GOOD

GOOD has a serious moral premise. It shows how an ordinary person’s small compromises can lead toward something monstrous, while connecting Nazi euthanasia propaganda to the mass extermination of the Jews. Its strongest ideas emerge through character conflicts and dialogue rather than blunt statements.

That subtlety is also a weakness. The film can leave viewers uncertain about euthanasia’s evil, and its moral points sometimes lack passion. Strong foul language, sexual elements, and disturbing violence further limit its audience.

You may find thoughtful material here, but your family does not need to see it together. Wait for home, and reserve it for discerning adults.

In Nazi Germany, literature professor John Halder writes a novel about a doctor whose wife asks him to kill her after multiple sclerosis ends her career. The novel attracts Adolf Hitler’s propaganda unit, which wants to turn it into a film and involve John in a euthanasia program.

As John faces pressure from his personal life, his professional success, and the growing Nazi movement, he must decide whether his ideas will remain ideas—or become actions.

Two stars means GOOD has worthwhile ideas and competent filmmaking, but its weaknesses substantially limit the experience. The movie is well produced and well acted, and it brings its moral questions forward through character conflicts and dialogue.

However, it is too subtle and sometimes passionless. Its moral points are often indirect or unstated, and some plot elements are confusing. The film also would have benefited from more emotional force and a clearer condemnation of the murders and immorality its protagonist helps create.

GOOD presents a strong moral worldview opposing euthanasia, but it communicates that position indirectly. The story shows how a seemingly compassionate idea can become a program for killing the disabled, the mentally ill, and the elderly—and how that program can provide a model for the mass extermination of Jews and other undesirables.

The film also condemns anti-Semitism, book burning, and the corruption produced by moral compromise. Yet its secular atmosphere and mixed immoral content complicate the message. John’s Jewish friend approves of his infidelity, and some viewers may admire that approval. The movie’s indirect treatment of euthanasia may also fail to leave every viewer firmly opposed to it.

At the center is the danger of exchanging transcendent values for recognition, comfort, lust, or social acceptance. GOOD shows the power of mass media to corrupt whole nations, but it does not always speak directly enough about the evil that results.

The film’s warning accords with Christ’s question: “For what does it profit a man to gain the whole world and forfeit his soul?” (Mark 8:36)

GOOD offers a serious warning about how moral compromise can grow into public evil. But its subtle messaging, strong language, sexual content, and disturbing violence make it unsuitable for children and young teens. WAIT FOR HOME — ADULTS ONLY. For a different family movie night, try.