Nuremberg movie true story: Cast explain how they portrayed story of Nazi “psychopaths” and “narcissists”

by

Most people familiar with history have heard of the Nuremberg trials. These trials were conducted by the Allied powers after Germany’s defeat in World War II. Between November 20, 1945, and October 1, 1946, 24 Nazi leaders – including prominent figures like Hermann Göring – were put on trial.

The Nuremberg trials have been depicted in many films and TV shows, such as the well-known 1961 drama Judgment at Nuremberg with Spencer Tracy and Burt Lancaster, and the 2000 TV docudrama Nuremberg, which starred Alec Baldwin and Brian Cox.

This important event has inspired a new film, and writer/director James Vanderbilt hopes it will offer audiences a fresh and insightful perspective.

This book centers on the experiences of Douglas Kelley, an American psychiatrist tasked with evaluating the mental state of each defendant before the Nuremberg trials. Through numerous meetings with figures like Göring and other Nazi leaders, Kelley hoped to gain a deeper understanding of evil – and whether there was something specific about the German mindset that contributed to it.

I immediately agreed to the project – it was the quickest ‘yes’ I’ve ever given!,” Vanderbilt said. “The story was told in a really compelling, emotional, and personal way, and I realized it was actually a much bigger story than I initially thought.

Richard E. Grant, known for his role in ‘Withnail and I,’ is a key actor in the film, portraying the important British lawyer David Maxwell Fyfe. While his storyline isn’t heavily connected to the scenes featuring Kelley and Göring, it was this part of the script that initially drew him to the project.

He noted that past Nuremberg-related films tended to focus on the courtroom drama, similar to movies like ’12 Angry Men’. This new approach, he believed, allowed them to explore the subject matter on a more profound level.

Grant explained that by closely examining the intense, year-long relationship between Kelley and Göring, and delving into such a personal dynamic, one inevitably confronts the core beliefs of the Nazi Party and attempts to grasp the motivations behind their actions.

He explained that when something feels personal, it’s harder to dismiss it with a simple ‘I wouldn’t do that.’ He pointed to Hermann Göring as an example – despite being a narcissist, Göring was remarkably charismatic. Research showed he was the kind of person many would actually want to invite to a dinner party.

It’s hard to fathom how someone second-in-command to Hitler, and responsible for the Holocaust, could even exist. But understanding how people with psychopathic or narcissistic traits function is truly fascinating.

Vanderbilt was particularly drawn to the fascinating dialogue between Göring and Kelley, which made the film a very appealing project.

The film explores a complex dynamic between two men who are each trying to use the other to their advantage. Kelley unexpectedly gains access to the world’s most prominent surviving Nazi and sees an opportunity to explore the roots of evil, hoping to write a successful book and profit from it.

Göring was hoping to make a final, lasting impression, and both he and his interviewer were trying to get something positive out of the encounter. We often discussed it as a psychological game, similar to ‘Silence of the Lambs,’ and how their dynamic evolved. It wasn’t exactly a friendship, but they certainly impacted each other in ways neither expected.

Oscar winner Russell Crowe portrays Hermann Göring in the film, and Vanderbilt shared that immersing himself in such a deeply disturbing character was emotionally challenging for the usually cheerful Australian actor.

The director described Russell Crowe as a great and outgoing person, saying it’s always fun to have drinks with him. However, Crowe had mentioned he wouldn’t be able to socialize as much during filming because the role required him to explore some difficult and emotionally challenging areas.

One of the biggest challenges in playing this role, and frankly, in making this film work, was avoiding the easy route of just portraying a straight-up villain. The filmmakers really dug deep, trying to understand why Göring held appeal for so many, even with the horrific things he did. It wasn’t about excusing his actions, but about honestly grappling with the unsettling fact that evil often has a seductive side, and that’s what made the performance so tricky to nail.

As Vanderbilt explained, everyone sees themselves as the main character in their own life. They applied this understanding when depicting Hermann Göring, portraying him as someone who genuinely believed his actions were justified. He saw himself as a patriotic and honorable soldier. Russell, and consequently the production, approached Göring by focusing on this self-perception – his desperate need to convince the world he had acted rightly.

Rami Malek, an Academy Award winner known for his role in Mr. Robot, played the part of Kelley, mirroring the performance opposite Göring. Malek was captivated by the story after reading El-Hai’s book and proactively contacted the filmmakers, eager to be cast. Once he secured the role, he immersed himself in Kelley’s autobiography, 22 Cells in Nuremberg, using it as his primary source of preparation for filming.

Looking at Douglas Kelley’s work felt like reading a personal diary – it’s rare to find his materials. I was actually given it as a gift by James Vanderbilt, and I truly wouldn’t have been able to do this work without it.

I found the character of Douglas Kelley incredibly compelling. The idea that someone would try to understand evil, and even benefit from it, was fascinating, and I was particularly interested in the lasting trauma he experienced throughout his life.

He was struck by the realization that evil isn’t limited to specific people, places, or times – it can arise anywhere under the right conditions. He found the ordinariness of evil particularly unsettling, and this idea challenged him throughout his life. The frustration of not being heard ultimately contributed to his downfall.

The film hints at Kelley’s tragic end – he died by suicide in 1958 using potassium cyanide, the same method as Göring. Vanderbilt has said that Kelley’s life after the Nuremberg trials was a key reason he was drawn to the story.

He explained that they discussed how this experience deeply affected him. They also explored his resulting insights and relationships, concluding that this event was a turning point in his life and career, changing him in unexpected ways.

Read More

2025-11-14 11:05