Monty @ 100: Oscar nominated again for "Judgment at Nuremberg"
Friday, October 16, 2020 at 8:29PM by Baby Clyde
1961 Monty was a shadow of his former self. Long gone were days of matinee idol status and teeny boppers swooning over his dreamboat looks. As has already been expertly detailed by my colleagues Montgomery Clift’s career is one of two halves. By this point he was deep into the second half and the eventual outcome seemed inevitable, but that didn’t mean he was unable to still produce the goods...
Post-accident the quality of his work and collaborators was surprisingly high. Despite all his troubles, top class talent was still willing to work with him. In the last 50’s and early 60’s Clift was directed by such legendary names Mankiewicz, Huston, Kazan and the less familiar now but undeniably A-List in his day, Stanley Kramer.
Starting in the late 40’s Kramer produced such classics as Champion (1949) and High Noon (1952) as well as introducing Marlon Brando to cinema audiences with The Men (1950). Turning to directing in the mid 50’s he became known for his important, Big Issue movies, propagating liberal causes and pressing social issues. Whilst he wasn’t an imaginative director and many of his films feel flat and static today, at the time these hot button issues were often controversial and hugely popular. The Academy certainly loved him receiving three Best Director nomination and six in the Best Picture category.
Having tackled racism in The Defiant Ones (1958), nuclear war On The Beach (1959) and creationism Inherit The Wind (1960) it was only a matter of time until he made it to the Nazis, which bring us to Judgment At Nuremburg (1961) and Monty’s last great hurrah.
Judgement at Nuremburg is a lumbering 3 hour, fictionalised account of the Judges Trial which took place in post WWII Nuremburg, Germany and 12 Nazis judges charged with various crimes against humanity. Subject matters don’t get any more important than that and whilst it’s not a bad film, it’s slow and talky and a bit of a chore. It’s saving grace is the dazzling all-star cast. Spencer Tracy, Marlene Dietrich, Burt Lancaster and Richard Widmark all bring their A game and newcomer Maximillian Schell won the Best Actor Oscar for his role as the defence council but it’s a couple of extremely familiar faces with similar personal demons that steal the show in tiny supporting parts.
Playing German victims of Nazis atrocities Clift and Judy Garland are the heart of the film. Never particularly known her for dramatic chops, Judy is a revelation (But we have to wait a couple of years for her centenary!) and in one scene of little over 15 minutes Monty proves that even if he looks diminished his talent certainly isn’t.
He’s heart-breaking as Rudolph Peterson a ‘feeble minded’ bakers assistant who was the victim of forced sterilization. We first see him as he nervously enters the courtroom to testify. He falters in the doorway momentarily overwhelmed by the sea of faces staring at him and the importance of the situation. He wants to be anywhere else, whilst at the same time he's eager to please. You can see him take a deep breath and steel himself for what is to come. Hesitantly looking around for reassurance he visibly relaxes as he’s able to answer the first questions and briefly enjoys the warmth of the crowd as they laugh at one of his stories. This all changes on cross examination. The defences argument is that no crime has been committed because it was perfectly legal to sterilise the mentally incompetent. Up until this point Peterson had been holding his own but when questioned about his education and the insinuation that his beloved mother may also have been to blame for his problems he begins to crack. Voice breaking, hand trembling he shifts uneasily in his chair and becomes increasingly agitated as he’s hounded to complete a simple language exercise. It’s hard to watch. Holding a picture up to the court and crying ‘Was she feebleminded’ all we’re left with is a frightened little boy begging for his dead mother to come and save him.
In fifteen minutes, Clift takes us from nervousness, to confidence to broken man. It’s an acting Tour de Force made even more remarkable by the fact that the actor was in such bad shape that he was unable to remember his lines, and reportedly ad libbed much of his dialogue.
The role was perfectly suited to him at the time. The legendary beauty was a faded memory. Bloated from alcohol, scarred and paralysed from the accident and with two eyebrows like marauding caterpillars trying to escape his forehead Clift seems much older than his then 40 years. He looks haunted. You can read the pain in his face and it feels like there is a fine line between what is real and what’s performance.
an FYC ad for Judgment at Nuremberg
Judy and Monty at the premiere in December 1961
The film earned him his 4th and final Oscar nomination and the one he should have won in a landslide (I’d give him the win in ’48 as well). It seems the loss was down to Hollywood politics as much as anything else. There can be no doubt that by this time that his addiction problems and unreliability had lost him a lot of good will with his peers. The nominations for both him and Garland caused controversy as such legendary stars slumming it in the Supporting categories was frowned upon by many, including powerful gossip maven Louella Parsons who complained it was like ‘a bank president reducing himself to title of bookkeeper in order to get a coffee break’ (Oh how times have changed). He also wasn’t helped by an over the top campaign that seemed to suggest so deep were his problems that this was likely to be voters last chance to reward him. This didn’t sway them and they went with an entirely undeserving George Chakiris, caught up in the West Side Story sweep.
There were only two more films after this (Which you’ll be reading about over the next couple of days) but it’s hard to watch this truly great performance and not wonder how things could have been different. Imagine Monty relieved of his leading man status and left to pursue a career as a topflight character actor. It’s one of cinema’s great what ifs.
Next up: Freud (1962)
Reader Comments (14)
This is a powerful piece of cinema and the cast really all give their best efforts but it's a tough sit and despite its many superior components it's been years since I put myself through watching it.
But the power of Monty's (and for that matter Judy and Marlene's) performance is still fresh in my mind. Sad to see him such a broken husk of his former self, especially knowing that he still had about five years of downward spiral still to go, but his physical decline adds tremendously to the impact of the tragic character he plays. He did the role for free, when asked why he stated simply "Because I wanted to play him".
I made it through this last night, and while Clift and Garland were superb I think their roles (especially Garland’s breakdown), the film just felt so long for me. It was nice seeing Clift reunite with Lancaster and Schell. I guess I should’ve been in the right mindset to fully appreciate the film, but alas, it was already 9pm and I realized the running time was three hours.
Watching this film in several sittings is the only way to go. It’s why I can say I actually enjoyed this rewatch. All those character actors (and ex leading men and ladies) going for it... Another role for Monty with mother issues, which was probably easy for him to access given his own family craziness. He is so fine in this and his other late-career supporting roles that you realize again and again what a shame it was he couldn’t vanquish his many demons and become a major character actor.
Re: Judy. I’ve always considered her a consummate dramatic actress, going back to her child star days. It was part of her gift as a torch singer, which made her performances in The Wizard of Oz, The Clock, Meet Me in St. Louis, and of course A Star Is Born particularly poignant. Stanley Kramer recalled that MC watched her film the scene in Nuremberg weeping, but proceeded to tell the director that she “did it all wrong!”
A great piece - it’s very strange to say so (considering the themes of the film) but I have sentimental feelings about this movie.
It was one of the first “Older Hollywood” movies I ever watched, presumably sought out because it meant that I could check off a long list of stars I’d read about but never seen in a film, all at once.
Clift and Garland ripped my heart out, while Dietrich and Schell were stellar...
He totally should have won!
He still remained so handsome, even after the accident, for me.
What makes me curious is Schell's win! How many times do people who are fifth-billed won the leading Oscar?
Should Have Won simple.
When this film was released in Spain, then under Franco's fascistic dictatorship, it got the astonishing title "Vencedores... ¿o vencidos?". That is, "Victorious... or defeated?", implying that the Allies morally lost WWII.
Clift deserved to win more than Chakiris (but they loved WSS, they really really loved WSS) and even more than Schell (Newman ❤️) and Marlene deserved to be nominated as well
I strongly recommend readers watch "Making Montgomery Clift," as the film sheds real insight into the post-accident Clift, who was very much on top of his craft while making Judgement at Nuremberg, putting to rest the false claim that the was "just playing himself."
I do like this movie, even though it is long. I must admit, though, that while I like Clift here, I just don't connect as strongly to the tortured-soul performances he gave later in his career. I love so much of his pre-accident work that while I admire some of his post-accident choices, I also see the same type of performance being repeated. That's why I like him so much in "Wild River." I think it's a far more understated role for him and had he been well and lived longer, I think his style would have reflected more nuance. It's sad that the world never had a chance to see his gifts grow and deepen as he continued to age.
According to Stanley Kramer's autobiography, he knew Montgomery Clift was emotionally disturbed but felt he was right for the role. However, Clift couldn't remember his lines, so Kramer told him to forget the lines and react to the other actors. If he struggled with a word, Kramer told him to use that as part of his character. In the end, Clift relaxed and the performance worked.
Here's my favorite excerpt from Kramer's autobiography about Clift: "I recall him becoming upset about one scene in which he didn't even take part. It was a scene with Judy Garland on the witness stand recounting her tragic treatment at the hands of the German judiciary. It left Clift badly shaken. He watched it in a corner of the set and huddled up in a ball as it progressed, weeping openly. Leter he came to me, still weeping, to say that he thought Judy had played it wrong!"
I saw this maybe 15 years ago but remember it being gripping. Guess I am due for a rewatch? I don't remember it being overly long. The whole cast was great, yes. Perhaps I was just enthralled by the star wattage as a wee teen while watching it.
I'm firmly in the "he should've won" camp. The fact that Clift never won at any point in his career -- let alone for this -- is gobsmacking.
I'd say two factors contributed to Clift (and Garland) loosing the Oscar. First was West Side Story. It was an undeniable juggernaut then and has held on to its status as a beloved film. In addition, while Clift and Garland had people on their side, they also had industry people who were angry and disillusioned by their drinking and emotional problems causing delays or commotions on sets. As talented as they were, the off screen behavior caused some to vote elsewhere. I don't think this is fair since both were addicts and suffering from depression, but no everyone saw it that way. Sometimes perceived bad behavior (even if it's not or understandable) isn't rewarded. Russell Crowe lost his second Oscar due to tempers and I'll bet Jennifer Lopez's rumored diva attitude cost her a nomination.
Monty deserved that Oscar but he was not appreciated by that time. He was the true inspiration for the upcoming generation of actors.