feels written for modern audiences
• 148-minute runtime that could be tighter
• Occasional overreliance on musical score to telegraph emotions
• Tangential subplots that don't justify their screen time
• "Silence of the Lambs" parallels that sometimes feel too obvious
• Fake archival-style footage that creates aesthetic distance
• Some transitions and visual choices that call attention to themselves
• The film sometimes preaches to the choir rather than challenging viewers

Final Verdict

"Nuremberg" is an imperfect but essential film that demands to be seen despite its flaws. James Vanderbilt hasn't crafted a subtle masterpiece—the opening urination scene makes that clear—but subtlety may not be what's needed when depicting the prosecution of genocide architects or when reminding 2025 audiences that fascism requires constant vigilance to prevent.

The film works best when Russell Crowe is on screen. His Göring is simultaneously magnetic and monstrous, a performance that makes clear how such men rise to power and why they remain dangerous even in defeat. Crowe's work here rivals anything in his Oscar-winning career, finding layers in a historical figure who could easily have been played as one-dimensional evil.

Rami Malek provides necessary counterbalance as the overconfident psychiatrist gradually realizing he's outmatched. Their dynamic, while occasionally derivative of other psychological thrillers, generates genuine tension and raises provocative questions about the nature of evil, the psychology of fascism, and how easily well-meaning people can be compromised.

Michael Shannon's Robert Jackson represents the film's moral center—a man fighting to establish that individuals, not just nations, can be held accountable for crimes against humanity. Shannon plays him without false heroics, as someone doing difficult necessary work rather than seeking glory. His courtroom confrontations with Crowe's Göring provide some of the film's most gripping moments.

The supporting performances, particularly Leo Woodall's shattering turn as translator Howie Triest, elevate material that occasionally sags under its own ambitions. Woodall's monologue about why the Holocaust happened—"because people let it happen"—crystallizes the film's urgent contemporary message without feeling preachy. It's delivered as personal anguish rather than political lecture, which makes it land with devastating force.

Where "Nuremberg" stumbles is in its sprawling structure and sometimes leaden pacing. At nearly two and a half hours, it tries to cover too much ground—the political maneuvering to establish the tribunal, the psychological evaluations, the actual trial proceedings, multiple subplots involving supporting characters. A tighter focus might have served the material better, or alternatively, a limited series format could have given proper breathing room to all these elements.

The film's treatment of women deserves criticism. In a story dominated by male power struggles, the few female characters exist primarily in relation to men—worried wives, desperate spouses seeking favors, journalists used as honeypots. This reflects historical reality to some degree, but Vanderbilt's screenplay does little to give these women interiority or agency beyond their relationships to male characters.

Despite these flaws, "Nuremberg" succeeds in its primary mission: making audiences understand why these trials mattered and why their lessons remain relevant. The sequence featuring actual concentration camp liberation footage is worth the price of admission alone—a brutal reminder of what happens when evil goes unchecked, when people choose not to stand up until it's too late.

The film's contemporary resonance cannot be ignored. When Göring describes how Hitler made Germans feel great again, when characters discuss how economic desperation and wounded pride make populations vulnerable to authoritarian promises, when the film demonstrates how charismatic narcissists manipulate truth and weaponize loyalty—these aren't just historical observations. They're warnings about patterns that recur across time and geography.

In an ideal world, we wouldn't need another Nuremberg film. We'd have learned these lessons so thoroughly that reminders would be redundant. But we don't live in that world. We live in one where authoritarian movements resurge globally, where historical atrocities are downplayed or denied, where the mechanisms that enable genocide remain disturbingly familiar. In this context, "Nuremberg" isn't just a historical drama—it's an alarm bell.

Recommended for: Russell Crowe enthusiasts eager to see his best work in years, history buffs interested in World War II and its aftermath, viewers concerned about contemporary political parallels to fascism, fans of courtroom dramas and psychological thrillers, anyone who believes cinema can serve as moral education, Michael Shannon admirers, those interested in the psychology of evil and authoritarian personality.

Not recommended for: Viewers seeking subtle, understated historical drama, those exhausted by World War II narratives regardless of approach, audiences sensitive to Holocaust imagery and disturbing archival footage, people looking for fast-paced entertainment, anyone who finds contemporary political parallels in period films heavy-handed or preachy.

"Nuremberg" is now playing in theaters. For more thoughtful historical and contemporary Film Reviews, explore our coverage of 2025 Movies and dive into our sections on Drama, Thriller, and War cinema.