James Hitchcock One might have thought that the Third Reich is a subject which has been done to death in the cinema, yet occasionally a film turns up which is able to shed new light on the subject. "Good" came out in 2008, the same year as "The Reader", another film about Nazism, but one which was much more widely publicised. John Halder is a young lecturer in the literature department of a German university in the 1930s. (Although the film is set in Germany, the first names of most characters are anglicised- for example John and Maurice rather than Johann and Moritz). When the Nazi Party comes to power in 1933, Halder seems an unlikely convert to their doctrines, as he is relatively liberal in his politics and not at all anti-Semitic- indeed, his closest friend Maurice Glückstein is Jewish. He is angry when he is ordered to stop teaching the works of Jewish authors like Marcel Proust. Yet Halder is seduced into going along with the Party. He first comes to the notice of the Nazi hierarchy when he publishes a novel in support of euthanasia, and is commissioned by them to carry out research into the same subject. He is persuaded that taking out Party membership will advance his career and is given a rank in the SS. This position is at first purely honorary, but later he is charged with more responsibilities. Halder's involvement in the party leads to the end of his friendship with Maurice; when his friend asks him for help in obtaining an exit visa so he can leave Germany, Halder fails to do so out of moral cowardice. The film ends in 1942 with Halder working in a concentration camp. The story is told against the background of Halder's personal life, including his difficult relationship with his elderly mother and the breakdown of his first marriage following an affair with a student, who becomes his second wife. What is striking about Halder's gradual moral corruption is the methods used by the Nazis to get him to co-operate. They never need to resort to threats or bullying. Nobody ever barks "Ve haff vays und means…." or some similar phrase. Even notorious real-life Nazis like Philipp Bouhler and Adolf Eichmann come across as quite reasonable. Halder is won over by flattery, by appeals to his self-interest and by playing on his quite genuine idealism. Although the title "Good" is intended ironically, there must have been many in the early thirties who persuaded themselves that the National Socialist movement could be a force for good, that it could lead to a genuine sense of national rebirth and renewal in Germany and that the its regrettable anti-Semitism was merely a temporary mania which would burn itself out once the Party had consolidated itself in power and established a firmer control over its wild young stormtroopers. When Halder hesitates about joining the Nazi Party he is won over by the arguments of his second wife Anne that the party needs good men like himself as members in order to ensure a better future for the country. I was not very impressed by Viggo Mortensen in the last film I saw him in, "A Perfect Murder", so I am happy to say that he is much better here as Halder, the man whose personal road to Hell is paved with the best of intentions. I also liked Jason Isaacs as Maurice. The theme of the film- a once liberal man seduced by Nazism, was also treated in a German- language film, Istvan Szabo's "Mephisto". I wouldn't rank "Good" quite as highly as Szabo's film, but I certainly preferred it to "The Reader" which I found empty, barren and lacking any new insights into its grim subject-matter. "Good", by contrast, does have something of interest to say about the Nazi era and, by extension, also about the temptation to collaborate with evil which arises whenever people are forced to live under totalitarian regimes. 7/10

nzallblacks_12 Not expecting 'Masterpiece Theater', I rented this flick hoping that it explored an interesting theme: mercy killing or euthanasia. It didn't happen.The director/producers not only forgot to 'explain' the link between the nutty literary professor (Mortensen) but they completely gave up on exploring the facets of the Nazi fascination. Yes, in one scene we glean some snippets. Even there the 'subject' is fumbled then abandoned.Instead the actors switch to their normal mold: wooden, stunted speech using a modern English vernacular. Can you imagine the horror on hearing SS Command barking orders with a Cockney accent? That obtuse behavior actually happened all the time in this film!The whole film was horrid. There was no fluidity to the scenes. It's obvious that this low budget flick was cobbled together in any old disjointed fashion. And it showed. And why do these nouveau rich breed of directors resort to inserting a porn scene when all else fails? Well, we know the answer but I'm still tired of this schickt. Now, it happens all the time. Well, the director hails from Brazil, so... Nah!This film is about as far from redemption as Judas was from the Cross. It should not have been released from the cutting room floor. Even better: toss it on the pile of books to be burned. The director even bungled that scene. Actually there was no rhyme or reason for any of the scenes.Then why'd they release it? Can't wait to hear their answer, not.

Ben Larson What have I done? What have I done? You can imagine that Professor John Halder (Viggo Mortensen) was asking that question over and over.He seemed not to understand what was happening to him as he let himself be used by the Nazi's. First, he joins the party, then he loses his lifelong friend simply because he was Jewish. It was only when he was picked to inspect the death camps did he come to a full realization of the depths into which he had sunk.How do you cook a lobster? If you throw it into a pot of boiling water it will scream and jump out. But, if you put it in water and slowly raise the temperature, it boils before it knows what/s happening. Professor Halder was put in tepid water and the temperature raised gradually until the shock hit him full force, and he could not escape.Mortensen was very good, but his friend Morris (Jason Isaacs), a Jew, was excellent.

Xabier Jense I was quite disappointed by the role played by Viggo Mortensen; he could not make me believe that he was resisting anyhow the fate which was getting hold on him. Of course I have no experience with such problems as being intellectually and morally paralyzed by the political repression of societies like the Third Reich, but at least I expected an actor as Mortensen -who played an thrilling role in A History of Violence- to be able to show something more of a battle a conscience has to fight with the reality of his time like Brandauer demonstrated in Mephisto. But of course it's possible that his role was to be plain obedient and thus weak like many Germans must have been, because discipline was not only moral obligation to the state but also a political one to the nation. Only, even than he didn't convince me.