Touko Laaksonen, a decorated officer, returns home after a harrowing and heroic experience serving his country in World War II, but life in Finland during peacetime proves equally distressing. He finds peace-time Helsinki rampant with persecution of the homosexual and men around him even being pressured to marry women and have children. Touko finds refuge in his liberating art, specializing in homoerotic drawings of muscular men, free of inhibitions. His work - made famous by his signature 'Tom of Finland' - became the emblem of a generation of men and fanned the flames of a gay revolution.
Karukoski's scenes often have a smoky, sweaty reek that would have amused the late Rainer Werner Fassbinder, a titan of tang himself... The tensile central performance by Pekka Strang is adroit at capturing the complicated man.
Why does Tom of Finland play like an over-cited term paper? The film is jammed with incident and detail but there's little flow to the storytelling ...
Touko Laaksonen sketched out an enduring legacy with his homoerotic images of hyper-masculine men. So, why then is Dome Karukoski's depiction of Laaksonen's rise from closeted pornographer to celebrated artist so flaccid?
More delicately, the film brings to life the desire that lit the artist's genius, until he'd filled the entire world with leather gods and muscle studs.