‘Something Beyond A Cautionary Tale.’ Critics Weigh In On Nuremberg And Russell Crowe’s Portrayal Of Hitler’s Right-Hand Man

by

Many films have powerfully shown the battles and brutality of war, but the new movie Nuremberg focuses on the aftermath. Specifically, it portrays the period immediately following World War II, before the actual trials of the surviving Nazi leaders began. Early reviews of the film, ahead of its November 7, 2025 release, suggest it’s a strong contender for an Academy Award.

Rami Malek plays Dr. Douglas Kelley, the lead psychiatrist tasked with evaluating whether German prisoners are mentally fit to be tried. He finds himself in a battle of intellect with Hermann Göring, Adolf Hitler’s close associate. In a review of Nuremberg, Hugh Scott from TopMob notes that while the film’s second half is appropriately serious, the first half relies too much on quick, out-of-place humor. He awards the movie 2 out of 5 stars, stating:

Hermann Göring is a deeply unsympathetic figure, and attempting to portray him otherwise would likely be a mistake. While the film does briefly hint at a strange, flawed humanity within him, the rest of the movie doesn’t treat the subject matter with the necessary weight for that nuance to truly resonate.

Brian Truitt from USA TODAY rated the film 3.5 out of 4 stars, praising Rami Malek and Russell Crowe as potential awards contenders. He describes the movie as inspiring but surprisingly less heavy than the serious topic suggests.

The movie Nuremberg isn’t like typical Holocaust dramas such as Schindler’s List. It’s more similar to a courtroom thriller like A Few Good Men, focusing on the trial of Nazi leaders. It’s a classic Oscar-bait film – a star-studded historical piece that’s engaging and entertaining, but also tackles serious subject matter when necessary. The story centers around a battle of intellect between an Army psychiatrist, played by Rami Malek, and one of the most notorious figures from the Nazi regime, portrayed by Russell Crowe.

According to Matthew Jackson at AV Club, James Vanderbilt’s film delivers a direct and impassioned message about the cyclical nature of history. He gave the movie a B, and noted that it doesn’t shy away from making its point.

Nuremberg is most powerful when it feels like a story we shouldn’t need to hear, and the film understands that. It takes a while – nearly two and a half hours – but director Vanderbilt builds a slow, deliberate narrative that transforms from a simple warning into a stark, urgent alarm. By the end, the film powerfully reflects the anger and helplessness many feel watching evil thrive. Vanderbilt isn’t suggesting another tragedy could happen; he’s arguing that it’s happening right now.

I just read a review of the movie Nuremberg on Slant, and it sounds pretty interesting! The reviewer, Rocco T. Thompson, gave it 2.5 out of 4 stars. He says the director, James Vanderbilt, and Russell Crowe’s performance really make Hermann Göring a complex character – someone who’s both charming and terrifyingly human. Apparently, the movie does a good job of showing how even monsters are still people, and it even makes you think about things happening in the world today.

How does a seemingly normal nation descend into mass violence, and how can an ordinary person become capable of horrific acts? Vanderbilt skillfully portrays this Nazi as a human being, challenging the common tendency to label perpetrators of atrocities as purely evil. By showing him as flawed and susceptible to influence, Vanderbilt suggests that we often fail to recognize the warning signs of how easily societies can slip into darkness, and how far we may have already gone down that path.

Lindsey Bahr from the Associated Press rated the film 2.5 out of 4 stars, noting a lack of chemistry between Rami Malek and Russell Crowe, and a missed opportunity to explore the disturbing psychology of a key figure in Hitler’s regime. Bahr explained that the film…

I found this film really fascinating because it’s built around these conversations between Kelley and Goering – they end up with this strange, almost friendly rapport, or at least a temporary truce. It gets into some really uncomfortable and morally gray areas, which isn’t surprising coming from the writer of Zodiac. It definitely raises some interesting questions, like whether war tribunals are truly just when they’re run by the winning side. But honestly, I think the film’s traditional structure doesn’t quite mesh with the harsh realities it’s trying to portray. It feels a little… disjointed, like it couldn’t fully pull everything together.

As a critic, I’ve been thinking a lot about Nuremberg, and Variety’s Owen Gleiberman hits the nail on the head. The film clearly wants us to understand the roots of evil by looking at Hermann Göring – through Russell Crowe’s performance, naturally – but it doesn’t quite manage to get beneath the surface. We’re left with a figure of evil, yes, but not a truly explored, humanized one. Gleiberman’s review really captures that sense of something missing – the man behind the monster.

The movie runs for two and a half hours and feels like a classic, traditional Oscar contender. It features grand, carefully designed sets – from destroyed buildings to a dimly lit courtroom – and a cast of well-known actors portraying historical figures. James Vanderbilt, who has worked on diverse projects like Zodiac and The Amazing Spider-Man, both wrote and directed the film, giving it the feel of a major Hollywood World War II drama from the late 1980s.

With a 72% positive rating on Rotten Tomatoes, this movie is one of the most exciting releases promising weeks of trips to the cinema. If you’re looking for a film that critics suggest could be an Oscar contender, Nuremberg opens in theaters this Friday, November 7th.

Read More

2025-11-07 03:40