I had a really good time with the previous film, 'Tokyo: The last megalopolis.' The truncated writing of adaptation was flawed, yes, sometimes even losing sight of the basic information of the plot, but it was above all built as a dark fantasy-horror spectacle of 80s effects and visuals, and by that measure it was a great success. Sequels are another matter, however, and often inherently raise doubts about achieving the same success as their predecessors; that this was accordingly afforded a smaller budget is also possibly cause for concern before we even sit to watch. Now, granted, I'm unfamiliar with Aramata Hiroshi's novel and can't speak directly to the source material as a comparison, but it's also not specifically necessary here. As screenwriter Hayashi Kaizo returns, working under new director Ichise Takashige, it's evident quite quickly that with a smaller budget, an effort was made to reduce the amount of effects this time around, or at least save them for where they were needed most. The front end of the presentation is therefore more conventionally dramatic in nature, exercising effects a little less while trying to foster atmosphere through sparing use and "creepy" imagery and music. Yet this was not a strength for Hayashi and director Jissoji Akio in 1988, and frankly, it's not a strength in 1989 either. It's hardly that 'Tokyo: The last war' is bad, but it very distinctly lacks the vitality that made its antecedent so fun.
For the first full forty minutes or so the picture just dawdles, trying to more softly lay the groundwork for the remainder to come but unable to do so in a manner that's convincing or meaningful. Once again, information about major characters is at best weakly imparted. Those operating behind the scenes turn in fine work as the budget allows, and the cast earnestly try to make something of the material. Yet whether we say that the feature took the shape that it did owing to the limitations of the production, or simply owing to a skill issue on the part of Hayashi and/or Ichise - or, I don't know, maybe the particular book being adapted had its own problems - this struggles to really even make an impression even as the plot picks up. The storytelling substance is wanting; there was much for this to explore with regards to the state of Japan and its people as 1945 rolled on, but then, such is only intended to be the foundation for the supernatural tale laid on top, and the actual plot feels thin. The anticipated stunts and effects are decidedly fewer this time around, and while we indeed get treated to some here and there, there never actually comes a point when the movie absolutely leans into that facet; even the climax lands rather gently. In fact, it's true more than not that 'Tokyo: The last war' is an ordinary wartime drama, and the trouble is that it was meant to be much more than that.
The production design and art direction are terrific. The costume design, hair, and makeup are sharp. Other aspects like Ando Shohei's cinematography are fine, and I certainly like Ueno Koji's music in and of itself; I don't know why a Janis Ian song plays over the end credits, but I'm not complaining. Where practical stunts and effects do come into play they look fantastic, including a late dream sequence that's straight out of 'A nightmare on Elm Street' (or maybe an Aphex Twin video; you know the one). With some forced exceptions I think the cast give capable performances. And still the title fails to in the slightest degree reproduce the experience of the previous adaptation. Even if we say, in a spirit of utmost magnanimity, that this isn't what the title was trying to do, it's still the case that this wanted to be a follow-up, and it comes across as no more than a pale shade of what it wanted and tried to be. I was fully locked in with everything that 'The last megalopolis' was doing; for 'The last war,' I kept glancing at the clock. Once more, it's not outright bad, but there's nothing here that's especially grabbing or noteworthy. As far as I'm concerned it earns much more concrete criticism than was the case months before - definitely for its writing, with even broad strokes that stumble, and for many other things. I guess if you've already watched its predecessor there may be sufficient cause to check this out, but otherwise, in all honesty, you can probably just not ever bother. And that kind of makes me sad.
