The film that explores the infamous Leopold-Loeb case. So, at the very least, it encompasses Nietzsche and free will. And what could the relationship possibly be between them? Is the uberman welded or not welded to the laws of nature?
There are arguments that go back and forth over behavior of this sort. The mind of one who rationalizes doing anything simply because it wants to. A mind that measures the consequences only in terms of not getting caught. In my view, only the existence of God resolves it.
But, with or without God, if we do only what we must do than morality is a bit of a sham.
It’s always entertaining though to watch two “super-intellects” tear into each other once the jig is up and the mere mortals have them on trial for capital murder.
Of course at the end of the trial [in the film] any semblance of delving into this “philosophically” devolved into the exploration of “abnormal psychology” instead.
In my view though, the film’s title is somewhat of a misnomer. The idea that through a combination of nature and nurtue we are compelled to behave as we do was hardly stressed at all in Wilk/Darrow’s argument to the judge.
And the ending. Back to God? Well, this film is from the 1950s.
IMDb
[b]Alfred Hitchcock’s 1948 film Rope, Tom Kalin’s 1992 film Swoon, and Murder by Numbers (2002) are all based on the Leopold/Loeb case, although they emphasize different aspects of the story. Hitchcock’s film highlights their belief in their own intellectual superiority and Kalin’s emphasizes the sexual aspect of their relationhip; this film focuses on the way their “thrill” crime unravelled and the innovative approach Clarence Darrow (renamed for this film as Jonathan Wilk) took to their defence… The TV movie Darrow also deals in part with Clarence Darrow’s involvement in the Leopold/Loeb trial.
Those who have seen the movie and are familiar with the case of Leopold and Loeb say that the movie is extremely accurate in its portrayal of the real story. Some events may be simplified and/or skipped over, but watching the movie is like reading a detailed account of the case. Only the names have been changed. Leopold’s autobiography, Life Plus 99 Years (1974), may give further insight into the case from Leopold’s point-of-view.[/b]
Leopold and Loeb at wiki: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leopold_and_Loeb
At philosophical investigations: philosophicalinvestigations. … mitstart=5
trailer: youtu.be/MTzja2DQgg4
COMPULSION [1959]
Directed by Richard Fleischer
[b]Judd: To the perfect crime!
Arthur: Crime? Oh, my wealthy fraternity brothers. 67 dollars, and a second-hand typewriter.
…
Arthur: He’s asking for it, give it to him. That’s an order, Judd!
…
Judd: It would have been murder.
Arthur: Uh huh. And you know why I tried it, Juddsie? Because I damn well felt like it. That’s why.
…
Judd: Please, Artie - I’ll do anything you say.
Arthur: Anything?
…
Arthur: I want to do something that is really dangerous. I want to do something that will have everybody talking. Not just a few guys.
…
Judd: An experiment. Detached, with no emotional involvement. And no reason for it, except to show that we can do it.
…
Max [to Judd]: It just irritates me to see anyone as brilliant as you make a jackass out of himself over someone like Artie Straus.
…
Judd: Professor, I must agree with Nietzsche. Tribal codes and such do not necessarily apply to the leaders of society.
Professor: All men are bound by law, Mr. Steiner. And had Nietzsche been a lawyer instead of a German philosopher, he would have known that too.
…
Professor: Perhaps my thinking is outmoded. But I still cling to the theory that if we were all super-intellects, we would nevertheless, evolve our own code of laws.
…
Arthur: Stop worrying. It’s not that easy to trace an ordinary pair of glasses.
Judd: But suppose they do?
Arthur: So what? They’re not my glasses.
…
Arthur: You want me to order you to, Judd?
…
Judd: Sad? That’s a sentimental term. There is no such thing as sadness. Only the reality of things happening.
Ruth: You don’t really believe that.
…
Judd: What’s one life more or less? There were nine million people killed in the war. What does one little Chicago boy matter?
Ruth: Judd! You’re not that cruel.
Judd: No? Murder’s nothing. It’s just a simple experience. Murder and rape? Do you know what beauty there is in evil?!
Ruth: Is there?
Judd: Yes! Why don’t you run?
Ruth: Is that what you want me to do?
Judd: Yes!
Ruth: Do you have to attack me, Judd?
Judd: I don’t have to do anything! If I attack you, it’s because I choose to!
[he pushes her to the ground and starts ripping at her clothes]
Judd: Are you afraid of me?!
Ruth: I’m afreaid for you, Judd. I’m afraid for you!
[he stops and rolls off her]
Judd: I’m so ashamed!
…
Judd: What is it?
Athur: A Judas goat. Didn’t you ever see one?
Judd: No. What does it do?
Arthur: Watch and you’ll find out. See, when they get to the slaughterhouse, he ducks to one side and the silly sheep go in to get their throats cut—and that black devil knows it!
…
Arthur: Hey, come on—let’s go watch them slaughter the sheep.
…
Ruth: I can’t help feeling sorry for Judd and for Artie.
Sid: Sorry for them? Ruth, they plotted a cold blooded killing and went through with it like an experiment in chemistry.
…
Ruth: It wasn’t the way you think at all. He made an attempt at it. He couldn’t go through with it, Sid. He was like a child–a sick, frightened child.
Sid: I don’t understand you, Ruth. He tries to rape you and you defend him.
Ruth: I know. It’s difficult to understand but, see, you weren’t there, you didn’t see him like I did. If you did, you’d have some compassion or sympathy for him, believe me.
Sid: Sympathy? Ruth, you sound as though you’re sorry he didn’t go through with it.
[Ruth slaps him across the face]
Sid: I hope they hang him. I hope he hangs till the rope rots.
…
Arthur: So we sweat through 3 months of misery just to hear that?
[then to Wilk]
Arthur: I wish they had hung us right off the bat.[/b]