7/10 This is a pretty good documentary, directed by the Rosenberg's blood granddaughter Ivy Meeropol, it covers in more detail the relationship the trial and execution has had on the family, than on the the actual trial and evidence. It is clear and objectively shown that indeed it has had an arrant multigenerational effect and most likely will continue with the director's children. However, important in the film was the revelation of information contained in the 1995 opening of classified government documents (The Venona Papers) which pretty much proves Julius' guilt (guilty of passing secrets, but nothing supposedly as serious as atomic info) and exonerates Ethel. This is presented as a surprise in the film, although this information was revealed nearly a decade before the film had been made. We spend half the film getting to this point, whereas the film would've been much more effective and in-depth if it would've started off at this point. I only say this 'cause the degree to which the guilt, or degree of guilt affects this family's identity, is highly relevant and the major theme of the documentary. This, and Morton Sobell's incomplete answers to the nature of their guilt (he was their co-defendant!!) made the film seem a little more biased than it had to be. The film also in a way martyrizes the Rosenbergs, which is fine if they were innocent, but a sad and unavoidable manipulation if not. Overall, this is slightly nitpickish on my part and anyone interested in this era of history will not be disappointed.
25 Reviews
Wonderful
JohnSeal16 June 2004
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.
Mildly interesting, but probably not for the reasons the filmmakers intended
JNC-421 May 2007
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.
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.
Very conflicting
davepitts7 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The film is compelling -- especially when the Rosenbergs' sons revisit their old family apartment -- the same kitchen sink is in place. However, there is no real settling of the central question of guilt. The family has had to question whether Julius and Ethel were "totally innocent," as they died claiming. Soviet documents made public in the 1990s list Julius as a spy with a code name. His friend Abe Osherfoff, interviewed in the extras, says that he knows Julius passed on aircraft technology to the Soviets. I am unclear as to whether Ivy Meeropol thinks then it is a proved fact that Julius committed treason. The family position seems to be, yes, Julius was probably a spy, but, no, Ethel wasn't, and no, they never gave away atomic secrets and shouldn't have been executed. Of course, all this is muddied by the witch-hunt hysteria of the times. The questions I am left with: What should have been their punishment? How can the family be sure that Julius never passed on atomic bomb specs? As devoted to the socialist dream as he was, would Julius have hesitated to pass on such information? Granting that David Greenglass's testimony was the only incriminating evidence against Ethel (and thus I agree that she was unfairly convicted) is it likely that she knew nothing of Julius's espionage? Was their silence to the end attributable to the zealotry of their politics? (I think it was, and I find it unsettling that their present-day defenders don't put this into the discussion. Julius was trying to help Stalin's regime -- is there anything noble about that?) Because they refused to talk to the FBI, even on the day of their deaths, we'll never know the whole story.
Sad, naive treatment of treason and consequences
smokehill retrievers9 July 2006
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.
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.
I liked Ivy Meeropol's work in "Heir to an Execution", but...
wzmb21 May 2007
Ivy Meeropol has produced an emotionally moving documentary about her infamous grandparents, the Rosenbergs. I liked her work in this film, however her account of this notorious trial of Russian spies and traitors, as well as the effect on both Rosenberg boys, is purely an emotional and subjective view. Julius Rosenberg was definitely a traitor and a Russian spy, operating against the interests of U.S. national security and defense. Ethel was clearly an innocent woman. Julius was arrogant, evil, and extremely selfish not to confess information that would have saved his loving wife Ethel. Obviously, the ramifications were quite extensive as to whom was involved in that espionage ring of secret agents, having smuggled nuclear weapons technology to the Russians. Ivy Meeropol's documentary of the historical events however, never answered the most important question about her grandfather Julius' betrayal of the United States...Why? Why did he do it? What made him commit himself to his loyalty and sympathy for the Russians? Why was he so strongly compelled to give nuclear weapons secrets to the evil heinous empire of Stalin and the Soviet Communist's regime? The long term consequences of Julius Rosenberg's actions are a debacle of infinitesimal proportions. Why do you think we are now horrified that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon to use against the U.S.A.? That same stolen nuclear technology, was given to the Islamic jihadist regime of Iran, by none other than Vladimir Putin and the remnants of his mother Russia!
Much more than a political documentary
bzb200128 December 2004
The names Julius and Ethel Rosenberg bring on a sweeping sensation of treason. They have become the poster-children for anti-American hatred and fear of foreign ideology. But to some, the names mean mother and father; grandmother and grandfather.
I must admit, before I saw this film I didn't even know the Rosenbergs had children. This is left out of history lessons since, after all, what did that have to do with anything? Heir to an Execution, a sensitive and thoughtful documentary from Rosenberg granddaughter Ivy Meeropol, sheds light into a shadowy area of communist spies and family tightness.
Meeropol's film begins questioning the famed Rosenberg's death sentences by interviewing old friends and socialist peers. A door is opened into their world in a way I had never seen. Hated so fiercely by the rest of America, these revolutionaries have found their way from prisons to retirement homes.
What is far more interesting, however, is what comes next. As Meeropol tracks her grandparents' lives to the electric chair the question of her father and uncle arise. What exactly did happen to them during the chaos? And more importantly, what was to be done with them after the inevitable? Political documentaries are sometimes dry and are often as subtle as a man with a stick pointing at an easel. Heir to an Execution is different. Meeropol raises doubts to at least part of the Rosenberg trial, if not all of it, while at the same time documenting the life of a wonderful man, her father. In the end we don't know which is more important, the Rosenberg injustice or the chronicle of a distinguished life whose path you would not expect winding up here. **** out of ****
I must admit, before I saw this film I didn't even know the Rosenbergs had children. This is left out of history lessons since, after all, what did that have to do with anything? Heir to an Execution, a sensitive and thoughtful documentary from Rosenberg granddaughter Ivy Meeropol, sheds light into a shadowy area of communist spies and family tightness.
Meeropol's film begins questioning the famed Rosenberg's death sentences by interviewing old friends and socialist peers. A door is opened into their world in a way I had never seen. Hated so fiercely by the rest of America, these revolutionaries have found their way from prisons to retirement homes.
What is far more interesting, however, is what comes next. As Meeropol tracks her grandparents' lives to the electric chair the question of her father and uncle arise. What exactly did happen to them during the chaos? And more importantly, what was to be done with them after the inevitable? Political documentaries are sometimes dry and are often as subtle as a man with a stick pointing at an easel. Heir to an Execution is different. Meeropol raises doubts to at least part of the Rosenberg trial, if not all of it, while at the same time documenting the life of a wonderful man, her father. In the end we don't know which is more important, the Rosenberg injustice or the chronicle of a distinguished life whose path you would not expect winding up here. **** out of ****
Thoughtful and touching
zippyskippy5 April 2005
This film is lovingly created and deeply touching. What happens when parents are forced to say goodbye and children must go on without them? I first became interested in Ethel Rosenberg after viewing "Angels in America". I thought Meryl Streep had done a great job of making us remember Ethel. Ivy's film has been honest and makes me want to understand what truly happened here.
Michael and Robert (Rosenberg) have done an amazing job of holding each other up through the years. This film is a must see.
There are moments in the film where Ivy is fighting her own emotions while telling the tale of her Uncle and Brother. Why did none of the brothers and sisters of the Rosenberg's come forward to take the boys? The important questions are both asked and answered here. Also important, Ivy is not trying to convince us her Grandparents were perfect. Rather, she is showing the world the questions that still haunt them all. I recommend this film.
Michael and Robert (Rosenberg) have done an amazing job of holding each other up through the years. This film is a must see.
There are moments in the film where Ivy is fighting her own emotions while telling the tale of her Uncle and Brother. Why did none of the brothers and sisters of the Rosenberg's come forward to take the boys? The important questions are both asked and answered here. Also important, Ivy is not trying to convince us her Grandparents were perfect. Rather, she is showing the world the questions that still haunt them all. I recommend this film.
Finally---more information!
hillabill9 July 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Growing up, I had heard the story numerous times of Julius and Ethel. Ethel was my grandmother' cousin. I remember the tale of family members asking for aide and guidance, but that if "the government says they did it..." My family didn't want to get involved either. As a child I always wanted to know: What happened to the kids? Who raised them? Where were they now? Did they know they still had family? This movie really helped me to fill in some blanks-- especially after the creepy encounter my family had at my great-grandmother's funeral a few years back--- David and Ruth Greenglass made an appearance. To my knowledge, the family hadn't had contact with them in decades and there they were--hoping for a handout. Hoping their was some money in it for them. Cowards and Scavengers. That's how I think of them. May God have mercy on their souls for what they did.
Michael Meeropol should have made this film, not Ivy
leychica6 March 2006
I have always been fascinated by the Rosenbergs and was eager to see this film, but came away disappointed. It's a good thing I knew all about the Rosenbergs beforehand, because otherwise I would have been very confused. The film didn't give any back story on Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. Who were they? What did they (allegedly) do? How were they discovered? Why were they chosen to symbolize the witchhunt era? Why were they executed, when hundreds of other convicted spies were not? What evidence suggests they were guilty, and what evidence suggests they were not? A documentary should elucidate the viewer and make them feel more knowledgeable on a subject than before. Ivy did practically no historical research when making this film, which betrays the entire purpose of a documentary. She interviewed family members and tracked down old people who knew her grandparents, but otherwise provided no context. Someone who is not American, or unfamiliar with the McCarthyism era, would be baffled by this film, because it assumes that everyone already knows the story.
It is clear that Ivy put her whole heart into this project, and the result is a very sincere attempt to humanize the grandparents she never met. However, I wanted to understand what truly happened, and my questions were not answered.
The best thing about this film was Michael Meeropol, Ivy's father. He is a passionate, articulate activist who knows more about the subject than his daughter. The scenes in which he speaks were the smartest in the film. I began to wish that he had directed this documentary, and not his daughter. Ivy, despite her good intentions, is ditzy and a weak interviewer. She has the very annoying habit of trailing off questions halfway, and leaving her subjects to figure out what she is asking. Her interviews were unstructured and the narration was rickety.
Furthermore, the biases and shoddy journalism are apparent. Ivy and her brother are naively insistent that their grandparents were "innocent" (a word that gets thrown around repeatedly) despite admitting that they never examined the evidence or studied the story beyond hearing it from their father. The Rosenberg records were unsealed by the government in 1995, and yet Ivy didn't bother looking at them until she made this film.
Everyone has the right to know where they come from. While the Meeropol family's efforts to define their legacy are admirable, the result was a very amateurish film. It is too bad that another family member with better documentarian abilities didn't take the helm.
It is clear that Ivy put her whole heart into this project, and the result is a very sincere attempt to humanize the grandparents she never met. However, I wanted to understand what truly happened, and my questions were not answered.
The best thing about this film was Michael Meeropol, Ivy's father. He is a passionate, articulate activist who knows more about the subject than his daughter. The scenes in which he speaks were the smartest in the film. I began to wish that he had directed this documentary, and not his daughter. Ivy, despite her good intentions, is ditzy and a weak interviewer. She has the very annoying habit of trailing off questions halfway, and leaving her subjects to figure out what she is asking. Her interviews were unstructured and the narration was rickety.
Furthermore, the biases and shoddy journalism are apparent. Ivy and her brother are naively insistent that their grandparents were "innocent" (a word that gets thrown around repeatedly) despite admitting that they never examined the evidence or studied the story beyond hearing it from their father. The Rosenberg records were unsealed by the government in 1995, and yet Ivy didn't bother looking at them until she made this film.
Everyone has the right to know where they come from. While the Meeropol family's efforts to define their legacy are admirable, the result was a very amateurish film. It is too bad that another family member with better documentarian abilities didn't take the helm.
A very amateurish and personal film that offers limited appeal and fails to make its subject more accessible
bob the moo10 March 2007
Ivy Meeropol is the granddaughter of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg, who were executed as traitors for allegedly passing the secrets of the atomic bomb to America's enemy Russia. Decades after the event she decides to try and uncover the history around their execution and sets out to interview her relatives and others involved.
As a non-American and someone who was only born in the 1970's, I was not that familiar with the subject of the film but had a vague knowledge of what this was about or at least enough to come to the film to learn more. The problem is that the film doesn't actually help the causal viewer at all and seems to assume that everyone watching it will already know the whole story. In a way perhaps this is a fair approach because the film is roundly personal and amateur, made by Meeropol for herself more than anyone else. With this in mind then perhaps it is forgivable that the film has come off this way, because it does just what the small target audience needed; however to my mind this approach is a bit careless towards the audience Meeropol could easily have built the factual story and then expanded it to be a personal exploration.
The film doesn't do this though and really the history behind the Rosenberg's and the events in America at the time are hardly touched upon in favour of Meeropol trying to get to grips with her complex family tree and the relatives who scattered when the execution took place and the children were left with no family to take them in. The interest in this material will be limited and, without the film giving you any background, the casual viewer will feel as isolated as I did which is a problem whether Meeropol thinks it is or not.
Overall then a very personal film that has a limited audience as a result. For those very familiar with the Rosenberg and the wider family then this will be gripping and touching but without even knowing the basics then how was I suppose to care about the personal story behind (after) the execution? A very amateurish and personal film that offers limited appeal and fails to make its subject more accessible.
As a non-American and someone who was only born in the 1970's, I was not that familiar with the subject of the film but had a vague knowledge of what this was about or at least enough to come to the film to learn more. The problem is that the film doesn't actually help the causal viewer at all and seems to assume that everyone watching it will already know the whole story. In a way perhaps this is a fair approach because the film is roundly personal and amateur, made by Meeropol for herself more than anyone else. With this in mind then perhaps it is forgivable that the film has come off this way, because it does just what the small target audience needed; however to my mind this approach is a bit careless towards the audience Meeropol could easily have built the factual story and then expanded it to be a personal exploration.
The film doesn't do this though and really the history behind the Rosenberg's and the events in America at the time are hardly touched upon in favour of Meeropol trying to get to grips with her complex family tree and the relatives who scattered when the execution took place and the children were left with no family to take them in. The interest in this material will be limited and, without the film giving you any background, the casual viewer will feel as isolated as I did which is a problem whether Meeropol thinks it is or not.
Overall then a very personal film that has a limited audience as a result. For those very familiar with the Rosenberg and the wider family then this will be gripping and touching but without even knowing the basics then how was I suppose to care about the personal story behind (after) the execution? A very amateurish and personal film that offers limited appeal and fails to make its subject more accessible.
Fascinating Study of Anti-Communist paranoia.
xaixura30 June 2004
Warning: Spoilers
A very brave thing for Ivy to do & a good exploration of the paranoia of Cold War Mentality. The Rosenberg situation was a product of the times, regardless of what other reviewers say. They did not do anything to deserve the death penalty, perhaps only prison. Spoiler: The real tragedy is that Julius was willing to put his family at risk by his political activities. He must have known the consequences of being caught; was it worth it to pass info to the Soviets? It was never made clear what goal he hoped to achieve as a result of his espionage. The fact that he & Ethel acted so nobly after their arrest was amazing! Much better, as Michael said than to live the life of David Greenglass. Is the shame worse for a traitor to your country or to your friends & family?
But what if....
nmkramer-216 December 2006
We all should know what kind of person Roy Cohn was...we also know what a maniac McCarthy was. It was a different world back then.
I think the question to ask about the Rosenbergs is this:
Why were the executed when other alleged spies were not?
But in the same token...
If they were innocent like they maintained to the end of their lives, why didn't they just comply with the agencies and turn in some other spies that were higher in the ranks and spare their children from being orphans?
Were they members of a Communist party? Probably...
Did they pass along information about the a-bomb to Russia? Doubtful...
Did their crimes justify the death sentence?
I think the documentary was well done and brought back a lot of questions that still haunt many people in the US.
I think the question to ask about the Rosenbergs is this:
Why were the executed when other alleged spies were not?
But in the same token...
If they were innocent like they maintained to the end of their lives, why didn't they just comply with the agencies and turn in some other spies that were higher in the ranks and spare their children from being orphans?
Were they members of a Communist party? Probably...
Did they pass along information about the a-bomb to Russia? Doubtful...
Did their crimes justify the death sentence?
I think the documentary was well done and brought back a lot of questions that still haunt many people in the US.
Documentary as Drama
groggo19 December 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Writer-director Ivy Meerepol has been accused of being 'amateurish' or 'naive' in the making of this exceptional film. For me, this lack of 'slickness' is why this doc packs such an emotionally wallop. The starkness and edginess, along with Meerepol's own tentative uncertainties, were entirely commensurate with the shadowy period she was investigating.
I was much impressed by Meerepol, who took on a huge challenge: how to find the truth, warts and all, about her larger-than-life grandparents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. She is an intelligent and sensitive person on a journey of determined discovery about an era blanketed by dark suspicion and paranoia.
I was 15 years old when the Rosenbergs were executed. It was a time of madness in America (a fairly constant thing to this day in my opinion). The norm was mass hysteria, fueled by the American government, about the Red Menace. It was the age of grisly neo-fascists like the alcohol-ridden lunatic Joe McCarthy, the deeply closeted gay-basher Roy Cohn, noted drag queen J. Edgar Hoover, and, yes, Tricky Dicky Nixon. All of them (and many others) casually destroyed countless lives with righteous indignation. They were the last people who should be indignant, righteously or otherwise.
Joe Stalin, a great American ally only a few years before (echoes of Saddam and bin Laden 40 years later), was still alive and served as the ideal American villain. He was part of the Axis of Evil long before George Bush pretended he invented the term.
These were the hostile social and political conditions surrounding the sacrificial killing of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. It was only a few years after George Orwell wrote '1984,' but the mind control featured in that book was already embedded in the psyche of the 'Free World'.
I was much impressed by Ivy's persistence, and by the brilliant commentary and encouragement of her father Michael (the Rosenbergs' eldest son). When Ivy arranges for Michael and his brother Robert to visit their parents' old apartment, it was a creepy (and powerful) moment in the film. The two brothers seemed overwhelmed by the eerie 'sameness' of the apartment. They were also spooked by the very same elevator that, 50 years earlier, contained a small army of FBI agents who stormed into the apartment and arrested their father. From the moment he left the apartment and stepped into that elevator with the FBI agents, Julius Rosenberg was doomed.
This documentary is outstanding, and Ivy Meerepol deserves tremendous credit.
I was much impressed by Meerepol, who took on a huge challenge: how to find the truth, warts and all, about her larger-than-life grandparents, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. She is an intelligent and sensitive person on a journey of determined discovery about an era blanketed by dark suspicion and paranoia.
I was 15 years old when the Rosenbergs were executed. It was a time of madness in America (a fairly constant thing to this day in my opinion). The norm was mass hysteria, fueled by the American government, about the Red Menace. It was the age of grisly neo-fascists like the alcohol-ridden lunatic Joe McCarthy, the deeply closeted gay-basher Roy Cohn, noted drag queen J. Edgar Hoover, and, yes, Tricky Dicky Nixon. All of them (and many others) casually destroyed countless lives with righteous indignation. They were the last people who should be indignant, righteously or otherwise.
Joe Stalin, a great American ally only a few years before (echoes of Saddam and bin Laden 40 years later), was still alive and served as the ideal American villain. He was part of the Axis of Evil long before George Bush pretended he invented the term.
These were the hostile social and political conditions surrounding the sacrificial killing of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. It was only a few years after George Orwell wrote '1984,' but the mind control featured in that book was already embedded in the psyche of the 'Free World'.
I was much impressed by Ivy's persistence, and by the brilliant commentary and encouragement of her father Michael (the Rosenbergs' eldest son). When Ivy arranges for Michael and his brother Robert to visit their parents' old apartment, it was a creepy (and powerful) moment in the film. The two brothers seemed overwhelmed by the eerie 'sameness' of the apartment. They were also spooked by the very same elevator that, 50 years earlier, contained a small army of FBI agents who stormed into the apartment and arrested their father. From the moment he left the apartment and stepped into that elevator with the FBI agents, Julius Rosenberg was doomed.
This documentary is outstanding, and Ivy Meerepol deserves tremendous credit.
Painful To Watch
harkin-14 May 2007
I'm not sure what makes this embarrassingly amateur 'symp-documentary' more painful to watch, the fact that it's mostly misplaced, vindictive pseudo-journalism or that there are many gullible America-hating minds ready to eat this trash up.
The Venona Papers (opened after the fall of the Soviet Union) have confirmed without a doubt that the Rosenbergs were not only traitors giving the Russians America's atomic secrets, they also showed that the Rosenbergs were hard-core ideologues who felt their mission was more important than theirs or other people's lives. FACT - While the USSR was killing millions of its own citizens, these two criminals were doing everything in their power to help spread communism over the earth. David Greenglass was a scum and he's probably the closest thing there is to Julius and Ethel......except he talked.
I'm sure it would be hard for any descendant of this sinister couple to come to terms with what they did, much less move on and live for themselves; in fact, Ivy Meeropol has actually put her mind in REVERSE and regresses to a point of blaming everyone but the traitors. I can't imagine anyone sitting and listening to her and her family and not wanting to get the hell away.
The title of this film should be 'How To Waste Your Life And Wallow In Pity And Hate Because Your Grandparents Were Willing Tools For Totalitarinasm'
The Venona Papers (opened after the fall of the Soviet Union) have confirmed without a doubt that the Rosenbergs were not only traitors giving the Russians America's atomic secrets, they also showed that the Rosenbergs were hard-core ideologues who felt their mission was more important than theirs or other people's lives. FACT - While the USSR was killing millions of its own citizens, these two criminals were doing everything in their power to help spread communism over the earth. David Greenglass was a scum and he's probably the closest thing there is to Julius and Ethel......except he talked.
I'm sure it would be hard for any descendant of this sinister couple to come to terms with what they did, much less move on and live for themselves; in fact, Ivy Meeropol has actually put her mind in REVERSE and regresses to a point of blaming everyone but the traitors. I can't imagine anyone sitting and listening to her and her family and not wanting to get the hell away.
The title of this film should be 'How To Waste Your Life And Wallow In Pity And Hate Because Your Grandparents Were Willing Tools For Totalitarinasm'
It is what it is.
williamdoug200128 June 2004
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.
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.
Worth watching if you are a history buff
elenipnyc27 September 2018
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.
You Had to Feel Bad for the Survivors
shelbythuylinh3 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Julius Rosenberg was the main person who traded secrets while his wife Ethel was a scapegoat in the whole thing.
Though she knew of it but the US government wanted to make them an example by executing them in the infamous Sing Sing Prison.
As think that her brother and Julus brother in law, David Greenglass that sold them out and gotten up to 15 years in prison and saved his wife over his own sister. As even though he did not feel the prosecutors would seek the death penalty.
Had Julius needed to save his wife and that really it should had been him and David with the latter sitting on his lap while Old Sparky was turned on.
Even if you do not agree with Robert and Michael Meeropol's beliefs there, you had to feel bad as nobody would take them. But they later adopted the name that they are in from the late Abel and Ann Meeropol there, Abel wrote 'Strange Fruit" as it became very controversial there.
It all worked out as they could had been forgotten and blasted. But that they set it all aside, raised own families, as got jobs as lawyers and/or professors. Michael's own daughter Ivy wrote and directed this documentary.
Very compelling on it there.
Though she knew of it but the US government wanted to make them an example by executing them in the infamous Sing Sing Prison.
As think that her brother and Julus brother in law, David Greenglass that sold them out and gotten up to 15 years in prison and saved his wife over his own sister. As even though he did not feel the prosecutors would seek the death penalty.
Had Julius needed to save his wife and that really it should had been him and David with the latter sitting on his lap while Old Sparky was turned on.
Even if you do not agree with Robert and Michael Meeropol's beliefs there, you had to feel bad as nobody would take them. But they later adopted the name that they are in from the late Abel and Ann Meeropol there, Abel wrote 'Strange Fruit" as it became very controversial there.
It all worked out as they could had been forgotten and blasted. But that they set it all aside, raised own families, as got jobs as lawyers and/or professors. Michael's own daughter Ivy wrote and directed this documentary.
Very compelling on it there.
The cost of a show trial
Strausszek17 July 2005
I saw this documentary investigation on TV recently, and it seems obvious it raises some questions about the Cold War era and about the kind of pressures that may apply in a courtroom. We'll probably never know just how far Julius Rosenberg, in particular, was involved in the top ranks of Soviet espionage on the U.S., or why he took what he must have known were grave personal risks to himself and his family. The accusation at the time that he'd "sold the secret of the atomic bomb to the Russians" was certainly an exaggeration; other people like Klaus Fuchs and British physicists seem to have handed over much more, and anyone interested in the era and the Soviet infiltration of the Manhattan project should read Allen Weinstein's "The Haunted Wood" - a pioneer work on Soviet espionage in America in the 40s and early 50s, written together with an ex-KGB veteran, and a book that makes real use of the Russian intelligence archives. One point he makes is that the NKVD (the KGB of the time) espionage activity in the U.S. seems to have declined sharply in the late 40s, and it had become really hard to find new agents (Mr Rosenberg may have been recruited as early as around 1940).
Anyway, Meeropol's film takes no unequivocal stance on her grandparents' innocence. Her father believed in it for a long time, but he points out that the Venona telegrams (released in '95) seem to put this in doubt. On the other hand, the question of just why the atomic bombs were used on Japan is still debated among historians. The clips of Nixon ("if you set out to shoot rats, make sure you shoot'em straight!") and McCarthy make a powerful, if a bit predictable, picture of the paranoia. I just read a review in the ultra-right Frontpage magazine which poured venom on this film, labeling it a clever and cold propaganda work, meant to exonerate the Rosenbergs. This is bullshit; the movie is much more about the human cost of this sort of heavily publicized show trials, and about how even the nearest relatives drew off (not *one* of the next-of-kin would pick up the Rosenberg boys after the trial and execution). In one poignantly funny scene, Ms Meeropol's father recalls how he realized the role of David Greenglass in giving away his parents - he still had to pay a heavy price - and says: "I wanted to go to whatever little place where he lived now, sneak up behind him and purr "Ex-con!" He'd say, No, wait a minute, just don't talk that loud - and I'd raise my voice to a shattering "EX-CON!!" "
Of course, a while later, Ivy Meeropol tells him (and us) how she felt exactly the same when she read about the case in school.
The Rosenbergs were just two of the many people who were credited with low motives and acts of treason in these years, but because they seem so everyday (in a positive sense) the fragments of their story get all the more poignant.
Anyway, Meeropol's film takes no unequivocal stance on her grandparents' innocence. Her father believed in it for a long time, but he points out that the Venona telegrams (released in '95) seem to put this in doubt. On the other hand, the question of just why the atomic bombs were used on Japan is still debated among historians. The clips of Nixon ("if you set out to shoot rats, make sure you shoot'em straight!") and McCarthy make a powerful, if a bit predictable, picture of the paranoia. I just read a review in the ultra-right Frontpage magazine which poured venom on this film, labeling it a clever and cold propaganda work, meant to exonerate the Rosenbergs. This is bullshit; the movie is much more about the human cost of this sort of heavily publicized show trials, and about how even the nearest relatives drew off (not *one* of the next-of-kin would pick up the Rosenberg boys after the trial and execution). In one poignantly funny scene, Ms Meeropol's father recalls how he realized the role of David Greenglass in giving away his parents - he still had to pay a heavy price - and says: "I wanted to go to whatever little place where he lived now, sneak up behind him and purr "Ex-con!" He'd say, No, wait a minute, just don't talk that loud - and I'd raise my voice to a shattering "EX-CON!!" "
Of course, a while later, Ivy Meeropol tells him (and us) how she felt exactly the same when she read about the case in school.
The Rosenbergs were just two of the many people who were credited with low motives and acts of treason in these years, but because they seem so everyday (in a positive sense) the fragments of their story get all the more poignant.
This is more about the family and not Julius and Ethel
golddoor11 February 2020
I expected this to be more factual in content. There is no information as to what they were charged with, how it came to be that they were involved in espionage. I guess since the family pretty much denies that Julius and Ethel did anything wrong I shouldn't have expected much more than what was in this.
Informative, really gives you all different points of view!
ShelbyTMItchell18 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
It is a shame and sadness that the Rosenberg family had to live in the shadow of Julius and Ethel, the first and only two Americans executed for treason and espionage. And shows the points of view from different angles.
Julius was guilty as his arrogance got to him. Ethel may have supported his ideas with the Communist party. But she was made a scapegoat in order to bring her husband down. Sadly, she ended up in the electric chair with him at Sing Sing. The FBI should had eyed David, not Ethel.
Julius could had named names and spare him and his wife from the chair. And not lie and proclaim his innocence. He was guilty as charged. Ethel may have typed the notes to give to the then-USSR at the time. But she had no codename. Julius and his brother in law, with his brother in law's wife did though.
Roy Cohn and Joseph McCarthy made careers out of hunting down communists. And in the end, they were overzealous and arrogant than Julius was. But very little was mentioned of them.
Filmmaker Ivy Merepol, daughter of Michael Merepol shows how the family has been in shame and guilty. As neither of Julius or Ethel's families wanted to get involved. Cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. And how they were expelling Michael and brother Robert of the espionage and treason of both men's parents. When the men were oprhaned and nobody would come to take them after their parents execution. As the families were ashamed of Julius and Ethel brought onto them all.
Except one cousin did talk to Ivy. As he was so ashamed of the family continuing to shun Michael and Robert, and both men's family.
Michael and Robert both turned out really well in the end, as they grew up. After being adopted by a loving couple, changed their names to Merepol in order to avoid anymore hurt and pain. That both men were being caused over their parents and being orphaned for a time. Went on to both earning several degrees and being professors. It could had turned out a lot more worse for them. But in the end, after the times changed and the hoopla died down. The media and the feds as well, left them alone to live their own lives, with their careers, started their own families.
Think that the real villain and main antagonists was Ethel's brother, David Greenglass and his wife Ruth. Whom both helped send Ethel to the chair. In order to save their own skin. Think that David should had been riding the lightening instead of his sister, sitting in Julius' lap when the electricity hit in the chair. Talk about heartless and cruel. And in a 2001 interview, David in a disguise in his first and only interview for CBS 60 Minutes. Has no remorse at all. And probably will never have that he sent his own sister to the chair.
The documentary is informative, helpful, and shows from all kinds of angels. The ending where Ivy and Michael found the graves of Ethel and Julius were touching. But only written in plain letters with their names. Not like Ivy said, beloved mother, father, husband, wife, etc.
Sure it was so bad that Julius and David Greenglass committed espionage and to a lesser extent, Ruth. And could had cost about nearly half a million peoples' murders. Like Judge Irvin Kaufman said, worse than murder. Sadly the overlooked happens to be Julius and Ethel's own children, and children's children!
Julius was guilty as his arrogance got to him. Ethel may have supported his ideas with the Communist party. But she was made a scapegoat in order to bring her husband down. Sadly, she ended up in the electric chair with him at Sing Sing. The FBI should had eyed David, not Ethel.
Julius could had named names and spare him and his wife from the chair. And not lie and proclaim his innocence. He was guilty as charged. Ethel may have typed the notes to give to the then-USSR at the time. But she had no codename. Julius and his brother in law, with his brother in law's wife did though.
Roy Cohn and Joseph McCarthy made careers out of hunting down communists. And in the end, they were overzealous and arrogant than Julius was. But very little was mentioned of them.
Filmmaker Ivy Merepol, daughter of Michael Merepol shows how the family has been in shame and guilty. As neither of Julius or Ethel's families wanted to get involved. Cousins, aunts, uncles, etc. And how they were expelling Michael and brother Robert of the espionage and treason of both men's parents. When the men were oprhaned and nobody would come to take them after their parents execution. As the families were ashamed of Julius and Ethel brought onto them all.
Except one cousin did talk to Ivy. As he was so ashamed of the family continuing to shun Michael and Robert, and both men's family.
Michael and Robert both turned out really well in the end, as they grew up. After being adopted by a loving couple, changed their names to Merepol in order to avoid anymore hurt and pain. That both men were being caused over their parents and being orphaned for a time. Went on to both earning several degrees and being professors. It could had turned out a lot more worse for them. But in the end, after the times changed and the hoopla died down. The media and the feds as well, left them alone to live their own lives, with their careers, started their own families.
Think that the real villain and main antagonists was Ethel's brother, David Greenglass and his wife Ruth. Whom both helped send Ethel to the chair. In order to save their own skin. Think that David should had been riding the lightening instead of his sister, sitting in Julius' lap when the electricity hit in the chair. Talk about heartless and cruel. And in a 2001 interview, David in a disguise in his first and only interview for CBS 60 Minutes. Has no remorse at all. And probably will never have that he sent his own sister to the chair.
The documentary is informative, helpful, and shows from all kinds of angels. The ending where Ivy and Michael found the graves of Ethel and Julius were touching. But only written in plain letters with their names. Not like Ivy said, beloved mother, father, husband, wife, etc.
Sure it was so bad that Julius and David Greenglass committed espionage and to a lesser extent, Ruth. And could had cost about nearly half a million peoples' murders. Like Judge Irvin Kaufman said, worse than murder. Sadly the overlooked happens to be Julius and Ethel's own children, and children's children!
This is very good & sad how this country could have done injustice?!
pineaultnicole20 July 2020
As my title explains it is an unknown fact if they were guilty or innocent and we all know people have been put to death when they WERE NOT GUILTY! It can happen to you or I and that's scary! I pray our country isn't still like that, but I know it is. As a child you grow up thinking your safe n it's not the case. Watch it and decide for yourself everyone has a different outlook on things, so I'd suggest you watch it and then watch Whitey: United Satates V. James J Bulger if you haven't already! Myself being from Massachusetts n close to Boston maybe you could understand my outlook on things. (Sorry I know that documentary has nothing to do with this one, but it shows the corruption, injustice that happened decades ago and is still going on today) Thanks
Ivy Meeropol's film isn't about history at all, it's a rather guileless investigation of who her family are.
poets-12 January 2005
The Rosenbergs are poster children for the black and white horror of what became known as the McCarthy Era, the Communist Witch Hunts, of the early '50s. Their faces, especially Ethel's, is as recognizable to us as McCarthy's himself. Ivy Meeropol, their granddaughter, grew up with an activist father who believed that his parents were, as they said repeatedly and even at their deaths in the electric chair, innocent. Her home was filled with their images, from newspaper accounts, books, and newsreel footage stills, to pieces of art created by the likes of Picasso. But this film only makes passing reference, I feel, to the fact of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. What it does do is present us with a granddaughter's rather guileless investigation of who her family are. Her own name was changed by her father's adoption by another family since his own grandparents, aunts, and uncles--on both sides--Greenglass and Rosenberg-- would not take the two orphaned boys in. Her cousins (one of whom she meets for the first time and who weeps with shame at how his own father--Julius's brother--changed their name to Roberts and refused to even see his two nephews) are complete strangers to her. What does she find out? Does she know her grandparents better? I doubt it. She can't know why the Rosenbergs chose to die rather than betray political beliefs, friends, and their nearly religious conviction that Socialism was humankind's only hope. What she can see is what shame, fear, cowardice, infamy, and love does to a family. I think Lillian Hellman's title for her memoir of the same period names it best: Scoundrel Time. After all, the Rosenbergs' convictions and executions made Roy Cohn into a celebrity. God help us.
Will Someone Please Take Her Camera!!!
Glilyerami10 April 2014
I'm not sure how any of the other reviews were 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, etc. "A sophomoric attempt at film-making" Amen!!! This is truly one of the worse documentaries. Not only are the facts inaccurate, distorted, and omitted, but also the credibility of the witnesses ivy meerpool interviews leaves viewers who were unsure of the Rosenbergs certain of their guilt. In short, no credibility. Especially the over reaching grand daughters with scenes of hyperbolic emotion. Growing up with biased and hearsay. Even Meerpools methods as a pseudo journalist with follow- up questions was baffling. Meerpool makes the assumption that everyone knows the story, which with this case, she shouldn't have--filmmaking 101, Journalism 101. Attempting to persuade the audience emotionally and with "evidence" that her grandparents were wrongly convicted, as a rhetorician I would use this film as a failing attempt and untrustworthy.
Another Ironic attempt at socialist propaganda
moviemom232 August 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Fact: The Rosenberg were guilty. The 1930s-1950s were a time of an enormous growth of socialism and communism in America, culminating in the McCarthy hearings, which quashed it for a time. But here we go again and surprise surprise propaganda from 2004 airing as socialism / communism being once again presented as legitimate by leftist democrats.
What's very disturbing is the son of the Rosenbergs (filmmaker's Ivy Meeropol's father) and his brother then and are now total socialist zealots. There is NO proof the parents were innocent and plenty of proof they were guilty as charged. When the family is confronted with the Verona files, which prove without a shadow of a doubt their guilt, the denial is thick as pea soup. If they deny it over and over again, are they creating enough "doubt" to change public opinion? I don't think so.
Watching this today I couldn't help drawing parallel to what is happening in the world today. The descendants now vehemently defend the actions of these traitors, who even had code names, contacts and paraphernalia related to spying against America straight to the Soviet Union.
The way both Rosenberg sons look directly at the camera trying to convince us the government was so cruel and wrong to execute 2 traitors who put communism above their own children and the entire United States didn't work on me. SNS.
Also the old people Meeropol interviews (some who did jail time with the Rosenbergs) apparently living in comfort in free America all these years after their sentences were served. The giggling old man really pissed me off. They lived free In this country on the backs of hardworking loyal Americans and they are still being assholes.
Spies = Traitors = Death penalty
What's very disturbing is the son of the Rosenbergs (filmmaker's Ivy Meeropol's father) and his brother then and are now total socialist zealots. There is NO proof the parents were innocent and plenty of proof they were guilty as charged. When the family is confronted with the Verona files, which prove without a shadow of a doubt their guilt, the denial is thick as pea soup. If they deny it over and over again, are they creating enough "doubt" to change public opinion? I don't think so.
Watching this today I couldn't help drawing parallel to what is happening in the world today. The descendants now vehemently defend the actions of these traitors, who even had code names, contacts and paraphernalia related to spying against America straight to the Soviet Union.
The way both Rosenberg sons look directly at the camera trying to convince us the government was so cruel and wrong to execute 2 traitors who put communism above their own children and the entire United States didn't work on me. SNS.
Also the old people Meeropol interviews (some who did jail time with the Rosenbergs) apparently living in comfort in free America all these years after their sentences were served. The giggling old man really pissed me off. They lived free In this country on the backs of hardworking loyal Americans and they are still being assholes.
Spies = Traitors = Death penalty
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
