I vehemently disagree with the comparison with Woo
t: , although i perfectly understand it because i actually found To because of it. But i dont think it has anything to do with style , Woo's always been a very flamboyant director , everything is big , large , melodramatic and extremely expressive in his films. To is in the other side of the spectrum. He's a very minimalistic director , personally to me one of the strongest visualist alives , with an incredible visual flair . The action usually happens as the drama unfolds , contrary to Woo's setpieces that were the center of the films. And if he wants to be flamboyant , he even acknowledges it in the movie, like Full Time Killer where he spoofs many action films.
The comparison might make sense because Woo (and Lam) for a while were major forces in creating hk cinema as a major brand and having a global reach , something To also accomplished being the most representative director in the last few years from that region. Both working in violent and nihilistic pics. But the comparisons sort of end there. They made heroic bloodsheds , he's a deconstructionist with those same genre conventions. He also plays a lot with narrative structures.
He's also incredibly chamaleonic (although he became famous because of his urban crime genre films) , and that has to do with his past and present. He was a commercial director and after founding Milkyway he never hid the fact he had to make a bunch of films that needed to follow the audience , and make some money even if they weren't great. Without those successes he couldn't have made the rest .
As for Drug War , we need to at least contextualize it. He's making a film for mainland China. With very strict rules. They had a censor board judging scenes !!" Its a simple high octane thriller , with some very cool setups done mostly by dialogues. And its incredible well lit. Far from its best , but if he doesn't start making movies elsewhere , he won't be able to keep making the films he wants to.