This could have been a film of 9/10, but...
In the finnish film industry sexuality has been a taboo until 90´s, when Finland joined European Union. This event refreshed and americanized finnish movies that had been long and largely subsidied by government by marxist principles.
I want to say: why to add innecessary erotic scenes to this third version of the film, meanwhile in the book or in the first version sexuality is not shown (told) at all? Apparently the third version of "Tuntematon sotilas" wants to approach Harlequin romance-books.
Väinö Linna´s "Tuntematon sotilas" is a hell of a book, and it´s greatness lies upon in ascetic life of the men who had to for years survive in brutal conditions- one of the survival methods was humoristic dialogue. The director in this new movie- that however flows nicely and interestingly- has decided to tell something about private lifes of soldiers that does not seem to me relevant. And by the way, the "playboy" Rahikainen´s sexual life is ignored.
If you disagree with me about greatness of asexuality you have to remember movies like" Paths of Glory" and "Das boot".
Another thing that seems to me tendencial are rasistic comments about eastern race that don´t appear in the original book, but have been added to the screenscript. This is not only sign of no-taste but also an act of violation to the Väinö Linna´s political convictions because he was a leftist.
Review of The Unknown Soldier
