Nuremburg

[Sausagenbacon]

Has anyone else seen this?
I was disappointed- there's a good film to be made on the subject, and this isn't it.
Too many incidents that wouldn't have happened and I find it distasteful that they show real footage of the camps.
A decent director could have got the effect by showing people's reaction to the film. Co-opting this into a fairly poor film is disrespectful, IMO.
Plus I find Malik irritating.
On the other hand, Crowe is always a magnetic screen presence.

Ok.
As i posted earlier, I think it's mediocre, but that's irrelevant.
It's a glossy Hollywood film, playing fast and loose with actual events, that uses footage of tragic events to bump up the dramatic effect.
Obviously it doesn't bother most people, but I don't like it fwiw

I thought it was integral to the whole film.

FWIW I watched the 1961 version mentioned up thread by a PP (it's on iPlayer). They didn't show the camp footage. They used fake names for all the characters. I think it lacked the impact of Nuremberg, maybe it was shocking at the time. But my main thoughts were "who TF are these men on trial?" And that of i hadn't seen the camp footage already, which many people probably hadn't at the time I would have had no concept as to what they actually did and why they were on trial. The shock factor wasn't there.

I saw the film at the weekend and felt the footage drew us into the courtroom. The characters couldn't bear to look, and 80 years on we in the cinema audience struggled to maintain a gaze at the screen too.

I am glad this footage hasn't lost its ability to shock. Sometimes I worry that it might. But I'd say a collective chill descended on the seats around us.

OP, I understand what you are saying. I dont know whether I agree with you or not till I see the film, but in general I agree. Footage is overused in a way that strips dignity from the victims and numbs the viewer. I prefer the approach of that recent film - what was it called? - which focused on the domestic life of the commandant family on the other side of the wall. Chilling and makes you think, rather than just reacting with a ewww.

Also to add that my great uncle, a German Jew who fled to the US in 1938, returned with the American troops for the immediate denazification programme after the war. Clearly he was very useful with his local knowledge and language skills, but he was very young and I think must have found it very traumatic. Not just what he was forced to see about the destruction of his family and community, but also because of the brutality of the reprisals and the destruction of his country. He alluded to it but so far as I know didnt really talk about it.

I think there is so much good art to be made about the aftermath, and would rather see more of this than yet more 'God, the Nazis were horrible'. I mean they were, obviously, but I think we should now go wider and deeper.

Howie Triest was a real person, whether he sounded as though he was a native speaker is doubtful but he was really there. Rami Malik was miscast as Kelly and they tried to make him a more conventional heroic character.
I thought it was a good film and Russell Crowe was excellent.

That's the thing though - there is no eeeewww. It is much deeper than that and it was the reality you saw in the midst of a movie. It reminds you that yes this was real.

Yes I agree. I've seen much footage but the ones they used were particularly awful.

Hear, hear! I agree on all points. And the film was far from mediocre.

I wonder if they added the real footage because young people may not know about the Holocaust? You might be watching the film, completely unaware of what the German High Command was involved in. You might believe Goring when he claims it's just the winners taking revenge on the losers.