Blade Runner 2049

To chase after an iconic masterpiece, to imitate or to try and supplant its rightful place, is a fool's errand.

Thankfully director Denis Villeneuve along with his talented collaborators never succumbs to imitating or trying to super-cede Ridley Scott's 1982 landmark "Blade Runner".

Hampton Fancher, who created the story of the original, has crafted a new screenplay with Michael Green, that not only builds on the themes of "Blade Runner", but ties them together with larger questions about the current human state and its challenges.

Ryan Gosling stars as a replicant of the latest generation, who tries to solve a puzzle that leads him into the realm of real and manufactured life, and walks along the same noirish paths that made the original so gripping. Gosling imbues his character with a very compelling façade, which starts to crumble as his humanity takes over his mechanical design.

The equally thrilling performances by Jared Leto, Ana De Armas, Robin Wright, Carla Juri and of course Mr. Harrison Ford, forge a credible bond with the audience and enhance the visual grandeur created by cinematographer Roger Deakins and production designer Dennis Gassner.

And although "Blade Runner 2049" may not achieve the same level of force as its predecessor, it is a tremendously immersive, philosophical and touching experience, that should be enjoyed on the largest screen possible.

The movie's pace is deliberately patient, which may confuse some members of the audience. But by slowing down and observing, the audience can revel in the immensity of the images.

The more we move, inexorably it seems, towards the do-or-die reality of "Blade Runner", the more vital these stories become.

Whatever the box-office-fate of "Blade Runner 2049" will be, the long wait has paid off. It is far more than just a quick cash-in on a cult classic or an overly devoted sequel. It stands on its own and adds many new layers to the question: "What makes us human?"

And it urges us on to find the truth in the rain.

With great acting, great screenplay, incredible cinematography Blade Runner 2049 is one of the best sequels ever made!

Denis Villeneuve is today without any doubt the most prominent Canadian director. In recent years he was mostly active in the crime ("Prisoners" (2013) and "Sicario" (2015)) and science fiction ("Arrival" (2016), "Blade runner 2049" (2017), "Dune" (2021) and "Dune part II" (2024)) genre.

It requires a lot of courage to make a sequel to such a cult classic as "Blade runner" (1982, Ridley Scott). "Blade runner 2049" is situated, as the title already indicates, in 2049 and therefore 30 years after the story of "Blade runner".

The theme however has remained the same, the fear of robots taking over. This fear is with the discussions about Artificial Intelligence in 2024 even more relevant than it was at the time of release of "Blade runner 2049".

Relevance is however not the same as originality. In "Blade runner" (1982) the fear of Robots taking over was further elaborated upon in the fear that they could adjust their own expiration date. In "Blade runner 2049" (2017) it is the fear that they can reproduce. Variation within a theme.

The cinematography is brilliant, perfectioning the decadent atmosphere of the 1982 film and having 3D technology as an extra. A very good performance by cinematographer Roger Deakins. Nevertheless the overall impression I got after seeing this film was that it is too much style over substance.

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 ...

It is 2049, 30 years after the events of the previous movie. K is a Blade Runner, a policeman who tracks down and terminates replicants (androids) whose model are viewed dangerous to society. K is himself a replicant, but has been programmed to be beneficial to society. One day he tracks down and terminates a replicant that has managed to evade detection and capture for over 28 years. In his garden are found the remains of a female replicant. Shockingly, the woman died during childbirth and the baby appears to have survived. Replicants cannot reproduce. If word gets out that they can, the human-replicant hierarchy will forever be disturbed. K must find the child, quickly. Also after it is Niander Wallace, a billionaire whose company makes replicants and whose main interest is in changing the world order.

An intriguing and engaging movie, directed by Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners, Incendies, Sicario, Arrival) and co-written by Hampton Francher, who co-wrote the screenplay for the original Blade Runner. Good plot with some great twists and turns. Some clever manipulation of the viewer too, as you are funneled down one way of thinking, only to have things turn out in another direction. This unpredictability, and requirement that you use your brain, makes for some intriguing viewing.

Great special effects, without being too show-offy and gratuitous. Great action scenes too.

While I have seen the original Blade Runner (in all three forms), you don't have to have seen it in order to enjoy, or even understand, this one. It works fine as a standalone movie.

Solid performances by all involved.

On the negative side, the plot is not entirely water-tight. There are a few key moments where things take a turn for the implausible and contrived. The end result ultimately justified these turns, making me less critical of them, but the writers could easily have developed the plot around those moments more, in order to make them less loose and clumsy.

Though I thought it was going to be, the running time of 163 minutes is not an issue. The movie never drags and the time just flies by.

Great movie - certainly not your average sequel.