Blade Runner 2049
Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: October 6, 2017
8.3
USER SCORE
Universal acclaim based on 2670 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
2,297
Mixed:
169
Negative:
204
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)

User Reviews

User scoreBy dateMost helpful
8
marcmyworksOct 13, 2017
2049 is a deceiving film. It is very slow paced and atmospheric, which is in contrast to the original, which contained a lot more action and tension. Beautifully shot and acted, it nearly is set to be a perfect film, but where it fails is in2049 is a deceiving film. It is very slow paced and atmospheric, which is in contrast to the original, which contained a lot more action and tension. Beautifully shot and acted, it nearly is set to be a perfect film, but where it fails is in the length of certain scenes that do not add to character development.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
7
Termin8terOct 31, 2017
I originally didn't care at all about Blade Runner 2049. But when I was impressed by the second trailer, and found out that the director of the excellent Arrival was directing this, I gave it a shot. I had a mixed experience. Yes, the visualsI originally didn't care at all about Blade Runner 2049. But when I was impressed by the second trailer, and found out that the director of the excellent Arrival was directing this, I gave it a shot. I had a mixed experience. Yes, the visuals are amazing, the acting is good, and the soundtrack has some good parts, but I found the soundtrack got a bit repetitive at times, and there were a few of obnoxiously strange and sickening scenes in the movie that serve no purpose. But at least the director treats the audience like adults and doesn't cram a bunch of over bloated exposition down our throats. There were only a handful of scenes that I genuinely enjoyed, though. I might rewatch this later on, and I'm probably gonna watch the original Blade Runner soon, but at the moment, Blade Runner 2049 is just a decent movie for me.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
7
Semtex_SteveOct 14, 2017
They really captured the feel of the first movie in this one, the world was just as futuristic and corrupt and modern day CGI really helped flesh out the cinematic style. The story was solid and entertaining and most of the characters playedThey really captured the feel of the first movie in this one, the world was just as futuristic and corrupt and modern day CGI really helped flesh out the cinematic style. The story was solid and entertaining and most of the characters played out exactly as intended.

My only problems were with Gosling - who can pull off an emotionless replicant pretty well, but isn't very good at expressing emotion later on as his character develops, and the music didn't really compare to the incredible soundtrack they had in the previous movie. Other than that it is a very good continuation of the Blade Runner story and I would defiantly recommend seeing it on the big screen to get the full experience.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
7
rcolon666Oct 15, 2017
I think this maybe is one of those movies I will have to review more times to have a complete opinion. At first sight I think it lacks the delicious tempo of the first one mixing action scenes with long artistic ones. I also find that theI think this maybe is one of those movies I will have to review more times to have a complete opinion. At first sight I think it lacks the delicious tempo of the first one mixing action scenes with long artistic ones. I also find that the philosopy it has been too simplified to make it a commercial product and finally, it is obviously too open to a third one...or more, I usually like more subtle ones.… Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
6
JoeCoolJan 25, 2018
Beautifully made world, but the plot drags itself along so slowly it hurts. Excellent visuals and some really great scenes but overall the movie was quite the disappointment. Not the masterpiece I had expected at all.
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
ConorMacleodDec 18, 2017
Blade Runner 2049 is one of the greatest science fiction noir films of this decade. It's rich with VFX and a narrative that builds upon the world and characters of the previous film. The slow burn of the runtime pulls off a third act that isBlade Runner 2049 is one of the greatest science fiction noir films of this decade. It's rich with VFX and a narrative that builds upon the world and characters of the previous film. The slow burn of the runtime pulls off a third act that is just **** awesome, and the filmmakers should be commended for their work.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
whoischarlotteNov 16, 2017
This was beautifully crafted and has a lovely style to it. Even with an almost 3 hours running time, it didn't drag and I didn't feel bored. Definitely recommend if you're a fan of the original.
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
6
NBFCJan 11, 2018
I love the original Blade Runner, it's one of my personal favorite films.

I was excited that Denis Villeneuve was directing this and not the notoriously hit-or-miss Ridley Scott. Villeneuve always had a great sweeping visual eye, which wasI love the original Blade Runner, it's one of my personal favorite films.

I was excited that Denis Villeneuve was directing this and not the notoriously hit-or-miss Ridley Scott.

Villeneuve always had a great sweeping visual eye, which was showcased in his previous sci-fi outing Arrival and that quality continues to be on display in this sequel. Right off the bat it feels like you are transported back into the rainy, dreary and mysterious world that Scott first introduced to audiences back in 1982.

Adjusted for inflation, this sequel has more than twice the budget of the original and not a single dime was wasted as far as the visuals are concerned. Everything from the rainy LA streets, to Joe’s (Gosling) apartment, to Wallace’s (Leto) baroque-style lair, to the almost apocalyptic junkyard and the eerie abandoned Las Vegas look absolutely gorgeous. This is by far one of the most beautiful-looking movies to have come out all year.

The storyline (conceived by original BR writer Hampton Fancher) also consists of a few intriguing ideas that are prime ready for a hard science-fiction affair such as this.

Despite what the trailers may have you believe, this is not an action film but an atmospheric methodically paced piece of philosophical examination (which is keeping true to the style of the original). Having said that, there is a particularly great un-conventional action set-piece in the third act involving a fight scene on a beach while a downed flying car is being washed away by the heavy tide.

While there are some great ideas, scenes and brilliant visuals; I still can't help but feel a bit underwhelmed.

I think it comes down to three issues:

1. The score, provided this time by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch, is very underwhelming. Now I like the work of Hans Zimmer (even if I admit he is over-exposed) and absolutely loved his work on this year’s Dunkirk but the dark drum-heavy ambience he provides to accompany Villeneuve visuals is lacking the sheer adventure and memorable cues of Vangelis.

2. The the pacing to feel rather baggy.

Now the original movie had a slow methodical pace too but it was also tight at two hours and focused on a handful of characters. The whole affair has a very Tarkovsky-like pacing to it, and I personally can't stand how slow Tarkovsky paces his films.

The storyline just feels bloated.

BB 2049 nearly clocks in at three hours but outside of Joe, Joi and Luv (Hoeks), all the other characters are given all-too brief screen time in order to make an impact. Wallace, the Steve Jobs-like main villain, is only in the movie for two scenes and Deckard (Ford) doesn’t comes into the narrative until 3/4 of the way through.

Most of the movie is taken up by Joe’s search for Deckard, which goes by way too slow and most of the third act is spent setting up for possible sequels/spin-offs. BR 2049 may have taken measures to expand the universe only hinted at in the original, but it was done in a way that felt banal and removed from the personal more soulful approach in Scott’s masterpiece.

3. The acting.

Dave Bautista (aka. Drax the Destroyer) impresses in his one scene with Ryan Gosling, showcasing an emotional range previously unseen. There is also an intense and thought-provoking dialogue exchange between Deckard and Wallace that showcases Harrison Ford sincerely ACTING instead of just growling his lines like he has been doing too often as of late.

But on the whole, the acting quality is okay but un-spectacular. Ryan Gosling is essentially giving the same stoic performance he did in Drive and I couldn’t get past Armas’ perplexing accent. Robin Wright gives another under-whelming performance like she did in this year’s Wonder Woman and Jared Leto is in the movie far too little to make an impression. Probably the most baffling performance was Lennie James, who literally disappears from the movie after just three minutes of screen time!!

I wish I can give more praise and I am aware that this movie has been getting great write-ups from critics and audiences alike, so I do seem to be in a minority here. There is plenty to like but at the end of the day watching BR 2049 was the equivalent to walking through an expensive art gallery.

It all looks gorgeous but not much in the way of emotional impact.… Expand
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
10
KuggzJan 28, 2018
Put on headphones sit back and let your mind get blown. It takes two viewings to appreciate what this really is. I saw it at the theatre and wasn't sure but once I saw it again at home I realized this is a masterpiece.
2 of 4 users found this helpful22
All this user's reviews
9
chesaroNov 19, 2017
A good movie, and good sequel, i watched the first one (for the first time) the day before, and i think it is the best movie i've watched this year so far.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
FurtinDec 21, 2017
Was totally blown away as I really feared a sequel to the original masterpiece and one of the best Sci-Fi movies ever made.

2049 is what SW:TLJ is not: aware of its heritage and completely absorbs its world building and pacing. AnotherWas totally blown away as I really feared a sequel to the original masterpiece and one of the best Sci-Fi movies ever made.

2049 is what SW:TLJ is not: aware of its heritage and completely absorbs its world building and pacing.
Another masterpiece, just like the original that aged so very well and yet we have a modern one. Great visual and auditive experience too.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
Grubes2001Jan 6, 2018
Beautiful, spectacular and deep as the original ! Villeneuve managed to do what I didn't imagine possible : expanding the universe of an all-time sci-fi classic without killing or denaturing it (Hello Last Jedis), however adding interestingBeautiful, spectacular and deep as the original ! Villeneuve managed to do what I didn't imagine possible : expanding the universe of an all-time sci-fi classic without killing or denaturing it (Hello Last Jedis), however adding interesting elements to the plot.
Can't wait for the remake of Dune now, a universe deserving a movie at its level (besides Jodorwski's Dune documentary)… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
eva3si0nJan 4, 2018
The best movie cyberpunk of 2017 and in general last 5 years. Yes the sequel is much simpler than the original. In general Denis Villeneuve the excellent director, has perfectly reported the atmosphere of the original, but after all the firstThe best movie cyberpunk of 2017 and in general last 5 years. Yes the sequel is much simpler than the original. In general Denis Villeneuve the excellent director, has perfectly reported the atmosphere of the original, but after all the first hour of the movie is tightened and in general almost doesn't bear important semantic loading. Jarrett Leto has perfectly played the antagonist, will be sure continuation soon and he will be revealed completely as personnel. And the main thing, is an ending. She has a little disappointed, after all there is a wish to see the complete final, let and open, but complete. As in the first part, but not just end of a deytstviye and credits.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
8
FonkeOct 28, 2017
Great movie, really enjoyed watching it. The movie was a bit too long for my liking, but but the music and acting is on point. Definitely worth watching.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
MarcStone2061Jan 3, 2018
This movie did for Blade Runner what Mad Max: Fury Road did for the Mad Max franchise; impossibly recaptured the original glory some 30+ years later. I was around in the early 8Os when Blade Runner came out...one thing this sequel couldn'tThis movie did for Blade Runner what Mad Max: Fury Road did for the Mad Max franchise; impossibly recaptured the original glory some 30+ years later. I was around in the early 8Os when Blade Runner came out...one thing this sequel couldn't recapture was the bleak Asian noir of a future some 30 years away It was realistic gritty window into the far future for 80s folk and it was mesmerizing. Even though the new movie didn't recapture the far future mesmerizing effect...it couldn't...it did copy exactly that bleak Asian noir of the near future. Back then we saw a vision of what could be and arguably made it come true in a lot of ways. Today the atmosphere seems familiar and enveloping and 'hey were gonna have that done in a few years, I can already see it' type way.

"We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time." - T. S. Eliot… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
dapennOct 25, 2017
First off, this movie is quite amazing. From its cinematography, to its acting, to its overall plot it is a phenomenal movie from start to finish. But this is not a movie to go see with your friends. The one thing you need to know is that youFirst off, this movie is quite amazing. From its cinematography, to its acting, to its overall plot it is a phenomenal movie from start to finish. But this is not a movie to go see with your friends. The one thing you need to know is that you really need to pay attention to what happening. You should not look at your phone when watching this movie. This movie is almost 3 hours long and you really need to pay attention in order to get whats going on in this film. The pacing of the movie is slow and it takes its time explaining what is happening on screen, but paying attention is a definite. But if you have the time, this movie is surely worth the money!… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
HyapeDec 21, 2017
It's an amazing picrure. A near perfect, with deep deep atmospere. A masterpiece.
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
nightmovesJan 29, 2018
Blade Runner 2049 is a great movie that keeps you guessing until the very end. The movie has a great cast and plot. Also, the tech that was created for this movie seems so real and fits so well into their crafted world. The only negative forBlade Runner 2049 is a great movie that keeps you guessing until the very end. The movie has a great cast and plot. Also, the tech that was created for this movie seems so real and fits so well into their crafted world. The only negative for me would be the "soundtrack". Villeneuve opted to copy the booms and bass drops from his other movie the Arrival and I feel that it distracts from the movie in places.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
lucasstarkJan 2, 2018
the movie is amazing from start to end, a sequel the original deserves, a must see movie
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
10
UmangGoslingJan 21, 2018
This movie reminds me of why I love watching movies.it has everything perfect I mean every Little thing is perfect stars from Screenplay is awesome it has every layer that I want from the movie like Blade Runner.I am a big fan of RidleyThis movie reminds me of why I love watching movies.it has everything perfect I mean every Little thing is perfect stars from Screenplay is awesome it has every layer that I want from the movie like Blade Runner.I am a big fan of Ridley Scott's original 1982 Blade Runner its flawed masterpiece and I love the movie too.let's talk about the cinematography of Mr. Roger Deakins I love that mans vision for movies the visuals are mesmerizing and heart touching and a lot of the work, not Evan Camerawork. Mr.Deni Villeneuve directing doing such a fantastic job he is the guy who created Sicario,Prisoner,Enemy,and arrival it makes total seance that he is Great director working today and lets talk about acting of Ryan Gosling this man is getting better and better at his job his work is amazing and Harrison Ford and Robin Wright also did nice job and also Female Actress as well.The soundtrack of this move is Beautiful as hell and overall this is the best Sci-fi movie I have seen in a long time.One thing that I am very impressed about that is they didn't try too hard for making this sequel I mean they didn't try to make a 7 or 8 movie franchise they just make a great Sequel of all time. This movie is now on my all-time best movies list.… Expand
1 of 2 users found this helpful11
All this user's reviews
9
BarreOct 6, 2017
Blade Runner 2049
Director: Dennis Villeneuve
Release Date: October 6, 2017 I cannot stress enough to see this movie only seeing the first trailer to come out and because I don’t want to spoil the story I wont be delving into the summary ofBlade Runner 2049
Director: Dennis Villeneuve
Release Date: October 6, 2017

I cannot stress enough to see this movie only seeing the first trailer to come out and because I don’t want to spoil the story I wont be delving into the summary of the film only the reasons it deserves your attention.. My expectations were set at this middling point of ok fro this film. I though they are either building upon the classic sci-fi masterpiece Blade Runner (released in 1982), or they are delivering this film for a complete cash in and an investment banking on the new generation liking it inevitably setting up future films they aren't necessary franchise films. But that’s the key word in describing Blade Runners brilliance, necessary. Sequels hardly ever do good because they weren't planned to be made, they feel like excess lore that usually feels only questionably fitting. But Blade Runner 2049 not only fits into the blade runner universe, but after seeing it I realized it filled a whole in my heart I didn’t realize I had. Blade Runner 2049 is going to be a pillar of a film I point to that stresses the masterful skill we have today. Roger Deacons , Hans Zimmer, and Dennis Villeneuve form a cinema dream team. The music rumbles with prestige at the perfect moments to exemplify the intensity in the scene. The cinematography is simply some of the best work I've seen from Roger Deacons (also known as one of the most revered and talented cinematographers to hit the industry) with such an expanded amount of colors and riveting set pieces truly do the job of immersing you in this universe. And Dennis Villeneuve has proven himself a master in this new era of film making; transcending one of the greatest films ever made with a story (which I wont spoil) that hooks you with thought provoking themes, sharp turns to keep from falling into predictableness and tugging on the moral heartstrings fantastically all while building these few but very memorable characters with unflinching performances. Everything is delivered with such refinement, Blade Runner 2049 earns the respect from new film goers and fans of the original alike, being one of the greatest sequels ever made and the best film of the year.… Expand
11 of 23 users found this helpful1112
All this user's reviews
10
lager96Oct 7, 2017
Blade Runner 2049, like it's predecessor, is a flawed masterpiece, except it isn't flawed. Right from the opening shot you are immersed into this bleak world. The atmosphere and the haunting score complement the already fantasticBlade Runner 2049, like it's predecessor, is a flawed masterpiece, except it isn't flawed. Right from the opening shot you are immersed into this bleak world. The atmosphere and the haunting score complement the already fantastic cinematography to make this one of the years highlighted films. Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford give their best performances to date, which helps elevate the story (which I won't spoil here) to a masterful degree. In fact, every actor and actress in this film give it everything they have and it shows. There isn't a single weak link in the cast which you cannot say very often. This is one of the years best films, if not the best. If your a fan of the original or sci-fi movies in general, you owe it to yourself to watch this masterpiece of a film!… Expand
10 of 21 users found this helpful1011
All this user's reviews
9
lennycliff123Oct 7, 2017
I generally hate the word 'awesome' but it's a fitting description of Blade Runner 2049. Watching it {on the biggest screen I could find} took me back to the days when going to the cinema was an 'event'. The film, while not without its flawsI generally hate the word 'awesome' but it's a fitting description of Blade Runner 2049. Watching it {on the biggest screen I could find} took me back to the days when going to the cinema was an 'event'. The film, while not without its flaws is a mesmerizing experience as a whole. Highly recommended.… Expand
10 of 21 users found this helpful1011
All this user's reviews
9
ChickenphOct 6, 2017
This is an outstanding movie. Very well-directed, and the design (and attention to detail) is exceptional...I can’t believe it, but this is a worthy sequel to the original.
It’s definitely atmospheric, so don’t go in expecting the emphasis toThis is an outstanding movie. Very well-directed, and the design (and attention to detail) is exceptional...I can’t believe it, but this is a worthy sequel to the original.
It’s definitely atmospheric, so don’t go in expecting the emphasis to be on action. I don’t know how else to say it: my friends and I left the theater and agreed that we were blown away.
Instant classic. There, I said it!… Expand
10 of 21 users found this helpful1011
All this user's reviews
2
EludiumQ36Jan 13, 2018
There's simply no justification for the 9 and 10 ratings - pure shills. This is a 7 at best but far worse for me due to its glacial pacing and dim/dark lighting. It's a film that you can feel yourself actually age. The plot is totally obtuse,There's simply no justification for the 9 and 10 ratings - pure shills. This is a 7 at best but far worse for me due to its glacial pacing and dim/dark lighting. It's a film that you can feel yourself actually age. The plot is totally obtuse, I defy anyone to tell me what the #$%^ the point of this was, on your own without internet assistance. And Harrison Ford at age 75 has no business being cast in this. He doesn't need the money or attention and we deserve to see better than old geezers in their last hurrah. Thank god for the distractingly gorgeous Ana de Armas, without her in it the film is a flat zero. The VFX swerve from great to awful and the accompanying music is worthless, though at times the foreboding made my soundbar awesome, but for a 2.5 hr experience my soundbar should've been rocking most of that time. Poor, poor effort.… Expand
7 of 15 users found this helpful78
All this user's reviews
8
SpangleOct 10, 2017
A little under a year ago, I declared Denis Villeneuve to be my favorite modern director in my review of Arrival. Now, with Blade Runner 2049, Villeneuve confirms my assertion and furthers my belief that Roger Deakins is the best modernA little under a year ago, I declared Denis Villeneuve to be my favorite modern director in my review of Arrival. Now, with Blade Runner 2049, Villeneuve confirms my assertion and furthers my belief that Roger Deakins is the best modern cinematographer. Put the two together and poetic, thoughtful, and visual magic happens. Blade Runner 2049 is the perfect embodiment of this with the two combining to bring forth a film that stands as one of the best of 2017 to date. Gorgeous, thoughtful, and brilliantly unraveling at a methodical-but-not-slow pace, Blade Runner 2049 is a film that makes me want to revisit the original, after having absolutely loathed it three years ago (I saw the Final Cut so do not even bring up the different cuts). Now, as my own journey through cinema alters, I am in a position to enjoy and bask in the glory that is Blade Runner with 2049, Villeneuve, and Deakins, being the gateway. Blending Tarkovsky influences, Tarkovsky religion, and the story of Blade Runner, Blade Runner 2049 is a thought-provoking work that goes well beyond the essential question of; are replicants equal and deserve to live or are they sub-human?

That said, the philosophy and ideas certainly take a backseat to the work of Roger Deakins. Watching Blade Runner 2049 is akin to being able to watch a painter work on his masterpiece, marrying warm oranges with cold blues, hues of pink, and shades of green, all in the name of creating a smorgasbord of beauty that stands as a testament to both the skill of Deakins in shooting a film and his ability to use color to tell a story. In terms of just the visuals themselves, however, the gorgeous reliance on silhouettes as Agent K (Ryan Gosling) walks out of white, billowing smoke and as Agent K walks through the orange wasteland that is Las Vegas, demonstrate some of this beauty. As do shots of Gosling walks through the cold blues and greens of Los Angeles, the dark ships flying through the orange air of Vegas, the white light of a ship with orange taillights against the dark black sky, the shot of a dog staring into the distance as its master is gone, a fire burning bright orange in the dark of the night, a blind man walking out of the shadows into the orangeish hue of temple, a car pulling into a snowy and green-walled parking garage with its red brakes beaming off the ground, and a glowing pink hologram with blue hair bending over to talk to Agent K and bringing with her the pink radiance surrounding her and blending it with the dark blue aura about him. This is a film with no shot out of place, no moment that is not striking, and more than anything else, this is a testament to Deakins. Turning colors into a visual mosaic of mastery and the simple beauty of the colors themselves, Blade Runner 2049 - before the year is even over - is the most visually stunning work of 2017. There can is no debate. Few films paint such a brilliant picture that words seem to fall short of truly expressing.

Perhaps one of the greatest displays of the film's brilliant visuals comes in how it uses the colors within its palette and also its locales/sets. As an agent for the Los Angeles Police Department, Agent K is tasked with hunting down replicants. He himself was synthetically made, but is a model who cannot rebel and made after the blackout, thus, is tasked with killing replicants who may still wish to rebel. While fully obedient, he is nonetheless an outsider. At home, he finds his front door has been vandalized to say "Die Skinner". Prostitutes are wary of him due to his status as a Blade Runner. The only one who accepts him is Joi (Ana de Armas), who is girlfriend and also a hologram made as a companion for him. As he walks the streets of Los Angeles, it is constantly raining or snowing with cold blues, greens, and purples, abounding through the streets. At work, the walls are flat white and his own demeanor his cold and repressed. Joi brings him joy, but limited given the fact that she is not real and they cannot touch. His existence is one that sees him kill replicants, who he feels a connection to, but he does as he is told. For Agent K, his life is one of coldness and repression. As such, his environment embodies exactly this. Cold and unwelcoming, the cold colors found in Los Angeles define Agent K as a man who lives on the outside. This is not his home, nor is he welcome in Los Angeles. He is a man in a foreign land with no fire to warm his chilly exterior.

By direct contrast, Agent K finally finds his people and his cause in Las Vegas. As a post-apocalyptic and radioactive city, Las Vegas is covered in a thick haze that is turned a burnt orange due to the orange, burned out sky above. Left behind as Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) is whisked away by Luv (Sylvia Hoeks), Agent K finds himself surrounded by replicants. Taken to the underground compound, surrounded by those like himself, and a warm orange fire, Agent K has finally found where he is meant to be.… Expand
7 of 15 users found this helpful78
All this user's reviews
7
DukeJonOct 9, 2017
Two and a half hours of Ryan Gosling staring mournfully into the middle distance. I liked the flying cars. So slow I almost fell asleep in the middle of the movie.
6 of 13 users found this helpful67
All this user's reviews
10
tuwaluaOct 11, 2017
Its a real blessing that the new Bladerunner keeps the old pacing. In a time where all big franchises from star wars to star trek uses only quick action to get the attention of the viewers. I liked the old style of film making which allowsIts a real blessing that the new Bladerunner keeps the old pacing. In a time where all big franchises from star wars to star trek uses only quick action to get the attention of the viewers. I liked the old style of film making which allows the viewer to think about it while watching. In my opinion its one of the best sequels ever made! A must for every scifi fan and a definitely must for Bladrunner fans!… Expand
6 of 13 users found this helpful67
All this user's reviews
10
ProsmoothOct 9, 2017
There is a lot more to this screenplay than meets the eye. I think this is one of those films that demands 3 or 4 viewings before you can get a grasp on it. For one thing, the sensory overload on the first viewing kind of blunts a lot of theThere is a lot more to this screenplay than meets the eye. I think this is one of those films that demands 3 or 4 viewings before you can get a grasp on it. For one thing, the sensory overload on the first viewing kind of blunts a lot of the subtext. The cinematography and sound are nearly beyond belief. True art. The music is grand. The acting and characters are tremendous. If you're not a fan of Russian cinema or deliberate directors like Kubrick --you'll probably hate it. Go see Transformers 8. This isn't the movie for you. Will probably bomb at the box office because it's a thinking man's film, and that is just a damn shame.… Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
3
ducmanJan 13, 2018
I kept watching for an hour. Hoping that there was something to come, got to bored. Really with these actors, why not make a movie that keeps your attention at least. So sad they didn't use the potential, maybe better next time? The originalI kept watching for an hour. Hoping that there was something to come, got to bored. Really with these actors, why not make a movie that keeps your attention at least. So sad they didn't use the potential, maybe better next time? The original was way better
sorry.… Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
2
p_reinJan 19, 2018
There is one thing that bothered me throughout the whole movie. Even though the soundtrack was amazing on its own it did not fit the scenes half the time. Music was super dramatic while what was happening on screen was nothing worthThere is one thing that bothered me throughout the whole movie. Even though the soundtrack was amazing on its own it did not fit the scenes half the time. Music was super dramatic while what was happening on screen was nothing worth mentioning. Music alone is not enough to make a scene dramatic or deep, it has to be a combination of both. They were force feeding us "Look at how deep and existential this looks and sounds!!!" while the plot was mediocre at best.… Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
0
NotonmywatchJan 20, 2018
BR2049 is nothing more than sci-fi porn. And like most higher-end porn, there's but a mere soupçon of a story, which only aids in serving the inevitable money shot. The inevitable money shot hit audiences square in the eyes, but there'sBR2049 is nothing more than sci-fi porn. And like most higher-end porn, there's but a mere soupçon of a story, which only aids in serving the inevitable money shot. The inevitable money shot hit audiences square in the eyes, but there's clearly a latency of pain or else more viewers would feel as I and many others do—that this reboot is a total failure from beginning to end. It steals its core idea from Battlestar Galactica and is basically a mishmash of other sci-fi tropes and traps into which the movie keeps sinking. Horrible. Sad. Shameful. The original BR was brilliant and masterful and subtle. This one is the exact opposite. Jared Leto and Robin Wright are completely miscast and laughable caricatures of themselves. The director should never direct another picture again until he's made to watch good, classic films that were made before MTV ruined everything for us.… Expand
5 of 11 users found this helpful56
All this user's reviews
8
CineAutoctonoOct 8, 2017
"Blade Runner 2049" was a very good film, the special effects and story were amazing, and as long as the performances were great. Ryan Gosling was very good in his role, we see again Harrison Ford, playing Rick Deckard, and Ford does not"Blade Runner 2049" was a very good film, the special effects and story were amazing, and as long as the performances were great. Ryan Gosling was very good in his role, we see again Harrison Ford, playing Rick Deckard, and Ford does not fail, this movie has been one of the biggest and one of the best this year.… Expand
4 of 9 users found this helpful45
All this user's reviews
7
TVJerryOct 12, 2017
This long-awaited sequel starts 30 years after the original, when a new blade runner (Ryan Gosling) is on a quest to uncover secrets and discover the fate of the original star (Harrison Ford). This film is LONG on atmosphere (and I mean 140This long-awaited sequel starts 30 years after the original, when a new blade runner (Ryan Gosling) is on a quest to uncover secrets and discover the fate of the original star (Harrison Ford). This film is LONG on atmosphere (and I mean 140 minutes). The wasteland settings and vast modern interiors are interesting, although they never seem as captivating as the original. There are some cool tricks, but nothing more original than numerous other films have done. Everyone is very serious and they take FOREVER to do anything. This film is about 30 minutes past its prime. Still, there are stimulating elements to the filmmaking that create magnificent moments of desolation and intrigue.… Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
7
cterryr2Oct 18, 2017
It looks great. The acting is good. The production values are excellent. I almost fell asleep at least 3 times while watching it in the afternoon. It's too slow paced. It's confusing. It's too long. On one hand I was bored and on the other IIt looks great. The acting is good. The production values are excellent. I almost fell asleep at least 3 times while watching it in the afternoon. It's too slow paced. It's confusing. It's too long. On one hand I was bored and on the other I was thrilled. I should have waited for the Netflix release though. I wasn't blown away by anything and think it's over hyped.… Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
6
gokartmozart491Oct 6, 2017
I write this review as someone who considers the original film a 10. I left the film trying to figure out what the real plot was, what was supposed to reel me in to caring about what was going on and I think the problem is that Ryan GoslingI write this review as someone who considers the original film a 10. I left the film trying to figure out what the real plot was, what was supposed to reel me in to caring about what was going on and I think the problem is that Ryan Gosling is good looking and he has acting talent (sometimes), but he lacks any sort of charisma to make me care about his characters; thus the problem with Blade Runner 2049, he's supposed to be the center of the plot, but I'm not riveted by the conflict he's supposed to be the center of. One thing I will say that detracted from the film for me is that there are more ties to the modern world we know, making this Blade Runner feel much less foreign, alien, than the first one. The first film, you knew it was our Earth in the future, but there was little to drive that home. There is one passage where we're hit over the head with 20th Century popular culture, effectively popping the bubble that Blade Runner so meticulously crafted. Finally, the thing that bothered me from the time that I heard that Blade Runner 2049 was announced and that Harrison Ford would be playing a character in the present of the timeline, as a man who's aged 30 years, except one of the central, crucial plot points of the first film was as to whether Deckard was or wasn't a replicant himself, replicants, who at the time only had a four year life span, the evidence and testimony from the director in later interviews pointed to him actually being a replicant, so he shouldn't be alive. I was expecting some weak excuse to be made in this film, but it wasn't even discussed. K, is plainly made to be a replicant, so it would seem to be further evidence to the point that Deckard, as a Blade Runner, was one; so confusion ensues in the bad way. It was a pretty film, somewhat interesting, one plot point that should have been major felt pasted in, so, go and watch with low expectations.… Expand
9 of 22 users found this helpful913
All this user's reviews
8
robertoiglesiasJan 13, 2018
Blade Runner 2049 is a nice movie that can be slow, but will most likely put a smile on your face.
2 of 5 users found this helpful23
All this user's reviews
7
GinaKOct 9, 2017
I have seen the original version of Blade Runner so many times that I probably have it memorized. Unfortunately, I did not completely appreciate this latest version, which was overblown in my opinion and too repetitive – which is odd since II have seen the original version of Blade Runner so many times that I probably have it memorized. Unfortunately, I did not completely appreciate this latest version, which was overblown in my opinion and too repetitive – which is odd since I would not say that about any of the Villeneuve films I have seen (Prisoners, Sicario, The Arrival). Both my companion and I almost dozed off at some point early in the film, but the second half held our attention. One problem for me was missing the many interesting, original minor characters in the original that kept things livelier. A new set would have been appreciated instead of Ryan Gosling and his many, many wounds and the many women who turned up in various forms. A disappointment. Not terrible, but not great either… Expand
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
3
thebagginsOct 15, 2017
People giving this 10/10 are either paid to do so or have no frikin idea. This movie is terrible. 3/10 for the effects only. Not even Harrison Ford could save it.
12 of 33 users found this helpful1221
All this user's reviews
4
Kadima82Oct 7, 2017
While it is visually and technically exquisite, Blade Runner 2049 does not engage us emotionally in terms of characters and storylines. Over a period of 180 minutes, this bring the spectator to the edge of boredom instead of their seats.
12 of 33 users found this helpful1221
All this user's reviews
6
gargooletzOct 12, 2017
Visually stunning on many levels but fails to create a believable, living world. Everything is really well designed but not much of this is exciting or fresh. The film has serious pacing issues, a plethora of plot holes and despite beingVisually stunning on many levels but fails to create a believable, living world. Everything is really well designed but not much of this is exciting or fresh. The film has serious pacing issues, a plethora of plot holes and despite being almost 3 hours long, feels like huge chunks of it were left on the editing room floor. It asks some interesting questions but unfortunately doesn't explore any of them and just seems to lack focus.… Expand
6 of 17 users found this helpful611
All this user's reviews
8
BBQTuckOct 9, 2017
To keep it simple, Blade Runner 2049 is a visually stunning neo-noir sci-fi film. If you see it in the theater, don't get a drink because the 2 hr and 44 minute run time will surely lead to a mid-movie piss break.

Overall the film is moody,To keep it simple, Blade Runner 2049 is a visually stunning neo-noir sci-fi film. If you see it in the theater, don't get a drink because the 2 hr and 44 minute run time will surely lead to a mid-movie piss break.

Overall the film is moody, heavy, deliberate and did I mention it was long? Ryan Gosling does his typical Ryan Gosling thing where he kind of skulks around with an blank look on his face, but it somehow looks cool. Imagine his character from "Drive", but somehow with an even cooler jacket. Harrison Ford continues to do his excellent "grumpy reprisals" of classic roles, and he handles this role about as well as he handled Han Solo in "The Force Awakens". The plot is solid, but nothing that will blow you away, and the setting of the film along with the soundtrack seem to be what's stuck in your head after viewing instead of the actual events that take place in the film. There's also Robin Wright Penn providing exposition, a hologram waifu, sequel bait, and Dave Bautista. Despite having a massive budget, there is no giant action set-piece scene in the third act, so don't go in expecting one, but to be honest it really wouldn't fit with the tone of this movie. There is however a beautifully crafted scene involving a sinking car that will give you an anxiety attack. Long story short. See this movies in theaters if you can stomach the giant run-time. It's an absolute treat on the eyes and ears, and Gosling and Ford provide excellent performances that prop up an fine but mostly serviceable plot.… Expand
6 of 17 users found this helpful611
All this user's reviews
2
buffboyOct 9, 2017
Blade Runner 2049 was so long it felt more like Blade WALKING. 2 stars because I liked some parts. Ridley Scott? Ridley Shot himself in the foot with this one!
11 of 32 users found this helpful1121
All this user's reviews
4
jondavisOct 8, 2017
Visually stunning, but beyond that nothing special. Story seemed intentionally confusing and some of the fighting sequences felt implausible. The depiction of women in this movie is also troubling. There are breasts galore in the picture andVisually stunning, but beyond that nothing special. Story seemed intentionally confusing and some of the fighting sequences felt implausible. The depiction of women in this movie is also troubling. There are breasts galore in the picture and women are treated as objects. The only friendly woman is a hologram. The other female characters are either hyper-masculine prisoners of their occupation, an actual prisoner, or prostitutes. I understand it's supposed to be dystopian but the male characters don't seem to be as one-dimensional as the female characters. Jared Leto's character is like a bad SNL skit.… Expand
9 of 27 users found this helpful918
All this user's reviews
5
BossukOct 9, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The original BR had a simple storyline, but told it in a way that was intriguing, atmospheric and engaging. And at the end you felt you understood the characters. BR 2049 has tried to capture this, but has unfortunately fallen short.

Spoiler Alert
It seems the penchant for films to over complicate stories nowadays has not been ignored by the writers of BR2049. The film has some amazing scenes and dialogue, but then when they get into the nitty gritty, the film instead raises more questions than it answers.

I left the cinema wondering" I think i enjoyed that...but I'm not sure. What about x and y"

The motives of some of the characters is unclear, why are you doing this? The overriding story is clear, but individual motives are certainly not.

The film is too long. One scene has 10 minutes of K walking round an abandoned hotel. No tension, no atmospheric music, no dialogue, no action. Literally nothing happens. Ok, we get it, the hotel is disused and abandoned. It was purely wasted time. There are a few scenes like this that did nothing for the film. Completely unnecessary time fillers that do nothing. What's worse is that this wasted time could have been spent filling on some of the obvious gaps in the story.

e.g. What the hell is baselining? I can guess, but why isn't the film explaining this to me? What does the fact he failed the test actually mean? And why are they now going to kill him for failing the test.

Then add to this, the actions or lack of in some scenes make no sense. These is no excuse for this. One scene that stands out is when Deckard is kidnapped. why is K left alive? As far as the female protagonist is concerned, she has no further use for him, so there is no reason to leave him alive. The only course of action would be to kill him. How did she find him?

If all the records were lost in the blackout, how did they find out what Rachel looked like. the only record we have is audio?

Just a couple of examples of where this film falls very short.… Expand
7 of 21 users found this helpful714
All this user's reviews
6
WdMacOct 8, 2017
Great production value and very interesting set design. pretty good acting too. Very long winded dialogue, and lots of pointless padding. The plot is largely moved forward by vigorous use of mcguffins and red herrings. Not a bad movie, butGreat production value and very interesting set design. pretty good acting too. Very long winded dialogue, and lots of pointless padding. The plot is largely moved forward by vigorous use of mcguffins and red herrings. Not a bad movie, but not a great one in my opinion… Expand
5 of 15 users found this helpful510
All this user's reviews
7
NikolayGOct 13, 2017
It is abundantly obvious why this movie didn't do as well as expected. It's too slow. Every shot, every single shot, lingers lovingly over every setting, every landscape, every apartment interior, every closet, every object, every littleIt is abundantly obvious why this movie didn't do as well as expected. It's too slow. Every shot, every single shot, lingers lovingly over every setting, every landscape, every apartment interior, every closet, every object, every little thing for twice, three times, sometimes eight times as long as needed to 'get it' - it's like watching a long game of golf. And the dialog. Someone speaks. Then there is this huge long pause before the other person responds. It's like the director or editor takes too high a dose of anti-depressants and he's just moving in slow motion. This movie should literally be half as long as it is or shorter. When released on demand and DVD a shorter cut should be included. Someone who had the power to say yay or nay fell asleep at the wheel letting this movie go out to theaters in this condition. It could have made twice as much money if it had reasonable pacing.

The second problem with this movie is that there's not enough Harrison Ford. I know he's old and a lot of people think he's a star of days gone by, but as soon as he enters this movie, as soon as you hear his voice, the movie gets real. It takes on more dimension, assumes real gravitas, and feels like a real movie. It's as if the other guy, Gosling (who never showed any emotion, which made him boring), was just there to hand the movie off to Ford and they took too long to do it. Also, they really should have made Gosling's holographic girlfriend do something critical to the plot. She acted well. The concept was cool. But ultimately, she supplied nothing critical to the story. That should have been fixed. A character who takes up so much on-screen time in a movie should not be expendable.

The third problem with this movie, which I think is the least important but it still bugged me, is that it doesn't look like Blade Runner. One reviewer said it looks more like Blade Runner than Blade Runner. But that's just not true. It lacks the dense urban neon crazy visual chaos of Blade Runner. It trades that for vast rust colored expanses that are nice, but are just a different aesthetic, and gives an entirely different feel to the movie. Sure, you get obligatory passes in the floating cars over the city, but even that looks quite different.

But even without reshooting anything, they could vastly increase the quality of this film just by cutting out all the dead space between dialog and cutting out all the gratuitous lingering pans. There is so much of that people in the theater were sighing and huffing with impatience. We wanted to see what came next, but it was like wading through molasses. And if there's any additional film of Harrison Ford on the cutting room floor, splice it into the movie. This movie needs more Ford!… Expand
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
3
JalpanJan 6, 2018
Its extremely silent movie which is almost 3 hours long. One of the most boring and depressing movies I have ever seen.
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
7
purplewelchyDec 23, 2017
Its pretty good especially visually..
Just not as good as the original one.
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
6
toronto_puzzlerNov 14, 2017
The film is visually stylish, but it is also derivative and emotionally unsatisfying. I found the pace slow and the mood depressive. While the film was entertaining, I missed the 'science' part of science fiction. "Blade Runner 2049" sharesThe film is visually stylish, but it is also derivative and emotionally unsatisfying. I found the pace slow and the mood depressive. While the film was entertaining, I missed the 'science' part of science fiction. "Blade Runner 2049" shares the spirit of Villeneuve's other films, while adopting the look and characters of the original "Blade Runner".… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
10
nikblu1904Jan 15, 2018
Blade Runner 2049 is one of the best movies I've seen in 2017. Didn't found it boring at all.
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
RonQuixote_Jan 8, 2018
A story that didn't need to be told ended up being the story I didn't know I needed. 2049 expands on the world created by its predecessor and still manages to be as daring and beautiful. The 2 hour and 45-minute run-time somehow seem shorterA story that didn't need to be told ended up being the story I didn't know I needed. 2049 expands on the world created by its predecessor and still manages to be as daring and beautiful. The 2 hour and 45-minute run-time somehow seem shorter than the 2 hours of the original (depending on what version you watch, duh). This movie is masterclass from Denis Villeneuve because every single decision made in this movie was the best one possible.… Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
3
ourtimehascomeOct 16, 2017
You might as well watch the original Blade Runner from 1982. It has stronger acting, better characters, an unpredictable story and fascinating cinematography. Though 2049 excels with its slow pace and spectacular presentation, it isYou might as well watch the original Blade Runner from 1982. It has stronger acting, better characters, an unpredictable story and fascinating cinematography. Though 2049 excels with its slow pace and spectacular presentation, it is ultimately a lifeless (pun intended) philosophical diatribe. A quintessential cerebral mess which asks too many questions without answering any from the first film. It's less like a sequel and more like a diversion. The ending is enough to make me wish I was a replicant so I wouldn't be so disappointed.… Expand
8 of 25 users found this helpful817
All this user's reviews
6
StrepsOct 10, 2017
Blade Runner was a movie that didn't need a sequel. The thing that made it good was the fact that it left the audience to decide what happened next and how the world changed after. 2049 spends a lot of time reminding you of the conceptsBlade Runner was a movie that didn't need a sequel. The thing that made it good was the fact that it left the audience to decide what happened next and how the world changed after. 2049 spends a lot of time reminding you of the concepts from the original, it even rehashes the same ideas and scenes that make this film needlessly long. It almost felt like a remake rather than a sequel or a continuation of the story. I am not sure if it was dumbed down to appeal to a less patient audience, or if cinema is forever changed and doesn't leave much in the imagination of the viewer.

There are numerous times in the film where it repeats scenes, just in case you didn't get it the first three times it showed you, and you get the feeling that the director for some unknown reason has to hold your hand the entire film. Can't I, the viewer make up my mind and figure out my own conclusion without having it rammed down my throat over and over again.

Agent K's love interest and accompanying drawn out and grating scenes, are some of the worst cinema I have seen in a long time. This entire plot line was another re-hashed idea from the original film. At one point It felt like I was watching an episode of Battlestar Galactica, that's how little this film has tried to push the boundaries of story telling.

Jared Leto's performance is borderline awful in this film, he over acts every scene, and honestly the film would have been better without him and his character which is a homage to the previous corporate goon. The character of Wallace (Jared Leto) doesn't fit in the film nor does his story line add any substance to the movie other than dragging the running time for 30 minuets longer.

The film really crashed and burned when a scene towards the end with Deckard and Wallace makes the Princess Leia CGI scene from Rouge One, look like Oscar level cinema.

This could have been a nice way to tie up the 1982 film, but it brings zero innovation to story telling, and never lets the viewer out of its grip long enough to have allow for imagination to rise up. There are too many rehashed concepts that are just told slightly differently and it doesn't explore anything new.… Expand
5 of 16 users found this helpful511
All this user's reviews
1
aaron_Oct 15, 2017
Personally less than impressed with Blade Runner 2049. There's a core story here that's good, but that story was stretched far too long before it could be realized. The twists in the plot came way too late and thus failed to keep me hooked. IPersonally less than impressed with Blade Runner 2049. There's a core story here that's good, but that story was stretched far too long before it could be realized. The twists in the plot came way too late and thus failed to keep me hooked. I believe the movie would have kept much better pace cutting down by half.

A little stimuli be it drama or action might have kept my blood circulating to prevent me from resting my eyes from time to time. The interaction with AI and the incredible tech required to create illusion seemed both extraordinary and out of place for the scenario, but that's minor. The action that did come felt exaggerated and unnecessary and something we've all seen a million times.

The 'Replicants' are smart enough to know or grasp that something is wrong and yet they need a miracle to prove it? Apparently the newer lobotomized models need more convincing that their position sucks and therefore a miracle is appropriate.

On the positive side the dystopian scenery is great and the acting is decent, but not even Harrison Ford could save this nearly three hour stoic-stroll through gloomy eco-winter from collapsing under its own weight.

All I can say is I envy those who enjoyed it.… Expand
9 of 29 users found this helpful920
All this user's reviews
6
tr78478Oct 6, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. What a missed opportunity! Visually stunning....but missing some of the 'grime' of the original....even the 'junkyard' looked too perfectly dirty....casting and acting was great....but can someone please tell me why Niander Wallace (Jared Leto) was even in this movie? His storyline only confused things....
Some of the established themes were touched on, but they could have gone so much deeper: if the 'new' Replicants were unable to go 'crazy', what side effect does that produce in terms of their reactions to certain situations; did they do away with the old 'classifications'? If so, what does ambiguous role assignments do to their a.i.? They didn't even address the theme of 'life-span', and time...and what both mean when 'you' don't change...ever! Instead, we get overly drawn out scenes that end up not meaning anything, and Harrison Old ALMOST taking out two Replicants....come-aw, Denis!
Worth seeing if simply for the visuals....but doesn't add anything to the discussions that the first movie created.… Expand
9 of 29 users found this helpful920
All this user's reviews
8
TwomblerOct 16, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Like many of us I've seen the original Blade Runner movie countless of times (Director's Cut is, by the way, the only version I acknowledge) but I've also read late Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? Unfortunately this movie isn't a masterpiece although director Villeneuve has left his mark to every frame. And those frames are beautiful!

Blade Runner 2049 will receive Academy Award for best cinematography without a doubt. But it will not receive such honours for its screenplay.

If you've read Dick's novel you may share my opinion which is that this movie totally dismisses its biggest catch, androids. Now we have an android Blade Runner which has a virtual girlfriend. We have also an blind oligarch who desires to spread his androids to the rest of the universe. We have a retired Blade Runner who's gone missing and at some point you'll have a deja vu regarding Harrison Ford if you have seen Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of The Crystal Skull. Heed my words!

It takes a bit too long to build the athmosphere for the plot twist and we spend too much time inside this android Blade Runners apartment. His female supervisor is also quite useless and I felt she was in the movie only to emphasize how heartless android villain can be. But then again, android doesn't have a heart.

Our protagonist does wonder if he's something more than a mere machine. However writers didn't had the courage to write a human character because there is a quite popular theory about Deckard being a android himself.

In conclusion Blade Runner 2049 is a great movie but unfortunately doesn't beat the original. If you like Villeneuves earlier works you'll love it and if you love Ryan Gosling you'll probably watch it more than once.… Expand
6 of 20 users found this helpful614
All this user's reviews
3
TheDavoDec 17, 2017
A steaming hot mess. I am not sure that with an outline of what was happening, I would even know. All noise and action and no real character or plot development. Great to look at and listen to but ultimately, completely empty. Entertaining ifA steaming hot mess. I am not sure that with an outline of what was happening, I would even know. All noise and action and no real character or plot development. Great to look at and listen to but ultimately, completely empty. Entertaining if you don't need a story.… Expand
3 of 10 users found this helpful37
All this user's reviews
1
kmulhollandOct 6, 2017
I love the first film and watched it when it was first out then again many times. I read a review by Rotten Tomatoes before going. Highly scored. I disagree. Boring, drawn out, lacking in action and characterisation. Best scene was theI love the first film and watched it when it was first out then again many times. I read a review by Rotten Tomatoes before going. Highly scored. I disagree. Boring, drawn out, lacking in action and characterisation. Best scene was the first scene. And worst of all unnecessary drama. Where was any Rutger etc? A dismal sequel.… Expand
14 of 49 users found this helpful1435
All this user's reviews
4
McGillotineOct 6, 2017
If I were addressing Blade Runner 2049 as a standalone film I may have been more lenient in giving the film a seven, however since this film is a sequel to Blade Runner (1982), my initial verdict of this film as it stands is a four.

BladeIf I were addressing Blade Runner 2049 as a standalone film I may have been more lenient in giving the film a seven, however since this film is a sequel to Blade Runner (1982), my initial verdict of this film as it stands is a four.

Blade Runner (1982) is by no means a perfect film, polarizing reviews at the time of release, a box office bomb and seven different versions of the film over the span of 25 years is enough to put any casual moviegoer off seeing this film within their lifetime. My experience with Blade Runner started with the director’s cut in 2005, I found it was boring, contrived and didn’t watch it again until nearly a decade later. Whenever I watch a film my objective opinion on whether a film is good or bad is never subject to change, however Blade Runner is an anomaly and upon repeated viewed of both the director’s cut and final cut my view shifted from hate to love for this film. Blade Runner (1982) is not a film in the conventional sense but instead an experiment, filled to the brim with story, culture and lore it has inspired countless sci-fi and neo-noir projects since its release. Blade Runner 2049 however feels more so like a conventional film and while it captures the Blade Runner look, the feel is lost in translation boiling down to a movie that’s excessively artificial and overall ‘okay’.

Blade Runner 2049 opens with ‘K’, A Los Angles Blade Runner played by Ryan Gosling tasked primarily with the job of ‘retiring’ The last of the Tyrell corp. Nexus 8 units who have exceeded the Nexus 6 lifespan of four years to more open-ended lifespans like human beings. While on a job K discovers an old and dark secret left behind by Eldon Tyrell's played by Joe Turkel in the 1982 film, Tyrell corp. that threatens the co-existence of human and replicant societies. All the while a darker force is at work by the name of Niander Wallace, whose Wallace corporation have since succeeded Tyrell in replicant manufacturing. What follows is a heavily long film at 2 hours 48 minutes that travels from location to location, with visits to familiar faces such as Rick Deckard played by Harrison Ford in the films second half to ease that nostalgic itch. Performances in this film vary tremendously from actors such as Ryan Gosling who easily carries the film and weaker performances from actors such as Jared Leto who once again blows his role out of proportion to be the films biggest ‘douchebag’. Actresses such as Robin Wright and Ana de Amras pull great performances in addition to actors such Dave Bautista plays a memorable performance as Sapper despite his small screen time. Harrison Ford feels a lot less versatile an actor as he did in the original Blade Runner but is otherwise enjoyable to watch as an older Deckard who seems to be tired from it all, desiring seclusion in his later life. One of the major realms this film comes apart in is the story. As stated before this film is very long at 2 hours and 48 minutes in comparison to its predecessor which is less than 2 hours long. While the outline of the film is promising and the first third of the film feels like a Blade Runner movie, the remaining two thirds make things needlessly more complicated as new side plots and locations are introduced that aren’t particularly interesting nor necessary in conjunction with the main story. The romance is another issue I had with the film and without spoiling much a scene between ‘K’ and Ana de Armas ‘Joi’ is quite possibly the most awkward romance scene I have ever witnessed in film. Furthermore, the films conclusion felt quite choppy and while topping Rutger Hauer's ‘Tears in rain’ monologue is by no means an easy task, the lack of existential questions or room for thought like the original film, leaves you more included to go ‘huh’ then question what it means to be human.

Another issue is the films soundtrack, while I can’t see why they didn’t get Vangelis back for the sequel considering he is still both alive and active, Denis Villeneuve instead hired Jóhann Jóhannsson to compose the films score. What we’re left with is a score that is fairly meh and isn’t all too memorable, many of the films dramatic scenes aren’t benefitted by the newer music and as a result you don’t tend to take much notice of the soundtrack. Part of me also thinks that Villeneuve found the soundtrack was underwhelming aswell as tracks from the original film are still used in certain sequences of the film. It is also worth noting that this is not the original soundtrack too as Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch were brought in to modify the soundtrack.

As it stands until another viewing Blade Runner 2049 is an okay film by itself but is a less than stellar sequel that I think in time people will forget about it.… Expand
8 of 29 users found this helpful821
All this user's reviews
4
pschiresonOct 8, 2017
A big fan of the original Blade Runner, I was looking forward to Blade Runner 2049. The trailers were promising and the casting looked terrific. On a deeper level, the film's themes continue to intrigue. I saw the film in 3D yesterday: anA big fan of the original Blade Runner, I was looking forward to Blade Runner 2049. The trailers were promising and the casting looked terrific. On a deeper level, the film's themes continue to intrigue. I saw the film in 3D yesterday: an interminable disappointment. After an hour, Ryan Gosling's understatement flattens out. Jared Leto's overly mannered performance (not to mention his cheesy lines) feel like they're from a B movie. Likewise the confrontation in the third act in which the villainous cyborg gets her comeuppance. Robin Wright is fine, but occupies only a tiny corner of the film. Harrison Ford enlivens things, but it must be 90 minutes into the film before he shows up. And the music, relentlessly heavy-handed cues of menace, as if it were necessary. Pretentious, overdone, interminable.… Expand
6 of 22 users found this helpful616
All this user's reviews
5
lmorinOct 9, 2017
The movie was a big disappointment. I felt the special effects were great, but the plot fell short, ending as a simple chase movie good guys vs bad guys and no clever solution. Muttered dialogue contributed to frequent confusion about theThe movie was a big disappointment. I felt the special effects were great, but the plot fell short, ending as a simple chase movie good guys vs bad guys and no clever solution. Muttered dialogue contributed to frequent confusion about the plot twists. I was amazed at the emphasis on the female body in this futuristic scifi story as it seemed so completely dated. Why weren't there more sex objects of choice also on display? The original was much better, IMHO.… Expand
6 of 22 users found this helpful616
All this user's reviews
6
mcgrzlyOct 13, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As a sequel, Blade Runner 2049 works visually and sonically, as it further expands and explores the post-apocalyptical Earth that the first movie set up. Story-wise there is an interesting subversion of the 'Chosen One' trope, as Ryan Gosling's "K" is set up as the the savior until the final act, in which it is revealed that his memories that seem to built to this were actually made and put there by the hermit-like Mariette (Mackenzie Davis) - a clever subversion, that is somewhat undercut by the fact that the movie still sees Deckard (Harrison Ford) as such a Chosen One, in that he becomes the Allfather for the replicants. Overall, the movie seems to want to have its cake and eat it too, but doesn't even have the necessary ingredients to make that cake in the first place. Storylines are underdeveloped and never followed through, a lot of characters remain pretty flat (Jared Leto's evil inventor is especially horrible, a one note villain that basically just dishes out exposition and never gets into the interesting politics and ideologies of his character).

This is especially inexcusable, as the movie would have plenty of time to explore its characters and subplots in more depth, but instead spends a significant part of its 2 hour and fortysomething running time on shots of desolate landscapes and decrepit buildings – though granted, a lot of these shots are gorgeously put together, but even the most gorgeous shot gets tiring if there is not enough substance to sustain it.

Blade Runner 2049 succeeds in some ways, mostly visually and sonically, but falls flat in some major areas otherwise, mostly in providing engaging characters and storytelling throughout and following through with the plots it sets up.

P.S.: For a movie that presents a world that seems highly influenced by Japanese/Asian culture (Japanese script (Kanji?) is shown throughout, female advertisement holograms that seem to be inspired by Hatsune Miku etc.) there is a incredible lack of diversity in this movie.… Expand
3 of 11 users found this helpful38
All this user's reviews
1
supermackOct 6, 2017
I did not like it. It felt like the movie was trying to be profound and meaningful but was just boring and gimmicky. I also felt it was too violent. The violence in the original film was part of the story - it was visceral and painful. InI did not like it. It felt like the movie was trying to be profound and meaningful but was just boring and gimmicky. I also felt it was too violent. The violence in the original film was part of the story - it was visceral and painful. In 2049 it was gratuitous and unnecessary.

I checked my watch 3-4 times during the film and left as soon as the credits rolled. So, yeah I was not impressed.

I was expecting to see some blade running but instead I was left baffled by the meaningless plot.

The crowning moment of the film's failure was the very poor ending. It was limp. The ending of the original film was powerful and nerve-shredding.… Expand
14 of 52 users found this helpful1438
All this user's reviews
1
norseOct 7, 2017
The movie is long, loud, and there's lots of water. Other than that, nothing much really happens. I was a fan of the original blade runner and was blown away by how bad Ridley Scott mangled this opportunity.

The most noteworthy character inThe movie is long, loud, and there's lots of water. Other than that, nothing much really happens. I was a fan of the original blade runner and was blown away by how bad Ridley Scott mangled this opportunity.

The most noteworthy character in the movie is played by insanely loud BRRRRRRAAAAAAAH sounds that occur every fifty seconds, presumably to keep watcher awake.

Stay away, you can spend your time more wisely by staring at a wall, any wall, really.… Expand
11 of 42 users found this helpful1131
All this user's reviews
8
RuslanDZEOct 9, 2017
When I watched Original Blade Runner at my childhood years I was not impressed by a movie. Then before watching BR2049 I watched it again. And I understood why people love it and many directors and creators were inspired by that. So I wasWhen I watched Original Blade Runner at my childhood years I was not impressed by a movie. Then before watching BR2049 I watched it again. And I understood why people love it and many directors and creators were inspired by that. So I was excited to see it now and good that I do not have nostalgia for an original one, since I watched it just recently. First at all, VISUALS. Denis Villeneuve and operator worked one the best looking movies. And visuals are masterly emphasize futuristic objects/ SCI Fi elements. I loved that like an original movie, future here represent in a really realistic way. You believe that in few decades we may live like that. And I can say that about whole movie. It feels down to earth. Nothing feels fake. Soundtrack is wonderful and it relates to the action very well. Ryan Gosling is a very good. Sci Fi Noir is very rare genre in movie industry and you have to watch this movie If you are movie nerd. Only doensides I have. That is eventually, movie falls flat. Some story lines do not have any progression. Jared Leto is wasted. And overall it does not make you think a lot. Well, it may be just a start and we will see an another sequel.… Expand
6 of 23 users found this helpful617
All this user's reviews
3
MahbubAli92Oct 10, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Overall it was interesting but deeply flawed. I wanted to like it, but I can see why it flopped so badly (grossed even less than The Mummy in its opening weekend LOL).

GOOD
- Spectacular visuals, as though the dystopia of the original has taken several big steps closer to hell in the last 30 years (reinforced by how the old music has been remixed to be discordant and oppressive)

- The hologram girlfriend was a cute concept, though she is largely irrelevant to the plot

- I respect that it at least tried to be a thoughtful movie for grownups, something that is increasingly rare these days (especially for big budget movies). Though I have to admit it's not really as smart as it thinks it is, mainly because the ideas it grapples with ("what if people were... ROBOTS?") don't actually resonate with anything real. Really the most powerful thing about it was the portrayal of urban decay and alienation via the eternal trifecta of pollution, multiculturalism, and corporate greed.

BAD
- Making the main character a robot was unbelievably stupid. Gosling's flat affect and lack of personality make it impossible to emotionally engage with the character. Since this is 100% Gosling's story, the fact that he's a mopey unrelatable autistic robot (who barely even shows any warmth to his videogame girlfriend) absolutely cripples the movie's emotional impact.

- Bringing back Harrison Ford was also dumb. Rick Deckard is not an iconic character, nobody cares what became of him and seeing him again is not an exciting prospect. Harrison Ford needs to quit rehashing every role he did back when movies were original and good.

- Way too long for what it is, with many slack scenes that drag out self-indulgently. A competent editor could easily get this below 2 hours with the plot intact.

- Ultimately the big reveal ("ZOMG A REPLICANT GOT PREGNANT!") isn't that interesting plotwise or thematically. News flash: humanoid robots aren't real and probably never will be, so "what if they could get pregnant" isn't a meaningful question to explore (contra the fanboys, it doesn't actually "make you think about what it means to be human" or w/e). After Villenueve kept claiming there was going to be a huge earthshaking twist, he needed to deliver something much better than this (should've used the element from the book where replicants have infiltrated business/media/government and are trying to twist them to their own ends).

- For a movie that takes itself so seriously it sure had a ton of lame genre cliches, including the one-dimensionally evil corporate magnate having a beautiful ninja robot assassin bodyguard, who has a kung fu fight with hero at the climax. If I wanted goofy stuff like that I would've watched the crappy Ghost in the Shell remake again.

It's really a shame this was such a box office disaster, since there was clearly a lot of thought and effort that went into making it. But I can't blame audiences for not lining up to watch 3 hours of grim navel-gazing about robots grappling with robot existentialism.… Expand
6 of 23 users found this helpful617
All this user's reviews
3
TomSoapEdyBaconOct 7, 2017
+'s Visuals, Acting, CGI, Themes
-'s Editing, Sound, Plot
Great visuals and themes let down by the plot holes and poor writing. Too much pandering to the audience and repetition of simple points. Editing cuts were too long & boring without+'s Visuals, Acting, CGI, Themes
-'s Editing, Sound, Plot
Great visuals and themes let down by the plot holes and poor writing. Too much pandering to the audience and repetition of simple points. Editing cuts were too long & boring without substance. Overall film too long. Music can be great but the jump-scare sounds were too much, the sounds of city when flying were terrible, also a poor echo affect on a lot of dialogue in open settings which makes very hard to hear. Too much unexplained in the plot, why were there no other flying cars in a city of millions? Its only slightly better than Ghost in the Shell 2017.… Expand
11 of 44 users found this helpful1133
All this user's reviews
5
amirrodanOct 7, 2017
not a good movie/ big disappointment.
visual is amazing but very boring
it dose not make u feel anything, storyline simple, characters flat, screenplay bad, cyberfunk dosent exist, too much talking with no point. and sound is too loud do theynot a good movie/ big disappointment.
visual is amazing but very boring
it dose not make u feel anything, storyline simple, characters flat, screenplay bad, cyberfunk dosent exist, too much talking with no point. and sound is too loud
do they really thought they got a good movie ?… Expand
9 of 36 users found this helpful927
All this user's reviews
6
PlzRMOct 16, 2017
Это очень приятный фильм, в стиле Бегущего, он так же отлично смотрится в этой вселенной, но фильм от части потерял свое противостояние человека и репликанта, теперь в основе сюжета другие цели, которые не такие уж и глупые, за происходящимЭто очень приятный фильм, в стиле Бегущего, он так же отлично смотрится в этой вселенной, но фильм от части потерял свое противостояние человека и репликанта, теперь в основе сюжета другие цели, которые не такие уж и глупые, за происходящим приятно наблюдать. Главный герой, очень приятный, не карикатурный, за его действиями стоят вполне понятные цели. В целом все хорошо, только смена направления сюжета слегка путает, но их можно понять, они хотели сделать, что-то свое. Будущее у этой франшизы есть и смотреть стоит, но начинать лучше с первоисточников.… Expand
3 of 12 users found this helpful39
All this user's reviews
3
Fortysixter_UKNov 23, 2017
I found this film to be quite poor. The production, acting and music were just fine, but somewhere along the way, the sense of intrigue, the sense of fun, a decent pace, and a good story were sadly cast aside for a slow, ponderous movie ofI found this film to be quite poor. The production, acting and music were just fine, but somewhere along the way, the sense of intrigue, the sense of fun, a decent pace, and a good story were sadly cast aside for a slow, ponderous movie of little interest. The first Bladerunner is a fine film in all its versions. Bladerunner 2049 will just go down in history as a non starter, dulled beyond belief. A huge disappointment.… Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
6
CarFan1999Oct 15, 2017
The best part about this movie is the visuals. Every single set piece is amazing to look at, every shot from the cinematographer is perfect, and the computer effects are so good that everything in this looks real. It’s easily the mostThe best part about this movie is the visuals. Every single set piece is amazing to look at, every shot from the cinematographer is perfect, and the computer effects are so good that everything in this looks real. It’s easily the most visually stunning movie I have seen this year. The acting from Gosling and Ford is also well-done. The story is fine and a little basic, although some of the deeper philosophical questions it poses (like most sci-fi flicks) doesn’t add up to much. The only real problem with 2049 is the pacing. While better than the original Blade Runner, it is still really slow. This movie is unnecessarily long, almost 3 hours to be exact. You could cut over 30 minutes of footage in places and it wouldn’t make a difference. In addition, the advertising is also misleading. You would think that this is an action-thriller, but instead it’s a slow moving detective story with some moments of action. In the end, Blade Runner 2049 has fantastic, stunning visuals and good acting performances. However, the slow pacing and overlong runtime hurt the overall experience. Please note that you have to watch the original in order to understand this.… Expand
2 of 8 users found this helpful26
All this user's reviews
4
cheroldJan 21, 2018
Imagine Blade Runner without a strong directorial vision, and interesting story, or engaging characters. If you find that impossible to imagine, just watch the forgettable sci-fi flick Blade Runner 2049.

Instead of the distinct '40s-noir ofImagine Blade Runner without a strong directorial vision, and interesting story, or engaging characters. If you find that impossible to imagine, just watch the forgettable sci-fi flick Blade Runner 2049.

Instead of the distinct '40s-noir of the original, 2049 offers scale without purpose and a dusty color palette. Instead of riveting, distinct, excellently-acted characters, you've got sturdy but unforgettable people. Blade Runner was full of amazing moments and places, such as the room of living toys and Rutger Hauer's every word, but 2049 has nothing but a bland lead and a bunch of characters whose motives can't be looked at too closely. Scenes come not out of the story but out of a desire to have something happened, resulting in pointless interactions like the tormenting of a naked replicant. There aren't so much huge plot holes as poor motivations and small inconsistencies that make everything in the movie feel false.

If you don't compare this to Blade Runner, it's a mediocre but almost-watchable movie with the occasional interesting idea (the talking, naked ad, the memory designer's creation of a birthday party), but as a sequel to a classic, this movie is a travesty. And how is it that a futuristic L.A. heavily influenced by Japanese cultures has no Asians in the entire city? It's as though there's no detail so big or small that the filmmakers won't ignore it.… Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
1
JDMCOct 6, 2017
I would really, really like to know if all the critics who gave the new Blade Runner movie five stars saw the same film I did.
1) MOVIE: Overdrawn, overlong dramatic scenes, which often substituted LOUD soundtrack for real drama. Literally,I would really, really like to know if all the critics who gave the new Blade Runner movie five stars saw the same film I did.
1) MOVIE: Overdrawn, overlong dramatic scenes, which often substituted LOUD soundtrack for real drama. Literally, my wife and I had to HOLD OUR HANDS over our ears at four or five points in the film. Not cool.
....of course, my perceptions could have been tainted by the....
2) Theater: Stank. Literally, stank. and the handle on My wife's seat's armrest broke at one point and I ended up wearing most of her soda pop on my leg
3) Movie again: attempts to be deep and thoughtful too often become pretentious. This was literally the single worst moviegoing experience of my life. Bleh.… Expand
12 of 49 users found this helpful1237
All this user's reviews
8
dharmaDec 26, 2017
Blade Runner 2019 is the ultimate fan film. On that level it works incredibly well. It answers all the riddles posed on the first film while offering new ones (possibly for another sequel). It also has incredible effects and cinematographyBlade Runner 2019 is the ultimate fan film. On that level it works incredibly well. It answers all the riddles posed on the first film while offering new ones (possibly for another sequel). It also has incredible effects and cinematography that will probably net this an Oscar nomination. Yet there lies its ultimate weakness: it is not an accessible film. If you haven't seen the first one, forget about understanding this flick. It is also bladder busting long at 2 hours and 45 minutes. It is a film that is budgeted for cinema, but can only be savored in home video (a bit like the original's 'faith'). This is why studios sometimes are reluctant to 'please the fans' too much. At the end of the day, they are not enough to make back the film's enormous budget.… Expand
5 of 21 users found this helpful516
All this user's reviews
3
David_HOct 9, 2017
As a qualifier, I’m old enough to have seen and been a big fan of the original Blade Runner, plus I’ve always been a sci-fi fan. That said, the better half and I were both disappointed in this sequel. You know how you hear that much of aAs a qualifier, I’m old enough to have seen and been a big fan of the original Blade Runner, plus I’ve always been a sci-fi fan. That said, the better half and I were both disappointed in this sequel. You know how you hear that much of a movie ends up on the cutting room floor? Well for this movie it’s like they forgot to do the cutting; they just left everything in it. Generally, it comes across as a film that is trying way too hard to be “epic”. Yes there are long sweeping vistas, advanced cinematography and long scenes with very sparse dialogue. Sometimes this approach can be entertaining, but for 163 minutes? This film requires a large capacity bladder and if you include previews, be aware you will be sitting there for about 3 hours. Where the original had so much action and interesting characters, this sequel is almost the opposite; most characters show no emotion at all and the whole thing drags so slowly, we came close to walking out after about two excruciating hours. I’ll admit performances by Ford, Gosling and Leto were good considering the script they were handed. However again it was way too long and to make matters worse, you leave with hardly a hint of an uplift.… Expand
6 of 26 users found this helpful620
All this user's reviews
3
blahhhhOct 29, 2017
Why is this movie 2 hours and 45 minutes?

Saw it with a friend who is like a cult-fan of the original. I just can't get over how long the movie was. The story wasn't particularly interesting to me either.
3 of 13 users found this helpful310
All this user's reviews
1
StanCliffBroadOct 12, 2017
More than 2 1/2 hours long, I knew it had to have something or other, to hold my attention, but no, I sat through the whole thing waiting for something interesting to happen. Ryan Gosling can't act, what a shocker! Turgid script, even vacuousMore than 2 1/2 hours long, I knew it had to have something or other, to hold my attention, but no, I sat through the whole thing waiting for something interesting to happen. Ryan Gosling can't act, what a shocker! Turgid script, even vacuous in parts. 'Pris' lookey likey, was the worst actress of all.
Look all you Producers out there, Robin Wright has hit the wall, so stop casting her.
The only good bit for me was the baddie, Sylvia Hoeks did a fine job with the script she was given, but she should've been given more to do, what a waste.… Expand
5 of 22 users found this helpful517
All this user's reviews
0
ShadowareOct 6, 2017
+ Great panoramic views & cgi, good sound quality, cool actors.
- boring story & paper thin plot. Minutes of slow motion movement & staring somewhere behind the camera. To be honest, we all know how it is to be caught in thoughts for hours,+ Great panoramic views & cgi, good sound quality, cool actors.
- boring story & paper thin plot. Minutes of slow motion movement & staring somewhere behind the camera. To be honest, we all know how it is to be caught in thoughts for hours, but actually seeing it on screen? Pew, thats not the reason to go to the cinema. That whole movie felt for me like they took the main Charakter from Drive (ultra boring movie in my opinion) and trow him into the world of Blade Runner. Go watch the 1 Movie or Blade Runner Black Out 2022, that anime short movie is far better than this. But THIS, its not even the best movie of the month :(… Expand
14 of 62 users found this helpful1448
All this user's reviews
1
StedeBonnetOct 16, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Sad to say it but Blade Runner 2049 is a dark, dull, hot-mess of a film—largely pointless and does nothing to advance the franchise. Only lonely fan-boys whose greatest fantasy is to take Siri or Alexa to their senior prom will find anything to like about this film. Worse yet is that the plot is basically lifted from the DaVinci Code--our hero deciphers sketchy clues from a lost age only to discover that he is searching for a "miracle" child hidden and protected by a secret society. Sound familiar? Visually interesting if you enjoy prolonged shots of bizarre architectural spaces of pointless design and Ryan Gosling's scruffy nerf-herder face staring blankly at them. At least the soundtrack contains enough needlessly booming discordant notes to regularly startle viewers back to consciousness as they struggle to endure the 164 minute running time. Very disappointing.… Expand
6 of 27 users found this helpful621
All this user's reviews
3
SchnitzelPoofOct 20, 2017
If I could save one person the time and money, then I've done my part. If you like fun or entertainment in any form, don't waste your time on this film. If you like engaging, captivating storytelling - this movie is not for you.
I can't evenIf I could save one person the time and money, then I've done my part. If you like fun or entertainment in any form, don't waste your time on this film. If you like engaging, captivating storytelling - this movie is not for you.
I can't even call it pretentious. It is a bad film because there's nothing appealing in it. Not bad in a good way, either, but simply boring, with unengaging characters, a foreign world that's never properly explained, and a tedious self-discovery journey, with some distant anti-human goals tacked in. The protagonist has zero charm, and the antagonist, or side characters, are about on the same level. The one minor character who had me curious is killed right in the opening scene - which happens to be the best in the film, by the way. Besides him, the only thing that merits some positive points is Harrison Ford's performance, which manages to bring in some levity, and a relatable character. However, he doesn't receive enough screen time to justify wasting 2.5 hours of your life watching a director experimenting with gloomy visual scenes, that have extremely dark lighting, and advance at an extremely slow pace, for no good reason. Rather than draw you in, they end up having zero emotional impact - just like the tiny, dead letters of the opening exposition.… Expand
4 of 18 users found this helpful414
All this user's reviews
4
BarryROct 14, 2017
Midway, I realised I was bored. The story was presented in too jumbled a manner with 2 major contradictions. One, a company was producing new replicants but had to kill old ones. Why? Two: Nowadays, we know that a smartphone can be tracked.Midway, I realised I was bored. The story was presented in too jumbled a manner with 2 major contradictions. One, a company was producing new replicants but had to kill old ones. Why? Two: Nowadays, we know that a smartphone can be tracked. So for sure a replicant would have inbuilt tracers. That really takes the steam out of both films.… Expand
4 of 18 users found this helpful414
All this user's reviews
3
MaxPayneIsGodOct 24, 2017
A visual masterpiece which unfortunately falls grossly flat of the (undeserved) hype. The original is a niche Sci-Fi classic which was not particularly popular upon release, in fact it was ridiculed. Any movie with 5 different versionsA visual masterpiece which unfortunately falls grossly flat of the (undeserved) hype. The original is a niche Sci-Fi classic which was not particularly popular upon release, in fact it was ridiculed. Any movie with 5 different versions obviously has something wrong with it, Ridley Scott has clearly acknowledged how broken it was/is. Harrison Ford has gone on record numerous times complaining about the entire process which is reiterated by his performance this time around.
A run time of 2hrs 45mins is totally unnecessary and the entire thing could've been over and done in less than 90. Everything is drawn out, way longer than it needs to be.
Gosling is as wooden as ever, he's channeled his character from Drive, Leto's over-the-top wannabe character actor melodrama is campy, he's still living off his Dallas Buyers Club success, the guy can't act. All the female leads are stereotypical Bond-esqe feme-fatals or damsels in distress. And lastly, Ford, Ford clearly doesn't want to be there (again) and with the amount of screen time he gets his $'s per minute pay check would be interesting.
They story is utterly laughable and has none of the mystique of the first one, its so completely contrived that to perceive this as anything other than a Hollywood cash grab is a joke. The "Love" scenes are a jab at where mankind is heading because of technology, but again, totally unnecessary and cringe worthy.
To summarise, I was stunned at how bad this film was, not disappointed, it was more like disbelief that something like this was (A) Made (B) Made this poorly.
Not the worst box office movie of the year, but after Wind River, IT and Logan its miles off the mark.… Expand
4 of 18 users found this helpful414
All this user's reviews
2
FlorentineOct 18, 2017
No, no, nooooooo! Please don't ever make me sit through that again. You can talk about character development and genres and whatever. This movie will take away your will to live! If 2049 is going to look like that, I'm glad I won't beNo, no, nooooooo! Please don't ever make me sit through that again. You can talk about character development and genres and whatever. This movie will take away your will to live! If 2049 is going to look like that, I'm glad I won't be around. By the way, I had a private screening with 3D and RPX and an assigned seat!!!… Expand
4 of 18 users found this helpful414
All this user's reviews
6
Nobilis1984Oct 14, 2017
Far from the quality the original, however, nevertheless, become good. ---------------------------------------- If I did not know the original of 1982, I would be inspired brightly on. But this is not thus and, hence, it is for me a goodFar from the quality the original, however, nevertheless, become good. ---------------------------------------- If I did not know the original of 1982, I would be inspired brightly on. But this is not thus and, hence, it is for me a good average. The graduations they were put in 1982 are not reached here roughly. But I must say I about what is offered me Visually not can complain. I feel the story, however, disappointed. She is simply too weak to me. Part 1 is to be preferred anyway.… Expand
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
6
Douglas56Oct 15, 2017
Don't fall for the lavish praise, this is a disappointing film. When I saw Villeneuve's Arrival, I predicted the Blade Runner sequel may not make the grade, and unfortunately the prediction came true. Like Villeneuve's previous efforts, thisDon't fall for the lavish praise, this is a disappointing film. When I saw Villeneuve's Arrival, I predicted the Blade Runner sequel may not make the grade, and unfortunately the prediction came true. Like Villeneuve's previous efforts, this film scores well for visuals and, I suppose, the soundtrack. But it is too nostalgic, too timid, too Hollywood and too long. The original Blade Runner was a cop thriller with some moral and philosophical solidity, a thrilling depiction of a world where the replicants are more recognisably us than the humans. Strip away the laboriously-worked back story and the impressive visual content and all that's left of BR 2049 is another action adventure where the good cop defeats all the bad guys. It's as if the writers were too scared to take the question of 'what is human?' a single step further, preferring to make endless references to the original film and set us up like comicbook fans, wondering what the next issue will hold. With Ridley Scott a spent force creatively and the overrated Villeneuve apparently unable to spot the dramatic flaws in a thin but very long script crammed with unlikely plot turns, the filmmakers have opted to turn a classic into a stylish clanger. The technological wizardry is occasionally intriguing but it's small compensation. Ryan Gosling is dull and grim as the protagonist in a dull and grim drama (not unlike Sicario in many respects) , and Harrison Ford does nothing to burnish our memory of Deckard. After his return to Star Wars and Blade Runner, what's next for Ford? A revival of Indiana Jones?… Expand
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
6
JaguargaitUrsaOct 9, 2017
Story was drawn out. This movie did not improve on the original in anyway but rehashed it's themes and style. Recommended if you haven't seen the original.
3 of 14 users found this helpful311
All this user's reviews
3
eberman123Oct 7, 2017
I was looking forward to this movie. I was disappointed because, yes the acting and cinematography were very good, the first hour was very boring. I walked out of the theater after the hour but maybe it got better.
8 of 38 users found this helpful830
All this user's reviews
0
GieverDec 29, 2017
I really don't get why there are so many positive reviews to such a boring movie.It's one of those self absorbing don't take the camera off of me im a demigod kind of film that deserves zero praise. I Don't get why the audience fail to seeI really don't get why there are so many positive reviews to such a boring movie.It's one of those self absorbing don't take the camera off of me im a demigod kind of film that deserves zero praise. I Don't get why the audience fail to see this. Viewers instead pretend to be socialite critiques trying so hard themselves to be notice and praised, so they write a review that there social media sheeple will think is acceptable, thus you have all these unworthy positives. Entire movie is bland, not much more i need to say. Just believe me when i tell you this and not the social media sheeple idiots.… Expand
4 of 19 users found this helpful415
All this user's reviews
2
rgjrOct 7, 2017
Blade Runner is long and very slow. Supposedly this is to build the plot, but at times it is very hard to follow. After we walked out of the movie I discussed the plot with the person I went with and they had completely missed what was goingBlade Runner is long and very slow. Supposedly this is to build the plot, but at times it is very hard to follow. After we walked out of the movie I discussed the plot with the person I went with and they had completely missed what was going on. Worse, the ending makes no sense. Supposedly Harrison Ford can now meet his child but nothing has happened in the movie that allows that. In good conscience I cannot recommend that anyone spend money on this movie.… Expand
10 of 48 users found this helpful1038
All this user's reviews
0
AlaingagnonOct 7, 2017
It ruined the original movie for me. I am a die hard science fiction fan. Loved the original until I watched this. First time in my life I couldn't wait for the movie to end. If my wife hadn't fallen asleep midway, we would have left.It ruined the original movie for me. I am a die hard science fiction fan. Loved the original until I watched this. First time in my life I couldn't wait for the movie to end. If my wife hadn't fallen asleep midway, we would have left. Boring, pretentious and self absorbing. Although it was almost 3 hours long, it felt much longer. Over the top musical score, all the actors did was stare and did not do the subject matter justice at all. Extremely disappointed. I waited for years and this is the **** the came up with?… Expand
14 of 69 users found this helpful1455
All this user's reviews
3
AlexMorteyzOct 6, 2017
A very very bad sequel. Instead of a good cyberpunk. Dear Ridley again continues to make films on biblical themes. I'm surprised that Michael fassbender did not appear in this movie.
10 of 50 users found this helpful1040
All this user's reviews
0
GeezezJstLftChiOct 16, 2017
Dune/Matrix 2&3 bad... looooong, tedious, dreary and boring. I didn't care about any of the characters other than the Dave Bautista's Sapper Morton...save your theater-going money, wait for Free/$1.00 Blu-ray rental from your videoDune/Matrix 2&3 bad... looooong, tedious, dreary and boring. I didn't care about any of the characters other than the Dave Bautista's Sapper Morton...save your theater-going money, wait for Free/$1.00 Blu-ray rental from your video store...not even Netflix worthy...certainly not a good sequel to the great original.… Expand
7 of 35 users found this helpful728
All this user's reviews
6
keemtOct 8, 2017
Looks good, moves slow, and doesn't reward with a good plot. The plot touches on themes but doesn't explore them. The original Bladerunner was awkward and this one is even moreso. The original Bladerunner did have at least a core messageLooks good, moves slow, and doesn't reward with a good plot. The plot touches on themes but doesn't explore them. The original Bladerunner was awkward and this one is even moreso. The original Bladerunner did have at least a core message that was pretty new and very satisfyingly conveyed. What can I say, the director has the same lackings in every movie and did it again in Bladerunner 2049. At least we got a decent sequel that is beautiful.… Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
3
Kdk2626Dec 19, 2017
I so wanted to love this movie: looks great, good acting. But the plot is trite and the script is dull. Worse, it is a movie that takes itself too seriously - it's trying to be an art house film, and by doing so it only manages to commit theI so wanted to love this movie: looks great, good acting. But the plot is trite and the script is dull. Worse, it is a movie that takes itself too seriously - it's trying to be an art house film, and by doing so it only manages to commit the cardinal sin of boring the audience.… Expand
2 of 10 users found this helpful28
All this user's reviews
6
raporgiDec 11, 2017
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. nice visuals from Dennis and his cinematographer. too many scenes that linger and the story is just dumb. if the movie was better paced I wouldve scored this higher, its just a slog to get through. the whole rebel/messiah bs comes out of nowhere and just flies in the face of the original.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
7
MiracSpectacDec 19, 2017
Blade Runner 2049 is one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. It's brilliantly atmospheric in ways that truly display the height of cinematography. Unfortunately, this is somewhat sullied by a misdirected story that is dragged out toBlade Runner 2049 is one of the most beautiful films I've ever seen. It's brilliantly atmospheric in ways that truly display the height of cinematography. Unfortunately, this is somewhat sullied by a misdirected story that is dragged out to the extreme. Even as a fan of movies that take their time developing, I practically fell asleep in the theatre watching this. Nothing felt meaningful and the entire story could've been told in a couple hours or less. However, seeing as I could easily watch it again on the visuals alone, I still believe it's a great movie.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
3
SatanskiMar 4, 2018
Love the first movie, but couldn't force myself to watch this one to the end. Due to lack of original mood and charm, i quickly got tired of cheap drama. Regardles of great CGI parts, the world just doesn't feel like distopian future - itLove the first movie, but couldn't force myself to watch this one to the end. Due to lack of original mood and charm, i quickly got tired of cheap drama. Regardles of great CGI parts, the world just doesn't feel like distopian future - it looks like some ruined part of present day world, with hover cars and androids slapped on it.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
4
elsiemonsterNov 6, 2017
I don't get why people love this movie so much. I admit that it was visually beautiful and the acting was great, but it was too quiet and slow. The story was okay-interesting. Why was it almost 3 hours long? Half-way through, I wasI don't get why people love this movie so much. I admit that it was visually beautiful and the acting was great, but it was too quiet and slow. The story was okay-interesting. Why was it almost 3 hours long? Half-way through, I was questioning my decision of watching this in a theater. If I was at home, I may have not finished it if I didn't fall asleep first.… Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
7
myneeshDec 20, 2017
I never thought a sequel would happen. Great direction, good visuals, sound and style. A little artsy...
The original Blade Runner is superior though.
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
Page:
More From This Movie

81 Critic Reviews

8.3 User Reviews

Details & Credits|Trailers

Current Movie Releases
By MetascoreBy User Score
1 81 28 Years Later: The Bone Temple
2 77 Project Hail Mary
3 75 Send Help
4 73 Hoppers
5 72 The Sheep Detectives
SEE ALL
Essential Links
New on Amazon Prime Video
New on Netflix
Coming Soon to DVD/Blu-ray
SEE ALL