GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Mjeteconer Just perfect...

Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

rps-2 Perhaps a little "artsy-dartsy", yes. But this is still a very compelling film that shows the many shades of grey that existed between the black and the white of most war movies. It's the story of a typical German --- a young professor --- who gets swept up in events as he goes along to get along. He sees Nazism as a temporary aberration and even believes he can have a positive influence on it but gets swept up in the movement without really believing in it. Life could be good in Germany before the war if you were not Jewish and were a Nazi or at least appeared to be one. Thus are Professor John Holden and his Jewish friend and fellow world war veteran Maurice caught in the vortex. There are a few extraneous lines in the plot: Holden's senile mother, his failed marriage and the reason for it. They don't seem to serve any purpose other than to add some flesh to a fairly skinny plot. But nevertheless it is both a powerful, well performed drama and a very different glimpse into the everyday life of Nazi Germany before the war.

jvdesuit1 This is a very good and dramatic movie.Some here have criticized it because the actors had an English accent! Gosh if this is the only thing they have noticed in the movie it is really a shame.The movie shows us how an educated man, professor in a university of literature, progressively shuts his eyes to the outrageous acts of the Nazi Power. Once you put the finger in the spiral an pretend not to see what is happening before yours eyes you become an accomplice of the leaders.We see this happening every day even today. When we accept to elect at the head of our Countries men or women who have committed unjustifiable acts we compromise with ethics. In France we did that twice once in 1981 and again in 2012. We laugh of the escapades of our President, but this is not laughable and shows weaknesses in his ethics and ours who elected him which could lead to anything else. This is the main point of the movie non only the professor is at fault but all his near entourage is also playing with ethics.What is most worrying is to see that the movie did not capture a large audience. It was not distributed in France and apart of Spain which reached a million dollars plus revenues, the USA and UK did not even reach have of that.It is a very dangerous tendency which shows that in today's world Ethics are considered a secondary matter to aim for and compromise totally accepted in all aspects of our daily life.

tomsview "Good" starts quietly, but ends powerfully. It goes to the heart of our sense of right and wrong.The movie is set in Germany a few years before WW2. John Halder (Viggo Mortenson) is a WW1 veteran and university lecturer who lives in a small apartment with his wife, two children and a demanding, invalid mother.He has written a novel about euthanasia, which the new Nazi government finds is in accord with their ideas, and John is offered a post within the SS. Although he is anything but a Nazi, John nonetheless enjoys the advantages the position offers him although it compromises his relationship with his friend, Maurice Glückstein (Jason Isaacs), a Jew.John also leaves his wife and marries a sexy young student, Anne (Jodie Whittaker); he is a man who seems easily seduced in love and in life. Eventually, in the film's grim finale, John is forced to confront his lack of firmness and the realities of the Nazi regime.The story shows in microcosm how the Nazis seduced the Germans, and how they accepted the loss of personal freedoms and worse for what seemed to be for the good of the nation, a better life, and maybe, just not to rock the boat. However, there was a price to pay and once ensnared there was no turning back.The film probably has more relevance to people who know some history of the times, because it helps explain why John acts the way he does - although not stated overtly, his actions are driven by underlying fear. There are little touches that the filmmakers don't feel necessary to explain such as why the previous occupants of Anne and John's new apartment have left so suddenly - a knowledge of the times would suggest that they were Jews who had been evicted.Some scenes are painful to watch, especially as John fails to help Maurice as the Nazis ramp up their persecution of the Jews. Here, the film seems to challenge the viewer, "What would you do in his place"? Would you have the courage to swim against the tide of events? John is basically a decent man, however he is too pliable, too apathetic, and does not act until it is too late."Good" may seem slow to some, "Iron Man 2" it is not. But I feel that the time it takes to build its characters pays off in the end - we become involved. One of the most asked questions in history is how did the Nazis manage to sway ordinary Germans to their cause? This film gives part of the answer in an intimate and accessible way. As British philosopher Edmund Burke famously said, " The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

darmitage1990 I'm really surprised this film had been so badly discredited.There are a few flaws, namely with character development, especially when analysing Anna, and Handler's (Mortensen) ex wife. Their characters appear integral to the story, yet influence over Handler and his actions are often overlooked. The story jumps through time periods, which artistically I can understand, however leaves the viewer to neglect the effect of time on Handler which is an integral element to the story - and the fundamental message this film is trying to portray.However, the message is strong and delivered well. It contends with traditional notions of the mindless brutality of Nazis and Germans, and probably more accurately reflects the role of an 'ordinary German' living in this society. Too often are films based on assumptions of stereotype and the black and white portrayal of good and evil. The only flaw in message is that Handler seem's to be the exception, the only 'good' in a sea of evil, but the film is thought provoking nonetheless. It echoes similar themes surrounding the role of the perpetrator and perpetrator guilt that have become iconically associated with the Reader. It places the image of a Nazi perpetrator in a context, which is vital in understanding the circumstances in which these actions were carried out. So many films in this genre are centred around the victim experiences and developments in Germany from 1933-39, and it is interesting to see the take from the perspective of a German. The image of a Nazi is deconstructed, it emphasises the Intentionalist theory in a top-down execution of the Final Solution. It shows an average German, caught up in a corrupt society - highlighting the weakness and vulnerability, as well as potential ignorance of the average German citizen - emphasised in the last scene.Mortensen is fantastic in this, his acting is convincing and emotive. Unfortunately I feel other cast members may discredit his role, and the whole tone of the movie. However, this film is one of the most sincere and interesting modern depictions of the Holocaust I've seen, and is refreshing change to sea of trauma currently loved by Hollywood.