To read of the production history, one gets a sense that this time around returning screenwriter Kasahara Kazuo had an even more difficult time arranging the source material and history into a form that was workable for cinematic storytelling, and even the process of filming may have had its share of issues. How might this impact the third entry in the 'Battles without honor and humanity series,' this coming five months after its immediate predecessor and eight months after the progenitor was released? Given the harried, chaotic feel of both the storytelling and film-making of the first installment, and the slightly more refined nature of the second - in my mind arguably translating into a slightly less vibrant and more conventional product, if generally just as worthy - how would 'Proxy war' be approached? What similarities would it share, and how would it stack up? I don't think it takes long before we start to get our answer, and while this third picture broaches the same subject matter, carries the same broad vibes, and boasts all the same fundamental elements in some measure, I also think it's evident that it follows the trend we saw with 'Deadly fight in Hiroshima': rather than embrace all the rough edges, many are smoothed over to facilitate a more cohesive narrative. That in itself doesn't specifically mean that this piece is any better or worse, but whatever one's opinion, it does mean that it's an additional step away from what made the original of January 1973 so intoxicating and extraordinary.
It remains true, if to a lesser extent, that the concrete plot, following a few specific yakuza families and individuals, is deemphasized in favor of giving a wide, long-view perspective of yakuza life and activity: bursts of graphic violence amidst constant feuding and shifts of power, position, and territory. As such, there is not so much concern here for how easy or hard the tale is to follow as might be true for cinema at large. On the other hand, this feature further significantly tempers the violence, pacing, and freneticism of before in an effort to bring a more straightforward, tangibly unified plot to bear; heavy-handedly accentuating the point, exposition and some dialogue needlessly hammer on the idea of the gangland wars in Hiroshima mirroring growing unrest around the globe, including proxy conflicts such as those between the United States and Soviet Union. Rest assured that we do get the big stunts, effects, bloodshed, and otherwise action sequences that we have before - but far more sparingly, and with less of the panache that characterized them five months before, let alone eight months before. Fukasaku Kinji's direction is reliably solid in guiding the production, and likewise, as cinematographer Yoshida Sadaji returns and Horiike Kozo replaces previous editor Miyamoto Shintaro, their contributions are splendidly sharp. All the same, some portion of the initial vitality is lost, including even in how the action is shot. One might reasonably say that it's only at the climax, within the last ten minutes, that this most closely resembles the earlier works.
The cast give swell, well-rounded performances, with all the principal stars returning; all those behind the scenes turn in superb work including sets, costume design, and hair and makeup. The music of returning composer Tsushima Toshiaki remains delightfully flavorful complement. The active narrative is ably rounded out one more by tidbits of narration, on-screen text, and instances of still images and graphics that serve to provide context and advance the narrative more concisely. And still: for all the skill and intelligence that went into this title, something is missing. The wild energy of the first movie is almost absent; the more carefully crafted dramatic sensibilities and impact of the second movie are painted over in dull hues. That narration, text, and still imagery seems overly abundant, distracting from the proceedings more than adding to it. Just as the violence is pushed to smaller corners, so is there also a strange dearth of urgency and import in the storytelling, and in its execution. The tale is duly interesting, but it is mostly rendered with a soft, bland tone that approaches casual indifference - and as plot development in the drama predominantly depends so, so much on quiet scenes of dialogue, this is very bad news in terms of the installment's overall success. Some moments are instead almost parodical, but for lack of any zest leave no mark; all told the film may be well made, but it struggles to make much of an impression. For as fine as 'Proxy war' is at its best, and for all that it has in common with its antecedents, to be frank it comes off as a decidedly weaker imitation.
The end result is a viewing experience that doesn't particularly command our attention; for all our expectations, engagement becomes passive. Taken in stride with its elder brethren this flick is unquestionably a step down, or maybe even two steps down, and kind of disappointing; considered on its own, it won't necessarily stand out in a crowd. I don't think this third 'Battles without honor and humanity' is altogether bad. I think that for as much as it tries to join the company of the progenitor and first sequel, it's only a pale shade, and maybe the reported difficulties of the production - namely, Kasahara's toils and troubles in devising the screenplay - were even more severe than they read on paper. In concept this is kith and kin with its forebears; in conjuration and in execution, it's a plodding, somewhat tedious simulacrum that can claim only slivers of the same value. I'm glad for those who get more out of it than I do, and I maintain that it's better than not; to one degree or another worth watching both on its own merits and as part of the ongoing series. For as much as 'Proxy war' saps away our enthusiasm, however, I also wonder if one isn't better off watching only Fukasaku's original, and not even bothering with the remainder. I want to like it more than I do, but then, maybe as it is I'm being too kind in my assessment.
