Review of Good (2008) by Billy H — 02 May 2009

Apparently, in the Thirties, it was a bad idea for Nazis and Jews to be friends in Germany. Even if they had been best friends for many years already, it seems that it was frowned upon by an awful lot of people - especially if you were a member of the SS. Now that just seems silly to me, but then there's no accounting for the Germans - they'll listen to anybody with a hard-line on industrial execution and a penchant for fetishistic uniforms.

Good, tells us the story of two such friends - who try to deny the onward march of History as it thrusts change upon them - and who ultimately become destroyed by the force of National Socialism that is sweeping through the hearts and minds of their homeland. Viggo Mortensen is the university professor forced to battle his own conscience, whilst trying to keep his own head, during the rise of The Third Reich. He tries to keep up a friendship with his Jewish pal, Jason Isaacs - but soon realises how difficult it is to marry his own beliefs with those of the Party he serves.

Despite the over-saturation of the Megaplex screens with tales of Nazi brutality and Jewish plight, Good serves to redress the balance with a genuinely affecting scenario and incredibly well drawn characters. This is not a simple morality tale where we must hate the bad Nazi men at all costs, but an intelligent treatise on the nature of goodness in the human spirit. We are forced to ask ourselves the same questions as Mortensen does - really trying to find where our self-interest begins and our empathy for others wanes. In a similar situation, would we find the strength to stand up for our own beliefs - or would we roll over and allow others to be persecuted in the interests of our own safety?

There are a lot of interesting clues as to the nature of Mortensen's character throughout the film, and they do a great job of allowing us to explore the main theme: The treatment of his elderly, sick mother; the decision to leave his wife and children for one of his students; the ease with which his ego is stroked by the Party propagandists. However, it's the one most important part of his conscience - that we really want evidence of - but are never allowed to share, that keeps us from understanding his true nature. His work for the Party - the essays he is asked to write on assisted suicide et al - we never get to hear or read. And as such we are never really sure whether we should be feeling sorry for our protagonist; whether he is truly a 'Good' man. This disassociation from our main character tends to keep the audience at a distance and never truly allows us to emote completely with the events on screen.

Other issues such as the subdued pace and the heavily bolstered Englsh accents also add to the fractured nature of the film, but they never get in the way enough to distract you from the main theme. Good, does a very admirable job of shining a light on an unadmirable situation and allowing the exposition of human nature to sneak out through the black leather. It takes itself seriously enough to offer real insight, but perhaps doesn't answer as many of the questions it raises as it should.

The final scene is one which will stick in the memory for a long time, finally showing the true nature of the beast underneath. We can join in on the puzzlement of how we let ourselves get to such a point - and then we can all question ourselves as to just how Good we may be. The answer may not be the one we want to hear!