Contents

Talk:The Good German

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The Good German article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Film: American This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles This article is supported by the American cinema task force.

Is it really as clear as the article suggests who the good German was supposed to be? At one point, Dora describes herself as the good German (when she was explaining that she set out to save her husband). Throughout the film, there is an impression given that, after the war, there was a general attempt to distinguish the good germans from the bad, without there being much of a straightforward way to do that. Maybe the film is deliberately meant to be ambiguous on this point? C d h 13:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have not seen this film, but there appears to be a bit of confusion here- this may or may not be present in the film itself. The Mittelwerk was the actual V2 production plant. By the time the tunnels were complete and production began, no prisoners were housed there. The actual camps were known as Mittelbau-Dora. --Gadget850 (Ed) 10:59, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is worthy to mention that this movie has a lot of similarities with The third man in terms of cinematography and in the plot. It is the main influence, along with Casablanca. Nazroon 15:01, 18 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Black Market dealings, Cold War intrigue, underground sewers/waterways, and one American who's desperately trying to locate another (who doesn't want to be found). A mysterious woman who seems to hold the key to the missing man's whereabouts..., etc. Even the scene where the kid tells Clooney about the river currents seems an homage to Welles and the 3rd Man. C d h 13:48, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

... And when she is about to fly off in the Dakota, once expects either "here's looking at you kid" or "this could be the beginning of a beautiful friendship"! Arrivisto (talk) 22:07, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The page said the film used a "more modern wide screen ratio" in its theatrical release. While the the theatrical print was 1.85:1, the picture was windowboxed to 1.66:1. Icorrected the passage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.237.116.31 (talk) 02:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Good german.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 22:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This issue appears to have been resolved. Aderksen (talk) 03:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article states both that it was shot in color - and in black and white. The opening description describes it as filmed in black and white, and the production describes it as having been shot in color, but then digitall muted to black and white. It'd be great if someone could resolve this with some citations - or perhaps the header text needs to say "presented in black and white"? Aderksen (talk) 03:09, 21 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The post-production didn't make the footage look any "grainier". The picture is crisp and sharp (in fact sharper and cleaner than the archival footage used in it, as well as not flickering). What they did was crush the whites and use some black diffusion, in order to achieve the look of 1940s/'50s film footage, an xth generation print of the time, and/or an old telecine. --79.193.53.160 (talk) 08:31, 24 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be answering some other question. JohndanR (talk) 07:09, 21 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]