Nuremberg is a Canadian film that was first released on 16th July 2000. The film was based on a book written by Joseph E. Persico and a teleplay by David W. Rintels. The runtime for the movie is approximately 180 minutes. The language used throughout the movie was English and German. Alliance Atlantis Communication produced the film in association with Canada Television (CTV) and British American Entertainment. It received various film nominations and won several awards.
Several actors were featured in the movie and were assigned different roles. Among the most notable characters included Alec Baldwin, Christopher Plummer, and Brian Cox alongside many other actors. In the film, Alec Baldwin acts as a judge of the United States Supreme Court.
…show more content…
He is instructed by the US President Harry Truman to create a war tribunal to charge the remaining NAZI leaders arrested in Germany after World War Two. Brian Cox is arrested by the US army and lives under their hospitality. Christopher Plummer and who acts as an Allied representative negotiates with Alec and other officials to have the trials of the NAZI leaders unified. The theme of the movie relates to historical and war events that took place during the aftermath of the Second World War in Germany and Europe in general. The movie is produced in black and white and colored format (Baldwin, Cox & Plummer, 2017). Summary The motion picture can be summarized in two parts. Brian Cox (Hermann Goring) NUREMBERG (2000) MOVIE REVIEW surrenders to the US army at the end of the Second World War. Alec Baldwin (Robert H. Jackson) is recruited by Max von Sydow (Samuel Rosenman) to prepare war tribunals to charge former NAZI leadership for war crimes committed during the war. Jackson and his assistants fly to Germany to negotiate with an Allied representative on how to carry out the trials. They select a place to conduct the trials. Goring and his friends are imprisoned in Nuremberg where they conflict with the prison guards resulting in one prisoner committing suicide. The trials begin, and horrors in concentration camps are revealed. In the second part, Goring dominance on his friends is questioned. He starts talking to the German people while in the court stand which results in his isolation. He outmaneuvers Jackson during the cross-examination. Later, Jackson confronts Goring with evidence of his involvement in the murder of Jews, a feat that dismisses the defendant’s case. Some of the accused leaders implicate each other resulting in some accepting their involvement in the war crimes. Goring’s wife is interviewed and reveals that they surrendered after Hitler ordered their execution. Goring is sentenced to death by hanging. He finally commits suicide after his request for persecution via a death squad is rejected. Historical Event One The movie was based on historical occurrences that had taken place in real time, immediately after the Second World War. However, in the movie, some of the actual historical events were not represented accurately. In the film, Goring surrenders to the US army and lives in a US Airforce base freely. The film proceeds to give an account of how Goring’s wife confided to Jackson the reasons of their surrender. However, in real time events, the movies account of this event is false. Goring approached NUREMBERG (2000) MOVIE REVIEW General Robert Stack through an aide and offered to surrender personally to President Eisenhower. However, an American military detachment infiltrated German lines and took him to a safe American position in Germany (Earl, 2016). It is at this juncture that the idea of sentencing him started. Historical Event Two In the film, Jackson says that the Justice Palace at Nuremberg was the same building Nuremberg laws were enacted. These laws were enacted to deprive all the Jews in Germany their fundamental human rights enjoyed by other people. In reality, these historical events were wrongly depicted in the film from how the original events transpired.
The Nuremberg legislations were enacted in a special meeting during a political rally by the NSDAP in Nuremberg (Hirsch, 2013). The Reichstag was the creators of these laws. The Nuremberg Justice Palace was a small regional court used to trial matters in the region. In fact, the building did not have any association with the rally conducted by the NAZI party annually.
Historical Event Three
In the movie, Justice Jackson is portrayed as a hero in the manner in which he conducted the trial. He is embarrassed and outmaneuvered by Goring in the initial stage of the trial. However, he rejuvenates and raises concrete evidence against the defendant thereby winning the case. The movie errors when it portrays that some verbal statements were made by the defendants when they were indicted. Additionally, the sentences given to the accused were pronounced together in the film.
The actual events were also misrepresented in this case. In reality, the cross-examination conducted by Jackson severely destroyed his reputation because it was below expectation. In fact,
NUREMBERG (2000) MOVIE
…show more content…
REVIEW the situation was not recovered by Jackson himself. Other lawyers helped him gather evidence that he used in the prosecution. In real events, the defendants were asked to write their statements on an indictment copy provided by Captain Gilbert (Heideman, 2016). Additionally, the sentences given to the accused were not read together. The defendants were summoned to the court individually where the judges read their judgment separately. Movie Critique Just like other forms of literary and motion works, it is essential to critique a movie to understand the film more.
Having watched the movie Nuremberg, several issues about the movie are debatable. The movie is based on a book written about the actual events that took place in Germany after World War 2. However, in the actual cast, the movie does not depict the true nature of events.
Entirely different accounts of what happened are not shown in the film. This action lowers the credentials of the movie about the theme of history. It is not possible to understand the real intention of the creators of the movie. A movie based on real events is supposed to be educative as it represents events that took place a long time ago. The movie will be watched by numerous people many years after it was released. Whenever the events are wrongfully illustrated, false information will be passed to the viewers.
I would recommend to people who are interested in historical events that took place in the Second World War to have a look at this film. Though the film depicts some false information of the true events that took place, it acts as a guide on what transpired during the aftermath of the Second World War.
NUREMBERG (2000) MOVIE
REVIEW References Baldwin, A., Cox, B., & Plummer, C. (2017). Nuremberg (TV Mini-Series 2000– ). IMDb. Retrieved 14 October 2017, from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0208629/ Earl, H. (2016). Legacies of the Nuremberg SS-Einsatzgruppen Trial after 70 Years. Loy. LA Int'l & Comp. L. Rev., 39, 95-115. Heideman, R. D. (2016). Legalizing Hate: The Significance of the Nuremberg Laws and The Post-War Nuremberg Trials. Loy. LA Int'l & Comp. L. Rev., 39, 5. Hirsch, F. (2013). The Nuremberg Trials as Cold War Competition: The Politics of the Historical Record and the International Stage. In Memory and Postwar Memorials (pp. 15-30). Palgrave Macmillan US.
Another accuracy in this movie was the concentration camps in this movie, they were portrayed very well. Just like history, immediately after arriving at a concentration camp, they were split up and divided by gender and age. As soon as they arrived people who the Nazis did not see fit to work were killed. Along with this people
****Both the movie and the book portray a timeline of events beginning with the start of the Holocaust or the taking of the Jews and concluding with the end of the
Not able to remember much about this particular part of the movie, I believe this introductory scene's purpose was to either enhance the realism of the setting by emphasizing the court building's efficient, business like manner or to provide a timeslot in which to roll the credits for producer, director, stars, etc. The settings aren't only built upon through the use of scenery and extras in the movie. Invisible and distant in the play, we see in the movie the judge, bailiff, those witnessing the trial and most importantly of all- the defendant. This is an important change because in the case, we are free to come up with our own unbiased conclusions as to the nature and identity of the defendant, whom we only know to be a 19 year boy from the slums. Seeing his haggard and worn face in the movie changes all of that, yet for better or worse, it engages the audience deeper into the trial as they surely will sympathize with him and can gain some insight into why, later, Juror 8 does so as well.
The play, ‘Twelve Angry men’, written by Reginald Rose, explores the thrilling story of how twelve different orientated jurors express their perceptions towards a delinquent crime, allegedly committed by a black, sixteen-year-old. Throughout the duration of the play, we witness how the juror’s background ordeals and presumptuous assumptions influence the way they conceptualise the whole testimony itself.
The movie did not really go into much of the activities before the pretrial. The action really happened with the court drama. There are several points that are in the movie that are more for show than for true effects. In the pretrial the Judge went a little
In the film, A Civil Action, Trial Procedure was shown throughout the entire movie. There are many steps that need to be completed before a verdict and judgment can be reached. These steps are the pleadings, methods of discovery, pretrial hearings, jury selection, opening statements, introduction of evidence, cross examinations, closing arguments, instructions to the jury, and the verdict and judgment. The case in this movie was actually called Anderson v. Cryovac. The plaintiffs are the Anderson family, the Gamache family, the Kane family, the Robbins family, the Toomey family, and the Zona family. The plaintiffs’ attorneys are Jan Schlichtmann, Joe Mulligan, Anthony Roisman, Charlie Nesson, and Kevin Conway. The two co- defendants are W.R. Grace and Beatrice Foods. The two co-defendants’ attorneys are William Cheeseman, Jerome Facher, Neil Jacobs, and Michael Keating.
From the start, the movie is adapted from the novel and therefore it could not cover everything, some actions or acts in the novel are too dense such that it is not of any importance to angle them in the movie. It is very realistic to everyone that the movie cannot cover every single paragraph in the novel even the memorable ones. Some materials are left out in the film, and others were changed.
The personality of the character played by Henry Fonda affected the way things played out because he was analyzing all of the evidence and the whole situation. The character played by Henry Fonda, was an architect. In the first initial vote, he was the only one who voted not guilty. This juror which was #8, made sure that they went over all of the evidence and eye wi...
This movie goes to show how such crucial facts and minuet evidence if not processed fully and clearly can change the outcome in such a big way. In this jury you have 12 men from all different walks of life, 12 different times, and 12 different personalities. Who have an obligation to come to one conclusion and that's whether or not the young man on trial is guilty of murdering his father or is innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. Under much frustration and lack of patience these 12 men began to get unruly and unfocused. Throughout this distraction key terms get misused, facts get turned around and more importantly emotions start to cross making it hard for these men to produce a verdict.
... believed in the innocence of the young man and convinced the others to view the evidence and examine the true events that occurred. He struggled with the other jurors because he became the deviant one in the group, not willing to follow along with the rest. His reasoning and his need to examine things prevailed because one by one, the jurors started to see his perspective and they voted not guilty. Some jurors were not convinced, no matter how much evidence was there, especially Juror #3. His issues with his son affected his decision-making but in the end, he only examined the evidence and concluded that the young man was not guilty.
I believe that both characters showed interesting standpoints for the audience to recognize and maybe even understand. Juror 3 and 8 were definitely the two most conflicting characters; they created a lot of tension within the play. I find that the play “Twelve Angry men” really brought truth to the saying “justice is blind”; prejudice simply cannot interfere with the truth, neither can it restrict reasonable doubt.
...s of the Holocaust, the Allies held the Nuremberg Trials of 1945-46, which made the horrifying actions of the Nazis known all over. The Ally forces pressured Germany to create a homeland for those who suffered through the Holocaust. Over the decades that followed, ordinary Germans struggled with the Holocaust’s bitter legacy, as survivors and the families of victims tried to regain their property and wealth that was taking away during the Holocaust. In 1953, the German government made payments to individual Jews and to the Jewish people as a way of apologizing for the crimes which were committed by the German people.
Director Mark Herman presents a narrative film that attests to the brutal, thought-provoking Nazi regime, in war-torn Europe. It is obvious that with Herman’s relatively clean representation of this era, he felt it was most important to resonate with the audience in a profound and philosophical manner rather than in a ruthlessness infuriating way. Despite scenes that are more graphic than others, the films objective was not to recap on the awful brutality that took place in camps such as the one in the movie. The audience’s focus was meant to be on the experience and life of a fun-loving German boy named Bruno. Surrounding this eight-year-old boy was conspicuous Nazi influences. Bruno is just an example of a young child among many others oblivious of buildings draped in flags, and Jewis...
Many times in Hollywood, a movie that intends to portray a novel can leave out key scenes that alter the novel’s message. Leaving out scenes from the novel is mainly done to time limits, however doing so can distort the author’s true purpose of the story. In history, movies were directed to intentionally leave out scenes that could alter the public’s opinion. This frequently lets the novel’s main points be swept under the rug. There were times of this at the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement, where white Americans were the only ones making movies.
The film 12 Angry Men consisted of twelve members of the jury who tried to solve a murder trial case. Trapped in a room, all men put their heads together by communicating and listening to each other. Each juror voted unanimously and in order for them to make a decision every juror had to agree to the same thing. However, out of all the jurors (Henry Fonda) the architect had a different perspective. Just when all eleven jurors had agreed that the boy was guilty the architect stood up and said the boy was not guilty. The case was about a lady who had given her testimony in court swearing she saw the little boy kill his own father. One boy's fate is on one man’s hand. As the architect tried to prove his point towards the others, the old juror