Really Surprised!

Good start, but then it gets ruined

Excellent, a Must See

Awesome Movie

Sometimes in life you want to experience something true and realistic. Molmberg's Unknown Soldier comes as close as it is possible in movie to experience war. Linna's 1955 version was more theatrical and entertaining. It had it's merits but I like Molmberg's better.In early 1990's I did my military service in Finland and trained a lot attack in the forest and the attack on the bunker line in Molmberg's film looks, sounds and almost smells the same. All details are in place and they really fire Maxim MG's and Suomi SMG's.I think you can't do good war movie without showing the ugly side of war. Molmberg shows the true nature of war. War is totally evil.

Rauni Mollberg's version of the Unknown Soldier, the novel of Väinö Linna, has always been the one that has been compared to the first movie version directed by Edvin Laine 30 years earlier. The times have changed between 1955 and 1985 and it shows. Laine's Unknown was jolly and cheerful, almost farce-like when compared to this one. Mollberg's Unknown is grimmer and wants to show the darker shades even darker and deeper than the first one. Laine skips the difficult themes like plundering of enemy cities and the executions of the soldiers sentenced in court-martial quite quickly or doesn't handle them at all. Mollberg obviously wants to dig deeper in them but hasn't left out any of the original scenes either. Hence the titanic length of the film.When one has seen the Laine's version so many times as, for example, I have, it is difficult to form an objective opinion about Mollberg's version. The first impression stresses the darkness and seriousness of the atmosphere. It would be OK, if all the actors seemed natural, but they don't. Of course, all the actors in the first version don't seem natural either, but hey, it's Laine's Tuntematon Sotilas! Who cares!? This one gets better along the way, though. You get used to the "new sides of the characters" and forgive some of their faults compared to the old ones. I have to say I haven't read the novel so fortunately I don't have to compare this film to the book. Fortunately, because the book usually overcomes the movie versions. Because of my illiterate manners, I cannot compare this film to the original novel, and again, cannot say how much this one is more or less true to the novel than Laine's film. Therefore, I can only compare these two films. This version has its strengths. It is in some ways more realistic and brings out the characters more than Laine's version, which is almost like an action movie because of its fast pace and light atmosphere. But sometimes Mollbergs Unknown is almost too dark and grim to believe. This is a nice film but it doesn't compare to the first one, which, unfortunately for this film, is a legend. However, Mollberg's Unknown couldn't make it without Laine's version, because to me, it could not stand alone without the legendary memories experienced with the scenes in the first one. Mollberg's Unknown adds something to the "one and only" but that's all there is to it. I first and foremost recommend Laine's Unknown and after that, if you have some extra four hours on your hands, take a look at this Mollberg's view.

Rauni Mollberg's (from now on referred to as 'Molle') Tuntematon Sotilas has been left far behind in fame to its predecessor, that of Edwin Laine's Tuntematon Sotilas from 1955. This is not surprising as the newer movie lacks the sentiment that is almost omnipresent in the older version. Despite this, is Molle's version more faithful to the original novel by Väinö Linna who was himself involved in making of the new version. Both movies however deserve their place, in Edwin Laine's time there was a need for high national epic but as the times changed a new version was also welcome and maybe even in demand.Molle's version deserves perhaps more praise and attention than it has been used to have, but also criticism. The newer version is no way meant to be 'a better' version but rather an alternative account of the psychological reality of a man. Therefore I call it an antithesis, it is impossible to see the newer version without comparing it to the all too familiar older version. You actually need to watch the film several times before it really opens to you in the way Molle had intended it. Tuntematon Sotilas is a war film, but the highlight is upon the people who fought in there, both Finns and Russians, who are brought to suffer the very same meat-grinder. Parts of it are funny, parts of it are disgusting.What is left to a lesser notion is historicity, the weapons and uniforms are from the second world war but you should not expect them to appear in correct order. For the weapon freaks be it informed that the same KV-1's appear as both Finnish and Soviet tanks. For those who already know everything that has been written about the Continuation War this movie does not offer any historical references, this time it is all literature from the ground view. Nevertheless this is one of the best war films there is, perhaps there is a conscious focus and perhaps there is some message, but the weight of the overall work will just make you silent.If you are going to see this film, make sure you are watching a quality copy. Many dark scenes have become incomprehensible in poor quality VHS transfers. The darkness is essential visual effect in Molle's version.

This movie is following a Finnish platoon in Finlands struggle against Soviet Union in the Continuation War starting in 1942. In the beginning the men are conscripts who are sent to the front when Finland attacks SU in hope of getting back the area that SU took from Finland in Winter War in 1940. In the beginning Finland is victorious but then the luck turns... Finland has to start its retreat. The men are just 19-year-old boys when the war starts, but in the end they are heroes who kept the Finland independent despite of the massive Soviet Army.