vince-92204 I only was interested in this film because I read Joseph Persico's "Nuremberg, Infamy on trial". The film was well made for a low budget film however the characters really suck you in, especially Brian Cox as Hermann Goering. Alec Baldwin is at his best as the lead prosecutor, SCOTUS Justice Robert Jackson.

lufts Writing in 2014 and having the benefit of reading all of the other reviews, as well as being a student of both the war, and the trials, I'm somewhat fascinated by how much others seem to miss about the actual trials, the war, and the film. First, considering the length of the the FIRST part of the Nuremburg trials (which went on long after this first portion, led mostly by General Telford Taylor who would go on to teach law at Columbia Law School, and whose magnum opus "Munich: The Price of Peace" is considered the standard bearer for history of that precursor to the war), condensing it into a 3 hour miniseries, the producers did a nice job, particularly in Brian Cox's portrayal of Herman Goerring.However, what is missed is that part of Goerring arrogance during his direct examination, had to do with his slow, and painful recovery from both his morphine addiction, and his gross obesity.By the end of the war, as mentioned by Goerring's wife in the film, the former Reichmarshall, had been stripped of his title and in fact, an SS squad had been sent to kill him.Goerring had become a bumbling, bloated drug addict, incapable of performing almost any function.And to Colonel Andrus credit, he made sure that Goerring got healthy before the trial.Yet, it was just that, and Goerring's return to the former WWI flying ace status (Goerring replaced the Red Baron as Germany's greatest combat pilot during that war) that helped lead to his confrontation with Jackson.As has been mentioned here, despite Alec Baldwin needing to "redeem" Jackson, in fact, there was really no redemption.The transcripts of the trial are available to all, and Jackson's examination of Goerring was an unmitigated disaster, prosecutorially.It was only Maxwell-Fyfe's brilliant cross that saved the day and it is a legal moment still studied by prosecutors to this day.The so called affair between Jackson and the Jill Hennesy character is also silly.As a final point, the unquestioned view of Albert Speer as remorseful is questionable at best.One gets the impression from his "Inside the Third Reich" that it is likely that Speer was simply looking out for himself, and, having served his sentence, left Spandau and became a successful raconteur.However, Speer was arguably the most important man in the Reich by the end of the war, and in fact, had made the Reich and the war effort even more efficient at the end, than the beginning. He was a long term member of the Nazi party (from 1931), and being in charge of everything in Germany, including the trains, which he claimed at the trial to not know were being used to transport death camp victims, his claim of not knowing rang very hollow.The "conflict" between Speer and Goerring was also overplayed. Speer looked at Goerring still as the corpulent drug addict, while he was the regal Nazi. Tall, good looking and oh so efficient.As for trying to kill Hitler, Speer himself said that he never actually meant to, and it was merely puffery.

xandervanvledder I couldn't believe my eyes when I watched Nuremberg yesterday on Dutch television. It starts very slowly, the backgrounds of the Nuremberg trials become clear step by step, the Germans have a funny English accent, but then, suddenly, in the last few minutes of the first part of the series, the audience gets to see the most shocking, horrific footage I have ever seen.It is important that people get to see such footage (although I absolutely don't agree with people stating that there is no minimum age at which children can be exposed to this kind of material), but in this film it was completely ridiculous. It was purely meant to improve the impact of an ordinary TV series. It was meant to shock the audience which is very cheap and unbelievably easy. In stead of trying to move us with well-done scenes, inspiring dialogue or interesting viewpoint's, the audience is being tortured with horrible images of skin-and-bones camp inmates. It doesn't show any respect for the victims of the holocaust.I'm very angry.

jmckelve I teach World and United States History at a high school (Hemet) in Southern California and use this movie in my classroom teaching. It is an excellent resource tool for learning and discussion with my students. They are all aware that the Nazis committed crimes against humanity by perpetrating the Holocaust, but they aren't as aware of the other crimes that they committed such as crimes in the conduct of war and the breaking of treaties and conventions etc. The "eyewitness" testimonies and the segment of actual Holocaust footage makes for a powerful effect on teen learners. Students get a broad picture for the scope of crimes committed by the Nazis and how each person contributed toward the whole. I was disappointed with the "bonus extras" that are included in the DVD version...no significant insightful commentaries with the actors...what they do share is way too brief. Brian Cox totally owns this in terms of his performance. Baldwin does his usual sharp performance. From a personal viewers standpoint it would have been cool to hear from the actors what they did to prepare for their parts. I know Baldwin to be research professional and expect that he invested a good bit into his preparation as did Cox I am sure. J. McKelvey