Nuremberg is a 2025 historical drama centered on the Nuremberg trials, focusing on the interactions between Hermann Göring and an American psychiatrist involved in evaluating war-crime defendants. The film features a high-profile cast led by Russell Crowe and Rami Malek, and it has generated a mixed but generally engaged critical reception. What reviewers are highlighting

• Performance and atmosphere: Crowe’s portrayal of Göring and Malek’s turn as the psychiatrist are frequently praised for intensity and depth, helping ground the courtroom drama in human terms despite the historic scale. Critics often note the film’s strong acting as a primary strength, even when some elements feel conventional.

• Narrative focus and structure: Several reviews point to the movie’s spine being the relationship between Göring and the psychiatrist, with the courtroom proceedings serving as a frame for psychological and ethical questions. Some critics appreciate the earnest, accessible approach, while others feel the storytelling occasionally simplifies the broader historical context.

• Audience reception: Early reactions range from praise for its thought-provoking themes and craftsmanship to critiques that it leans toward Hollywood-leaning drama or lacks/overstates certain historical dimensions. Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic summaries capture a spectrum of impressions, from solid to occasionally uneven.

• Context and source material: The movie is adapted from The Nazi and the Psychiatrist by Jack El-Hai, which centers on the real relationship between the U.S. psychiatrist and Göring, and how this dynamic informed public discourse about accountability after World War II.

Why some viewers might feel cautiously optimistic

• The film leans into a serious, Oscar-maudlin-friendly approach that aims to be accessible to a broad audience, potentially expanding awareness of the Nuremberg proceedings and the ethical questions raised by psychiatric assessments of war criminals.

• The courtroom drama is designed to be gripping, with standout performances that can elevate historical material beyond textbook recounting.

Possible caveats to consider

• Some critics argue the film could underrepresent the broader scope of the trials by centering narrowly on a physician-patient dynamic, which might oversimplify the complex legal and political landscape of postwar justice.

• There are mentions of pacing or tonal choices that may feel uneven to viewers seeking a more documentary-like treatment of the era.

If you’re deciding whether to watch

• If you value strong performances and a character-driven approach to a pivotal moment in legal history, Nuremberg offers compelling acting and a clear through-line centered on ethical questions arising from psychiatric evaluation in war-crime trials.

• If you prefer a more expansive, multi-perspective historical account of the Nuremberg trials, you might find the film’s focus narrower than expected.

Would you like a quick comparison with other 2025 WWII dramas, or a deeper dive into how the film handles the real-life figures and events it portrays?