Nuremberg (2025)

The critic finds the drama compelling, timely and powerfully directed. They especially praise Crowe and Malek’s performances, while also highlighting the supporting cast and the film’s consequential use of archival footage.

The critic calls the film gripping and smartly executed, with a rousing old-fashioned courtroom-thriller appeal. He singles out Russell Crowe as a showstopper.

Levitt finds the film a powerful, well-paced addition to stories about the Nuremberg Trials, despite occasional missteps in balancing entertainment with its serious message. He especially praises the moving direction of the Holocaust-footage scene and Leo Woodall’s shattering performance.

The critic finds the film’s first half uneven but says it becomes compelling once the trial begins. Russell Crowe’s commanding portrayal of Göring is singled out as a particular strength.

The review finds the film more dramatically engaging than a prior Nuremberg miniseries and timely in its political warning, while noting some distortions of history and character. It praises Russell Crowe’s chilling portrayal of Göring and the film’s contemporary resonance.

The headline characterizes the film as an earnest courtroom drama. The accessible text does not reveal a specific element the critic praises or faults.

The article title lists Nuremberg among its TIFF 2025 films. The page was inaccessible, so the critic’s verdict and specific praise or complaint cannot be determined.

The page could not be accessed, so the critic's verdict is unavailable. No specific praise or complaint can be verified from the material provided.

Erbland finds the film earnest but stale, arguing that its attempt to make the past feel timely leaves little new to say. She praises the chilling archival footage and the film’s strong production design, while criticizing its unconvincing dynamic between Kelley and Göring.

Thompson finds the film a timely, thoughtful drama whose warning about authoritarianism ends in resigned pessimism. He praises Russell Crowe’s seductive, all-too-human portrayal of Göring, while criticizing the emotionally manipulative characterization of Sgt. Howard Triest.

Loughrey finds the film unexpectedly zippy but says its glossy Hollywood treatment ultimately stumbles. She praises the stark use of real footage from the liberated concentration camps, while faulting the film for retreating to familiar Hollywood storytelling afterward.

Walsh finds the film worthwhile for its subject and message but ultimately uneven, with its tone and extra storylines weakening the drama. She praises the commanding performances by Russell Crowe and Michael Shannon, especially their courtroom confrontation.

Crawford finds the film well-intentioned but clumsy and superficial in its attack on contemporary American fascism. She criticizes its heavy-handed dialogue and the bluntness of its political parallels.

Gleiberman finds the film competent and watchable but short on psychological tension and insight. He praises Russell Crowe’s commanding performance while faulting the film for failing to reveal the person behind Göring’s evil image.

The critic finds the film watchable but ultimately glib, failing to make the historical events feel authentic. The real concentration-camp footage is singled out for exposing how artificial the surrounding drama feels.

The critic finds the film thrilling, urgent, and especially relevant today. She praises the performances, particularly Russell Crowe and Rami Malek, and highlights the courtroom scenes and archival footage.

The critic finds this historical drama poignant and compelling, praising Crowe’s towering, terrifying performance as Göring. The ensemble and its focus on the psychology behind the trials give the familiar history fresh strength.

Bonaime finds the film solid but unremarkable, with a slow build that only becomes powerful in its final act. He praises Russell Crowe’s commanding performance as Göring, while criticizing the film for taking too long to reach its most affecting moments.

Ellwood finds the film flat and overly old-fashioned, despite its important subject and timely political parallels. He singles out the screening of real footage from the concentration camps as genuinely horrifying.

The critic finds the film engaging but ultimately hollow, as its character drama fails to confront the full weight of its subject. Crowe and Malek’s compelling exchanges are singled out as a strength.

The critic finds the film unfocused and uneven, falling short of a compelling battle of wits. They fault its clumsy exposition and heavy-handed score, while noting that it looks great in places.