If a movie can introduce me to something that is completely alien or even repulsive to me and still get me to like it, it is a remarkable a movie. I hate when movies play with time shifts instead of simply telling the story in chronological order. I think that porn is exploitive and repulsive. Depictions of promiscuity in films usually end up feeling sordid, empty and sad. I completely adored Tom of Finland and felt no judgment, only empathy.
Tom of Finland is a bio pic about Touko Laaksonen, a Finnish homoerotic artist whose work was outlawed in his homeland until after he died. The film’s narrative is predominantly impressionistic, primarily concerned about conveying emotional truths than facts. While the film is shot in a naturalistic manner, the early scenes set during World War II feel like a mash up of Art Deco meets expressionistic style. The film is simply gorgeous and follows a visual logic that orders the film, which largely abandons chronological storytelling and still conveys the era that we are in and how much time has passed. Not many filmmakers can do this, and before making the attempt, I think that they should sit at Dome Karukoski’s feet for lessons. I usually hate when films jump around time lines because it gets confusing, but Karukoski’s narrative is clear. The rhythm is rooted in emotion, not timing.
Tom of Finland starts with dialogue about a hungry, horny bunny that keeps escaping from the closet and running free in the forest. Normally I would think that this comment was a bit on the nose, but it helped to orient me throughout the film regarding how I should feel when I see Tom and other men spontaneously gathering outdoors in numerous different contexts to hook up during war and peace. His early years of freedom during war are formative because at his most natural, elemental state, he is free to congregate with men, have sex in nature and associates sex with uniforms without castigation or suspicion.
After WWII, Tom has to make a choice between being stuck in the trauma of war or have dreams and live. Tom has two foils: his sister, Kaija, who was also an artist, and a superior officer who is an unofficial mentor, who may or may not have had a sexual interest in him and is never consummated on screen so I’m inclined to say no for the purposes of the movie. Kaija and his mentor reflect how most of us force ourselves to fit into the whims of society’s dictates and kill an essential part of ourselves which result in pinched lives not fully expressed. It is remarkable how we become willing enforcers and torturers of ourselves then at least with respect to Kaija, impose that unhappy standard on others knowing that it is neither satisfying nor correct.
There are three wars that Tom must survive: WWII, Cold War fascist policies against homosexuals and a pandemic. Tom is remarkable because he emerges from all these wars not only whole, but increasingly more militant in embracing who he is and adamantly rejecting death of the body and the soul. We live in the twenty first century when a lot of progress was made, but to be gay, proud of it and live accordingly when it was not only illegal, but could come with terrifying physical and mental consequences was unimaginably brave and steely. Tom grumbles, “I fought Stalin with a knife.” He reclaims the trauma of that moment, confronting the arbitrary cruelty of war and victimization of another man whom he may or may not have found common ground or attraction with, and reframes it as, “Who the fuck are you to tell me that I don’t have a right to exist! Stalin could not stop me, and if I didn’t succumb then, and you are no one in comparison to Stalin, I’m not going to give up now! Get out of my way!” If only the rest of us could remember to respond accordingly when we are told explicitly or implicitly that we must change who we are and shape our lives in new ways that don’t fit existing standards, Tom’s work on earth would not be in vain. When told that we cannot do something, we should respond, “Why not!” with no room for a rebuttal. Tom is committed to dreaming and encouraging others to dream a better world.
The majority of Tom of Finland consists of him trying to carve out his space in the world and being indefatigable in the face of setbacks. I won’t delineate how he created a social life, found a partner and created a market for his work, but it is films like Tom of Finland that make movies like The Shape of Water seem hollow and inadequate in the face of reality. Even those in exile from society’s good graces found ways to turn the lava into land to exist on. Life will find a way. When he arrives in America, and it feels like his imagination has sprung to life like Galatea, I had to laugh because the idea of the US being a paradise seems simultaneously hilarious and incredibly sad.
Tom of Finland is remarkable because I look at his work as porn, but the movie helped me understand why his work was liberating and not exploitive because it improved self-esteem even if the gay men who consumed the work did not match the ideal on the page. Representation matters. Also it made straight masculine norms into sexual objects, which is an effective coping mechanism similar to when people say imagine that you are speaking in a room of naked people. When a figure of authority literally is threatening your life, imagining that man as a welcoming, sexually available object not only makes the person wielding power subconsciously uncomfortable, but reassures the vulnerable one, which is very effective, nonviolent tactic to use in a police state.
I love watching foreign films like Tom of Finland because I am not familiar with the language, the culture or the actors, I don’t know if the actors are gay or straight or if they are using stereotypes or not. The most provocative parallel made in Tom of Finland is Toukko as a type of Moses leading his people to the Promised Land, which is explicitly teased out when he seeks a publisher for his work. This scene sanctifies his art as God’s work and a continuum of his struggle against fascism since WWII.
I only had two minor problems with the film. If he was fighting against Stalin, was it Stalin when he sided with the Allies or the Axis? It was actually the prior, which isn’t to say that Finland was pro Nazi, but it is not a good look even if all your choices are crap. The movie hopes that by not making it clear, it can avoid some unpleasant implications in his work and the country’s history, but it does not take a lot of digging to conclude that while he may not be pro Nazi, he thought Nazis were hot because they had the best uniforms. The Night Porter already handled this controversial subject so I’m not saying that Tom of Finland had to, but if people had a problem with it, they would not be wrong.
There is also a scene when the LAPD is searching for a suspect, and Toukko is understandably alarmed because he is used to raids and state police persecution, but instead the atmosphere is light and jokey. I would enjoy this scene more if I were not black and American. The mostly white gay male partygoers jokingly point to the black gay kid as the suspect, and the kid clearly has no problem with the joke. This scene is not funny at all, and if you want to understand why, please see OJ: Made in America for a historical perspective of the LAPD and the black community. Tom of Finland is a foreign film so while I am not happy with the scene, I feel slightly less fucked with than if an American made it. I’m still astonished that the one line by a black guy in the film involved a joke about being a suspect in front of the LAPD, who would definitely beat his ass for doing less. Points deducted for breathtakingly lack of intersectionality. At least they had a cool black nurse, which would literally be my mom during the AIDS crisis.
Tom of Finland is a celebration of life and individuality in the face of war and an admonishment for all of us to create a world for ourselves to thrive in even if it is unimaginable, illegal or considered wrong because God makes no mistakes. Be the bunny!