Heir to an Execution: A Granddaughter's Story

The entire film is based on a fallacy and therefore makes it difficult to watch. Ivy basis the documentary on the misleading notion that her grandparents are not guilty of being traitors. The facts are that her grandparents were spies. Later, her father Michael says, Julius might have helped the Soviets, but Julius did not do what the government accused him of. Then another person says Ethel was only being a loyal wife.

The film is a sophomoric effort to understand the dark stain on her family. The camera work, editing, and narration are all weak.

Ivy should have created a documentary on what caused the executions. It wasn't 'red scare', or 'communist witch-hunts'. It was because Julius and Ethel were spies for the Soviets. They are both guilty of betraying their country.

As other reviewers have mentioned, this is essentially an amateur effort, but I believe it is more effective for that, and that a more polished, careful effort by "professionals" would not be nearly as poignant and effective.

Though many of the Rosenberg family cling to various pieces of the puzzle hoping, or pretending, that Julius & Ethel were either "innocent" or at least deserved a lesser punishment, it is clear from the Venona transcripts (released in '95) and testimony of ex-KGB agents that they were active -- Julius much more so -- in stealing highly classified U.S. secrets and giving them to the Soviet Union, as part of an organized socialist-communist cabal. They were clearly "true believers," which is what essentially scarred their children's lives.

As this film makes quite clear, the Rosenbergs could have spared themselves right up to the day they were executed, but their refusal to implicate other spies sealed their fate. However misguided, they were true believers, willing to die rather than betray their cause.

At this late date there is of course not the slightest doubt that both were guilty of treason and espionage, and, due to their refusal to "betray" their comrades or their cause, they also inflicted great emotional trauma to their families, especially their children. One cannot help but sympathize with them, but it's hard to argue that their parents are in any way "innocent" or did not commit treason and espionage. They opted to die. One can only bemoan the fact that others in the ring deserved death far more than Ethel, but got light sentences.

Though a bit long and slow-moving at times, for someone interested in this peculiar historical incident this film will prove fascinating despite its less-than-polished production.

If you're looking for a good, even-handed overview of the Rosenberg case, this isn't it, but it is nevertheless not without interest.

It's not a good overview for two reasons. First, the movie spends little time looking at the actual facts of the case, focusing instead mostly on the effects on the family left behind. This can be excused, since it wasn't the intent of the filmmaker to cover the case itself. Second, and less excusable, the movie seems essentially uninformed by much of the evidence that has come out in the last decade (e.g. from Soviet intelligence archives) which provides unambiguous answers as to what the Rosenbergs actually did.

For instance, you won't hear here that documents in the Soviet archives explicitly describe Ethel Rosenberg helping to recruit David Greenglass to pass on atomic bomb construction details from Los Alamos. Ethel may not have deserved the death penalty for what she did, but it's hard to put much weight on any opinions this movie expresses on the subject, given its reliance on the pro-Rosenberg side for its view of the case.

That one-sidedness, however, is what is responsible for one of the film's two real accomplishments: giving the viewer a clear view of the mind-set of the American left in the 30's and 40's, one in which spying for a foreign power for ideological reasons was not merely acceptable, but laudable, and one in which the bald-faced claims of the complete innocence of the Rosenbergs were credulously accepted. The interviews with the aging members of the American left alone are worth the time of a serious student of the era.

The other interesting aspect of the movie is its clear documentation of the havoc the Rosenbergs' wreaked on their family. As a number of reviewers have pointed out, this is not a polished film, but the lack of polish contributes to the effectiveness of this portrayal. The Rosenbergs' willingness to put their family through this is perhaps the best measure of the depth of their devotion to the socialist cause, and helps us understand how they could have helped pass some of their country's deepest secrets to a foreign power.

This is the Granddaughter's story. They skip (or, at least, I missed) Sobell's full story. He escaped the US to Mexico but could not get anywhere. Her grandfather was guilty. Her grandmother, yes less so, but still not innocent. Fascinating glimpse into history.

The historical record currently indicates that Julius Rosenberg probably gave the Soviet Union information, and that loyal wife Ethel was a bargaining chip used by brother David Greenglass to avoid prosecution. That's about as much background as one needs to appreciate and enjoy this deeply personal and very moving film about the aftereffects of the Rosenberg executions, and the worn out 'did they/didn't they' arguments are of only peripheral importance. Filled with fascinating interviews with the Rosenberg's children and a surprising number of elderly compatriots as well as some timely and frightening 1950s footage of anti-Communist hysteria, Heir to An Execution is an emotional attempt by director Ivy Meeropol (granddaughter of the convicted 'spies') to come to terms with a dark chapter in her family history. Strongly recommended.