Blade Runner 2049

This is a review I wrote in 2017 for Blade Runner 2049 - the much awaited sequel to the hauntingly spectacular original directed by Ridley Scott.

Whilst Denis Villenueve has forged his own path with the second instalment of this futuristic tale of humans and replicants, there were certainly enough nods to the original to ensure that this was indeed a close relative if not 'brothers'. The cinematography was visually amazing - the USA of the not too distant future depicted awash with red dust, almost post-apocalyptic deserted cities and given recent political shenanigans in the real US., possibly not surprisingly, a great deal of Russian influence in the style and culture of the remaining social and architectural landscape.

Gosling provides us with the dour yet stoic 'K/Joe', our titular character as the Blade Runner, tasked with rounding up remaining old-style replicants from an Earth which has pretty much been destroyed by humans, most of whom have since elected to live 'off world'. The few remaining humans carry out their day to day life amid a society which is largely occupied by modern replicants who seem to have found their own level or semblance of 'life'.

The normally delectable Jared Leto could be criticised for his performance as blind creator of the replicant civilisation, Wallace, but I would disagree. His jarring, slightly wooden and emotionless depiction of one of the highest placed humans in terms of social and economic stature, cleverly illustrates that the most inhuman being in this dark world is in fact made of flesh and blood.

The ever-present driving rain makes even the broadest vista seem strangely claustrophobic as our hero makes a life-changing discovery and invites the viewer to question their own life, it made me ask 'what kind of human am I?' 'Am I all that I can be?' Whether intended or not, I feel the message is that life, in whatever form it has been presented, is a gift and it is up to every single being to make sure that it isn't wasted.

All in all a stunning film that although may never match the raw emotion of Rutger Hauer's final 'tears in the rain' soliloquy, it offers a simple yet age old message that is creatively delivered and stylishly told.

I guess if the producers wanted to make another Blade Runner, they totally succeeded - at least so far. As with the original Blade Runner the visuals are the ones that people will refer to when it comes to this movie. And it's not just because of the Academy Awards. You can tell all by yourself and I reckon even without having seen it on an IMAX screen (though I would have recommended it and still am).

Having said all that, the movie has also the same irritating feeling about it, that the original Blade Runner had. So in almost every aspect it is a successor to it. Story wise obviously too, though I guess this one has a couple of shorts that play before this movie, that are supposed to get you in the mood. They are not necessary to watch, but they are also very well made. This movie is an experience and it is one you have to be willing to make.

While it does have some action scenes, while it is Science Fiction, it does play more like a slow moving drama with a lot of mystery elements to it. If that sounds intriguing to you, with some added social commentary flavor, than by all means watch it. But beware that you have to have patience with it ...

I've only seen the original Blade Runner once and it was a long time ago. I liked it but I just haven't got around to revisiting it. I mention this because even though I'm not a die-hard fan of Blade Runner, I still found the plot of 2049 engrossing. It's a well put together mystery, I found that they constantly took the plot in unexpected directions and other than the trailer spoiling the return of Deckard, I was always excited about what was going to happen next. The movie pulls an excellent bait and switch at the end that really surprised me. They made the right decision to not repeat the formula of the first one and take the story to a new place. They also create some compelling subplots which is something that few movies get right.

The biggest star of this movie is the cinematography and the excellent work of Roger Deakins. The original was noteworthy with the special environment that Ridley Scott and his creative team brought to the screen. That was continued here if not improved upon. The look of L.A. in 2049 they decided to go with isn't completely distinct but it was a little more understated (I'd compare it to the 2017 Ghost in the Shell but less fantastical). My favourite scene might have been a shootout in a defunct club where the lighting and the background show are turning on and off. I don't hesitate to praise when a movie looks good but this is an exemplary example of using visuals and atmosphere to help build on a strong story.

Blade Runner 2049 returns very few of the characters from the original film but they manage to breathe life into this movie through the new ones they created. Officer K isn't the most lively protagonist but he gets an eye-opening character arc that kept me involved. Deckard doesn't appear till later in the movie but he remains interesting and what they decide to do with him makes his appearance worthwhile. I also really liked some of the smaller supporting characters. Sapper really helps kick off the movie, what Joi represents is extremely emotional and Mariette is so mysterious that her involvement brings up more and more questions. Add in that Niander Wallace and Luv make for pretty menacing villains and you have a pretty well-rounded and fascinating script.

I don't think that the actors/actresses will be the focal point of the awards attention that this movie will get but that doesn't mean there aren't exemplary performances. Gosling is good as K, he's deliberately robotic and he accomplishes a lot through his subtlety. Harrison Ford isn't in the movie as much as I wanted him to be (he's still one of my all-time favourite actors) but he holds up his end. He works with Gosling well and they have a solid rapport. Surprisingly, I really liked Sylvia Hoeks. She stole a lot of her scenes and I thought she was great even acting against a stacked cast. Dave Bautista showed he has a lot more range than people give him credit for. Jared Leto is in a very Jared Leto role (deliberately weird and hard to understand) but he does it well and although he might be a little creepy, the guy is still a great actor. I also want to credit Ana de Armas, she was distinctly warm and she showed a lot more emotion than I had seen from her previously.

There were points in this movie I could have rated this a 9/10 but some small things that I had to dock the movie for. Even with a compelling story, the movie has such a long run time that it couldn't help but drag. There are certain scenes where the movie wants you to really drink in the environment but they could have edited it a little tighter. They also couldn't help but lose me at points through how much artistic flair the utilize. Villenueve is an authority in this area and while I appreciate an artistic approach to this science fiction tale, for me they overdid it a little.

I was surprised how much I ended up liking Blade Runner 2049. I think if you're a big fan of the original, you'll love this to bits. This is successful in bringing in the uninitiated but I think fans will enjoy this even more. I haven't been on board for all of Villenueve's films but this is a good combination of his artistic style with enough of a commercial element for the masses. I'd give this somewhere between an 8-9 but with the extremely long run time, I'll give this an 8/10.

'Blade Runner' is a masterpiece and a favourite of mine. It is still to this day a genre and film landmark, and ties with 'Alien' as Ridley Scott's best film, despite being disliked at the time it has rightly gained its reputation as a classic.

Hearing that there was a sequel over thirty years later left me with intrigue, with a great cast (Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford), one of the best cinematographers in the film industry today in Roger Deakins and with an equally great director on board (having liked to loved Denis Villeneuve's previous films), but also nervousness considering (with notable exceptions) the general reputation with sequels. 'Blade Runner 2049' turned out to be well worth the wait, it is easy to see why it will alienate some with its very long length (can understand the overlong criticism) and slow pace but it is even easier to understand the acclaim the film has received.

Is 'Blade Runner 2049' better than 'Blade Runner' or on the same level? No. Is it nearly, or shall we say just, as good? Yes. To me it is one of Villeneuve's better films along with 'Sicario' and 'Incendies' (my least favourite of his is 'Arrival' and despite being an understandably divisive effort to me it was still good) and one of the exceptions to the general reputation of sequels. A sequel that treats its predecessor with respect (including some thoughtful and cleverly done nods to it, including quotations from the original score, even Ryan Gosling's name is a nod to the original author Phillip K Dick) and also its audience with respect. Despite its faults, it's also one of my favourite films of the year, and this year has been very hit and miss for films so this is saying quite a bit.

Sure 'Blade Runner 2049' is not without its flaws. Can totally see where people are coming from criticising the length, most of the time it was not a problem but some of the time there was a sense that the length was too inflated, 20 minutes could have trimmed with no problem at all. There are a few implausibilities and contrivances here and there towards the end and much more could have been done with the underdeveloped character of Jared Leto (the only weak link in the cast, he doesn't have the presence to pull the role off and doesn't look comfortable or interested).

However, 'Blade Runner 2049' does a huge amount right. It looks amazing, it's impeccably and imaginatively designed with some of the best special effects seen in a long time. It's Deakins' cinematography that particularly stands out, darkly gritty, gorgeously fluid and beautifully audacious Deakins shows that he is fully deserving of being considered one of today's best cinematographers. One cannot praise 'Blade Runner 2049' without mentioning some of the best directing Villeneuve has ever done in a contender for the best directed film of the year (well between him and Nolan for 'Dunkirk'), he is absolutely the right man for the job and shows himself to be not only completely at ease with the material but also tailor made for it. Once again there is a beautiful darkness but also a hard edge and sense of wondrous awe.

Another big standout is the synthetic music score by Benjamin Wallfisch and Hans Zimmer, so well done and fitting that one doesn't miss Johann Johannsson that desperately. Though imagine what the film would have been like with his involvement, from my understanding he was originally meant to do the music but was fired for reasons that are a mystery to me and Wallfisch and Zimmer were parachuted in and did marvellously with big shoes to fill. It's appropriately hauntingly discordant, heart-pounding and tension-filled, with seeming echoes and quotes to the original's score. The sound effects are clever and thrillingly authentic, like for example the replicated wolfhound.

When it comes to the writing and story, 'Blade Runner 2049' also triumphs, even if the story is not perfectly executed. The action-oriented scenes and conflicts are filled with tension and suspense as well as ingeniously choreographed, a fine example being the masterful prologue which has to be one of my favourite opening sequences of 2017. The science fiction elements are positively awe-inspiring, often making my jaw drop, while the philosophical ones are incredibly thought-provoking and never heavy-handed (many films have made a hash with this aspect, it was refreshing to see a film doing it well). Despite being a long and slow film, a vast majority of the film was richly rewarding, with a delicious quiet tension and absorbing mysterious elements.

Excepting Leto, the acting is great. Best of all being Harrison Ford as a suitably world-weary Indiana Jones-like Deckard, that and the 'Apocalypse Now'-like meeting with Ryan Gosling providing a nostalgic element, and a deliciously cold-hearted Sylvia Hoeks (her character and performance being what Leto's character and performance should have been). Ryan Gosling also plays it straight to great effect.

All in all, despite imperfections this jaw-dropping, richly rewarding, very respectful and visually stunning follow-up is just as good, if not quite as, as the 1982 masterpiece and one of my favourites of the year. 8.5/10 Bethany Cox

The user reviews seems to be over-run by a troll. Lots of repetitive 2 and 3 stars reviews that all read like they're written by the same person.

It's a relief they still make movies like this; movies for adults. Yes it's a sequel, but it's quality and it stands on its own. This is real sci-fi, made with a proper budget and brought to life by artists. It's serious and paced so that you have time to think. If you're a fan of the genre and can appreciate some ambiguity and a little space for questions to breathe then I think you will appreciate this film. But if you can't remember the last time you read a book then maybe you will find this movie long and boring.

The cast, acting, and plot are all quite good with only a few misses. The soundtrack doesn't blow me away but it's suitable. The visuals are incredible though and where this movie really shines; I can't think of a single moment in the film where I felt like the vision was held back by the technology available. And the scene at K's apartment with Joi (you will know it when you see it) pushed the envelope of what I thought was possible to do in a film. This one is a real stunner visually. Like the original, I expect Blade Runner 2049 to hold up extremely well over time.