Nyurnberg

Historical drama, spy thriller, action movie. The film adaptation of the book by the Russian writer and historian Alexander Zvyagintsev (who was a screenwriter here, along with the director) "Without a statute of limitations", directed by Nikolai Lebedev (Star, Legend No. 17) with the participation of several European countries, besides Russia of course. I admit that I had serious doubts about this picture, because two pictures have already been shot on this topic: the American "Nuremberg Trial" of 1961 and the Canadian television picture "Nuremberg" of 2000, and now this list has been supplemented by a domestic, Russian picture. And the personality of the director bribed me, because Nikolai Lebedev, despite his "mannerism", knows how to shoot, and the screenwriter is not bad, but here he had Alexander Zvyagintsev himself as a partner, a historian and creator of documentaries about fascist atrocities in the occupied territory of the USSR during the war, called "Without a statute of Limitations". A person, to put it mildly, who understands the topic. I sincerely thank my favorite cinema "May", in which I watched this picture and I was alone at the session, so nothing distracted me from watching. And here's my brief opinion for you - Behind the scenes of the "process of the century". I really liked the picture, I'm not ashamed of it, but it has both undeniable advantages and significant disadvantages that need to be discussed. This concludes such an important introduction and gets to the point.

So, the undeniable advantages: 1. The scenario - it (with the exception of a serious minus, which is described below) tells both about the International Military Tribunal itself over the highest ranks of the defeated nazi Germany, held in Nuremberg in 1945-1946, and about the adventures of the hero of the Great Patriotic War, the order-bearer, captain of the Red Army Igor Volgin, who not only helps to ensure the safety of the tribunal, after all, the fascist underground (known as the "Werewolf") became more active, but also to solve personal affairs. The dynamics of the picture is strong, this is not the "Nuremberg Trial" of 1961, where all three hours of timing are given over to a judicial drama. Our "Nuremberg" decided to combine several genres, and it works. The picture looks cheerful, does not let you get bored. The characters (for once) do not look like cardboard boxes (well, most of them), the dialogues, although they do not claim to be a "masterpiece", but are pronounced with feeling. Motivation, characters - it's done very well. When watching, I didn't give a damn about what was happening on the screen, I wished our victory with all my heart. The drama, the atmosphere - and that's all right. It can be seen that the screenwriters worked on the picture, which is now a rarity in a big movie. Yes, the script is not replete with "surprises" (which are easy to guess), but it forces the viewer to think about some things after watching (or even during). Yes, they decided to mix the historical drama with the "Hollywood blockbuster", but the output turned out well.

2. The love line - it caused me doubts, because the heroine is from displaced persons (during the war she was forcibly taken to Germany for work). But it turned out that all this is closely intertwined with the process and spy games around it. True, the erotic scene here was clearly superfluous, but okay. And the "spark" between the heroes was felt, although the appearance of the girl was somewhat distorted (painfully well-groomed, especially in the bombed Nuremberg).

3. Costumes, scenery - filmed both in Europe and in Russia, thanks to Mosfilm for the scenery (especially for recreating Hall 600). Post-war Nuremberg looks like it was then: a bombed-out city, all in ruins, a few whole houses are occupied by desperate people who sell family jewels for a piece of bread, everywhere the military of the countries of the Anti-Hitler coalition, the notes of the Cold War, the mixing of cultures and customs, the general nervousness of all peoples, the Hitlerite underground and the like. And the costumes, uniforms, insignia - everything exactly repeats reality (after all, both the chronicle and the documents remained).

4. Atmosphere - as I said above, the creators of the picture managed to perfectly convey the atmosphere of those years. The predominance of cold colors, against which the insignia on the uniforms do not stand out much, the clash of the thirst for justice and the aspirations of the Hitlerite leaders for a split among the allies and efforts to disrupt the process. No wonder this tribunal was called the "court of history". The split among the Germans, the friction between the Russians and the Americans, the role of Churchill, and so on.

5. Fights, fights, shootouts are not aerobatics, but they look quite good. It is clear that both sides are using tactics, hiding behind shelters, not climbing into trouble. Fights also do not lag behind, it is clear that the actors trained so that it all looked convincing on the screen, because most of them play the military.

6. Music - the famous Soviet and Russian composer Eduard Artemyev (now deceased, God rest His soul) is responsible for this, and in his last work he showed all his many years of experience, because his music perfectly emphasizes the atmosphere of the picture.

7. Ideological pumping - the picture is saturated with ideas about the fight against the "falsification" of history, which was headed by the former Minister of Culture Medinsky (who himself does not mind rewriting it, no worse than Western colleagues). Yes, they tried to alter the history of the process for themselves even then, in 1945, that's why all this action was filmed, documents were collected, the participants themselves then wrote books about it. All for the sake of not forgetting it all for the sake of the political conjuncture (which is perfectly reflected in the picture "The Nuremberg Trials" of 1961). This idea is even voiced by Mironov's hero. And that's right, these should not be forgotten. The whole picture was made with an emphasis on this idea - and that's good. Yes, you yourself know that and how they lie to us about the Second World War and the Great Patriotic War in particular both in the West and our native Ministry of Culture (when it was headed by Medinsky).

So, the essential disadvantages: 1. The motivation of the traitor - and both. They didn't explain the first one to us at all, and the second one - I'm sorry, it's a joke to the chickens. I don't believe it! Damn it! Nikolai Igorevich! Why did it turn out so badly? Why is it so funny. You don't have a children's cartoon, you have a serious drama with the horrors of war. Maybe it was necessary to increase the timing, because it clearly does not accommodate all the ideas (two hours and ten minutes).

2. The activity of the "Werewolf" - it was greatly exaggerated, and I put it mildly. Yes, these detachments operated in Nuremberg, and they committed sabotage, but there was no question of mass character. Especially the episode with the recruitment of prisoners of war into the ranks of the organization looks ridiculous. Yes, from this crowd, a maximum of ten, well, maybe fifteen people from the hundred that you liberated will join the fascists. After all, it is obvious to everyone that Germany has lost the war, Hitler is dead, Germany lies in ruins, and is under occupation by the troops of the Anti-Hitler coalition. What the hell is the war? And the head of the local "Werewolf" does not look like a beaten fascist fanatic, he is rather a rational maniac and sadist, but not a fanatic, and he has charisma. In general, there were such groups of nedobitkov, but they did not have an impact on Germany, but they managed to spoil everyone, especially the Red Army, though a little.

3. The Nuremberg process is not enough - the picture is called "Nuremberg", and at the same time the process itself occupies an important, but not the first place here. He serves as a skeleton here, on which everything else is built up, a drama there, a spy thriller and an action movie. Zvyagintsev is an experienced person who understands the topic, but they could not reveal the process together with the director. So, they walked, as they say, with "general strokes", focused on several high-profile moments (the screening of newsreels from concentration camps, the interrogation of former Field Marshal Paulus, the persistence of the prosecutor from the USSR Roman Andreevich Rudenko, the impudence of Goering and other defendants). Yes, everything that was at that trial could not be crammed into two hours, but Stanley Kramer in his "Nuremberg Trial" managed to penetrate into everyone's soul and condemn the crimes of the fascists (and in fact in his picture they tried not even the main fascists, but German judges), and in the Russian "Nuremberg" only indicated this historical events, but bright and dramatic. In general, the topic was not disclosed properly. The Nuremberg Trials of 1961 are definitely better in this regard.

4. Spy thriller - everything is guessed almost immediately. There is no intrigue.

5. Timing - two and a little hours is clearly not enough to reveal all this hodgepodge. And given the sponsors of this picture, we can expect a TV version of several episodes, where the necessary details will be given. By God, it was possible to show everything in three hours, because Stanley Kramer managed it more than half a century ago.

The actors did their best, both Russian and Western, especially Karsten Nergor in the role of Goering. Yevgeny Mironov pleased me, although he personally displeases me, but he can play.

I also liked the episode with Marlene Dietrich. Maybe this is a subtle reference by Nikolai Lebedev to a Stanley Kramer painting? Or maybe not, but the episode turned out to be convincing.