Honestly, I can't understand why Russia was unhappy with the release of this film. After all, there was only one unfriendly line about the Soviet Union in the whole film, namely the complaint about the use of explosive ammunition, deemed forbidden by a Finnish soldier and probably was that too, but I don't know the Geneva Convention that well.
On the other hand... after a Finnish soldier decides to use a communist pamphlet for wiping purposes, he gets blown up as the appropriate form of punishment for that kind of sacrilege, I presume...
And that's not the only politically cautionary measure here. The Soviet Union wanted only to secure Leningrad and if the Finnish would have been more reasonable and less mistrustful the bloodshed would have been avoided. That pretty much is the political take on the events back then and it is awfully close to a fairytale.
That becomes clearest during the discussion of military support. First the soldiers express hope that Sweden might help, later there's talk of America. But for whatever weird reason the word "German" or "Germany" isn't uttered a single time in the whole film. Just for your information, Ribbentrop's own son was actually fighting in a Finnish unit during that time, as a personal guarantee that the Ribbentrop-Molotov-treaty wasn't meant that way. Plus the fact that Germany build its submarines in Finland already during the Weimar Republic, in secrecy, since the treaty of Versailles forbade it.
Both sides are shown by far more innocent here than they were and that is an important misrepresentation for the message of the film to make sense.
But o.k., enough of that. Considering the action, I must say that the film I alluded to in the title of this comment was a pretty strong source of inspiration too. It's not black and white and it's set in snow and pine and birch forests, but that sums up the differences pretty much.
The strongest part of the film is actually the psychological presentation of its main characters and the spirit of the Finnish army. That is done skillfully, I have to admit. But that is about it. Honestly, the war scenes in "A very long engagement" were by far better, but the budget of that film was also bigger, granted.
All in all I can't give more than 6 out of 10.
On the other hand... after a Finnish soldier decides to use a communist pamphlet for wiping purposes, he gets blown up as the appropriate form of punishment for that kind of sacrilege, I presume...
And that's not the only politically cautionary measure here. The Soviet Union wanted only to secure Leningrad and if the Finnish would have been more reasonable and less mistrustful the bloodshed would have been avoided. That pretty much is the political take on the events back then and it is awfully close to a fairytale.
That becomes clearest during the discussion of military support. First the soldiers express hope that Sweden might help, later there's talk of America. But for whatever weird reason the word "German" or "Germany" isn't uttered a single time in the whole film. Just for your information, Ribbentrop's own son was actually fighting in a Finnish unit during that time, as a personal guarantee that the Ribbentrop-Molotov-treaty wasn't meant that way. Plus the fact that Germany build its submarines in Finland already during the Weimar Republic, in secrecy, since the treaty of Versailles forbade it.
Both sides are shown by far more innocent here than they were and that is an important misrepresentation for the message of the film to make sense.
But o.k., enough of that. Considering the action, I must say that the film I alluded to in the title of this comment was a pretty strong source of inspiration too. It's not black and white and it's set in snow and pine and birch forests, but that sums up the differences pretty much.
The strongest part of the film is actually the psychological presentation of its main characters and the spirit of the Finnish army. That is done skillfully, I have to admit. But that is about it. Honestly, the war scenes in "A very long engagement" were by far better, but the budget of that film was also bigger, granted.
All in all I can't give more than 6 out of 10.