Judgment at Nuremberg (1961)

#10 on 10 Top 10: Courtroom Drama 

This was such a devastating film about humanity.  About rights and wrongs, and letting things go, and bringing justice to a situation where people just wanted to forget and move on.    It is a film about fear, and what letting it take over can do, as well as what happens when you ignore it.   It is a film about justice.  It was a film about truths that were too terrible to imagine.   In the special features the writer, Abby Mann, says that the villain of the film is patriotism. People did what they did in Nazi Germany because of patriotism.  I find it interesting that patriotism is one of those things that walks the fine line between good and bad, and I think of how I’ve seen this reflected in the modern day real world.

Set in 1948, and based on true events, this film shows the search for justice after the crimes of the Nazi party in Germany.  It does beg some questions, like are we just looking for as many people to blame for a horrific situation as we can?  Or is justice truly being served by prosecuting doctors who were upholding the laws of their country at the time?

Overall the acting in this was phenomenal.  Marlene Dietrich’s character just wanted to forget the unspeakable events that took place in her country.  She almost made me feel the same way.  I never could quite understand this perspective until I saw her performance in this film. But then Spencer Tracy brings it all home and reminds the viewer how dangerous that line of thinking can be. Tracy acted up to his usual caliber, but I was most impressed by Burt Lancaster and Judy Garland.  This was the first film of Lancaster’s that I have ever seen, and I had seen almost all of Garland’s screen work before seeing this film. The amount of emotion those two were able to bring to their scenes, and the way they were able to affect me as a viewer with their performances nearly brought me to tears.  (Also, young William Shatner, say what? I was more than half way through the film before I realized it was him.)

I noticed the absence of music a lot.  There was a point where there was musical emphasis when we first saw Judy Garland, but for the most part, not too many other places.  I also though that having headphones to represent when dialog was supposed to be in German was a neat  way to show that this was a bilingual trial, but without subjecting the viewer to subtitles every other minute. (I personally don’t mind subtitles, but that is neither here nor there.)

I will say that some of the camera angles, and the camera moving, and zooming in quickly for emphasis could be some what distracting at points.  But it also helped to show how few cuts were made.  Actors had to get things correct in a single take. Pay attention to movies that are made currently.  There is an almost constant stream of cutting between actors and frames and you don't often see a single uncut shot for very long, to the point where I wonder if the film stars of today could handle it. Spencer Tracy's closing speech was 11 minutes long, and filmed in a single take, no cuts.  If that isn’t winning, I don’t know what is. 

Favorite Quote:
 Capt. Harrison Byers: I trust you'll be comfortable in this room, sir.

Judge Dan Haywood: Captain, I have no doubt that the entire state of Maine would be comfortable in this room!