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.

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.

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 ...

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.

It's very rare when a modern sequel/reboot is equal to the original in terms of quality, but this movie is that rare one. It carries over the sweeping and hypnotizing cinematography, it continues the storyline in a natural way, it references the original, but doesn't rip it off, it introduces new concepts without ruining the continuity, it expands on the themes presented in the original in a very natural way, it doesn't drag nearly as much as said original and it's got a more compelling protagonist. I have a feeling I'll just enjoy this movie more and more as time goes by, and I already love it a lot. It's a movie with a lot to unpack, and I have no doubt it will improve even more on rewatches.