This movie centers on determining who’s in the right and who isn't—a courtroom drama! There were several things to keep in mind while watching, especially given the subject matter. The film is based on a true legal case. It revolves around two individuals attempting to establish their correctness regarding a book detailing war crimes, whether those events actually occurred or not. Consequently, all of the scenes unfold within a British high court, with references to Auschwitz concentration camp—specifically focusing on its ruins rather than the incidents that transpired there. This makes it an interesting drama for understanding how these two people clashed in a legal battle, but like 'The Eichmann Show,' it doesn't delve into the actual events themselves. If you aren’t Jewish, or someone with neo-Nazi views, or even if you don't live in Europe or North America, then this film is decent for entertainment purposes, beyond any educational value about truth and history. I was honestly hoping to see some authentic details included, but we’ve already witnessed numerous films depicting Auschwitz. They chose to portray it as a contemporary court trial instead of blending in those historical crimes. The acting was strong across the board. Timothy Spall delivered an excellent performance in his antagonistic role; he functioned well as a supporting actor until I remembered his brilliant work in 'Mr. Turner.' This is among his best performances, and he’d be perfect for portraying Donald Trump in a biopic, perhaps alongside Rob Redford, who might be getting a little too old for the part. Rachel Weisz was alright—her character wasn't developed enough, even though she plays one of the main characters because everyone around her seemed to shine brighter. Tom Wilkinson, surprisingly, was fantastic. From my point of view, the film was good but not exceptional. The courtroom proceedings lacked a certain impact that films often need and audiences expect with unexpected developments in the arguments. However, I appreciate that they remained true to the story rather than altering it for commercial appeal. While there were some memorable moments, ultimately they weren’t enough. Particularly unsatisfying was the ending and the lack of clarity regarding the purpose of the trial—it felt more like a joke than something serious, stemming from one person's extreme challenge and another's response to it. Regardless, it remains a sensitive topic, and my perspective is that of an observer. Still, it’s worth watching if you don’t anticipate getting the full picture after reading the summary. _7/10_

Source on TMDB