Blade Runner 2049

1

RickBellOct 7, 2017

Completely over-rated by the critics, because they love this pretentious, slow-paced and confusing trainwreck of a sequel. Two of the female leads have noticeable Spanish accents to their English (similar to Penelope Cruz), which is jarringlyCompletely over-rated by the critics, because they love this pretentious, slow-paced and confusing trainwreck of a sequel. Two of the female leads have noticeable Spanish accents to their English (similar to Penelope Cruz), which is jarringly out of place. The movie is unappealing due to some of its violent and sexual scenes that are in poor taste and unnecessarily long. Not enough action, and poorly written. The disappointment in the audience was palpable after the movie ended. Ridley Scott should have directed it himself instead of Villanueva.… Expand

7 of 36 users found this helpful729

All this user's reviews

4

TrevorsViewOct 13, 2017

What separates real from machine? Do androids dream of electric sheep? Do we still think that humanity will someday crumble into a robot dystopia? Why do we still ask ourselves these obvious questions?

Blade Runner 2049 brings us to thirtyWhat separates real from machine? Do androids dream of electric sheep? Do we still think that humanity will someday crumble into a robot dystopia? Why do we still ask ourselves these obvious questions?

Blade Runner 2049 brings us to thirty years after the 1982 classic. If you love the original Blade Runner, then you may appreciate Harrison Ford as he reprises his old role, this time as a motivator for the supposedly replicant protagonist, detective K, played by Ryan Gosling (Drive, La La Land). Similar to his previous project, Arrival, director Denis Villeneuve attempts a philosophical study on the worth of humanity, except now resulting in a pointless anti-fantasy with no true knowledge about civilization.

Most of the film’s praise focuses on production designer Dennis Gassner’s (Bugsy, The Truman Show) creation of the sunless Californian city’s atmosphere, which it deserves. Between the desolate hell-red wasteland riddled by statues and the neon shades of evil corporations, immense spectacle commands the screen. The use of symbolic holograms within the city is particularly noteworthy, as a ballerina hologram three stories tall parades through the streets, and a nude pink hooker five stories tall rules over the solitary life; even inside the city walls, an Elvis concert juxtaposes a fist fight. Although more so than the visuals, the sound design sucks you into the experience the most—in the first scene, Villeneuve utilizes his silent storytelling skills with K at work in a protein farm, where the hard murder of a replicant takes place. Once K enters the city, the IMAX surround sound creates the big, unfamiliar world accompanied by a shrieking musical score by Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch (Hidden Figures). You indeed feel caught in this cyberpunk future.

However, the visuals hardly redeem the flaws, due to little effort made to modernize the decades old material. Villeneuve draws no inspiration from our current values, with social media and all, in turn making the original look more dated in its incorrectly predicted philosophical ideas. In fact, this whole city exaggerates our lesser-prevalent problems to improbable levels without explaining precisely how human error led to the ecosystem’s collapse.

The excessive three-hour runtime contains 15% beautiful imagery and 85% chitchat in standardly lit sets; the average person might be able to follow these overused slow conversations without a single yawn if the villains were more multi-dimensional. The screenplay ironically says, “memory is feeling,” yet no feeling exists here, so you too will fail to remember whatever it tries to communicate.

Part of the problem to the atrocious boredom goes to the lackluster dialogue—after a standard text straight-forward tells you the backstory, everyone acts as a tool to spill out philosophical rambles. Since no tension builds, our mindset identifies these individuals as human shaped phone apps rather than expressive minds.

The entire production crew overall showed little respect to regular moviegoers; cinema should never be about self-satisfaction, but about telling a great story that speaks to anybody at a spiritual level. The ego stroking of the picture primarily shows in its character motive: a fatherhood subplot gets thrown in without enough prevalence, and a significant other for K arrives and leaves without any resolution, so the entire subject of love, both familial and romantic, needed much more presence. Humanity and love complete one another, so why would such a heartless directorial approach impact our souls?

Even more ironically, a heartthrob actor, one who has embraced materialism throughout his career, plays the lead. Consequently, he was a dreadful choice for the uncastable role: Ryan Gosling never reacts to the miraculous events around him, he just stares blankly as he recites his lines off a cue card.

One last detail disproves Blade Runner 2049 as a sci-fi masterpiece: it plagiarizes. If you already saw this movie, then you might have noticed that K’s name, a codename assigned to him at birth, resembles Star Wars: The Force Awakens., or that it ripped off a true modern sci-fi masterpiece, Her, when the holographic girlfriend uses a flesh-and-blood girl to sleep with K (essentially telling girls to submit their control to technology). So sorry, nothing new is said other than we people deserve to feel discouraged.

Now, to answer my starter questions: People are real, machines are inanimate, androids never dream, because only people dream, and humanity can never crumble to basically resemble robots. Look at Facebook: things still look pretty dang expressive compared to the original Blade Runner’s incorrect theories, so the future seems more hopeful than we give ourselves credit for.… Expand

4 of 21 users found this helpful417

All this user's reviews

4

SandyRosenOct 15, 2017

I came with great expectations! I found the movie to be very flat, not at all the sequel that could have been or should have been, after 30 years. A total lack of imagination.

3 of 16 users found this helpful313

All this user's reviews

3

PeterayNov 12, 2017

Bring a pillow and blanket - this is a sleeper... What began as a visually striking movie with excellently staged cinematography, intriguing sets, and a few beautiful, sexy women, became a tiresomely long snore-fest. This dragged on...andBring a pillow and blanket - this is a sleeper... What began as a visually striking movie with excellently staged cinematography, intriguing sets, and a few beautiful, sexy women, became a tiresomely long snore-fest. This dragged on...and on...and ON...requiring much effort to stay awake through as the story-line took the occasional break from mind-numbing scenes of the characters meandering around in dark lands, to senseless violence. People literally snored this, my wife fell asleep, and I wanted only one thing FOR IT TO FINALLY END. Borrrrrrring... Ryan Gossling stars in another stinker. Save your money and watch TOTAL RECALL with the tracking so slow it adds another 45 minutes to the movie.… Expand

2 of 11 users found this helpful29

All this user's reviews

5

wee3200Oct 23, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I thought if i won't very like this film, the reason will be i didn't understand the storyline or scenes. But i didn't, at least while i'm watching i know what's going on in every scenes, i can understand the storyline, but... i still not very like this film.

I can understand even K knowing he is not the chosen one, but his action that still chose to help Rick to meet his daughter are very selfless, it's meant a lot, usually if i seen similar happen on the big screen, i will very touching, and mostly will loved the film because of this, but this didn't happen on Blade Runner 2049.

Peoples have surprisingly high review for this film, too bad i'm not one of them that can enjoy in this film.… Expand

2 of 11 users found this helpful29

All this user's reviews

6

GittoploOct 12, 2017

I was not disappointed, I was wryly amused by the end. Original Blade Runner is in my top 20 just to set the expectation. I think modern day viewers are so starved for grandiose thought provoking cinema that they would prepare to swallowI was not disappointed, I was wryly amused by the end. Original Blade Runner is in my top 20 just to set the expectation. I think modern day viewers are so starved for grandiose thought provoking cinema that they would prepare to swallow anything. Now to the film:

- Visuals were great at times
- Gosling was ok in the main role although he is no Belmondo or Rutger.
- The plot was poor. Very poor. Why replay Children of Men? Or many other films. Harrison should not have been in the movie. Now it kind of spoiled the original ending for me. All themes of memory, soul etc were done to death. Recent examples are Prometheus and Covenant that do it better. Original has already explored all these more than a human themes.
- The music wasn't there. When they finally played The Theme at the end, I was shaking my head. No music no atmosphere.
- Instead of making a film, director was vying for glory. Cult classic. This film hasn't touched me once and I never want to see it again. By the end, it was almost a comedy.

Overall, ok film. I didn't expect much so not disappointed. I give it 6 out of 10.… Expand

2 of 11 users found this helpful29

All this user's reviews

5

DavidnbOct 8, 2017

It took a hell of a long time to get there, and when we did, I wasn't sure it was worth the wait. I'm sorry, but it must be said, H. Ford is among the coolest guys on the planet, but he is not one of our greatest actors, and his presence feltIt took a hell of a long time to get there, and when we did, I wasn't sure it was worth the wait. I'm sorry, but it must be said, H. Ford is among the coolest guys on the planet, but he is not one of our greatest actors, and his presence felt just a little bit rediculous. It looked great though.… Expand

3 of 17 users found this helpful314

All this user's reviews

0

katezoeOct 15, 2017

MAJOR disappointment. Movie was 1 hour to long and even then you would have been BORED! Acting wooden. Waste a time and money. FAKE REVIEWS! Make movies great again!

8 of 46 users found this helpful838

All this user's reviews

1

lee2017usOct 23, 2017

From a movie enthusiastic person, this is the WORST NON-ACTION 'ACTION' MOVIE EVER 'CREATED' ON EARTH !!! I could not have been forced to WASTE MY 3 HOURS on it EVEN If I was PAID $50 to sit in this movie while TRYING NOT TO FALL ASLEEP !!!From a movie enthusiastic person, this is the WORST NON-ACTION 'ACTION' MOVIE EVER 'CREATED' ON EARTH !!! I could not have been forced to WASTE MY 3 HOURS on it EVEN If I was PAID $50 to sit in this movie while TRYING NOT TO FALL ASLEEP !!! and BTW, I need my retribution for the CONSTANT OVERPLAYED LOUD MUSICAL EFFECTS for 3 HR Pain & Suffering..
PS the ONLY Saving Grace to this movie is the beautiful virtual Cuban actress Ana De Armas!… Expand

3 of 18 users found this helpful315

All this user's reviews

4

cadoverOct 25, 2017

The fact that the studio added Jared Leto to the script much later on to make the film 'edgier' should tell you all you need to know. A profit-hungry studio hack job that destroys the story line of the original. Pretending I never saw it soThe fact that the studio added Jared Leto to the script much later on to make the film 'edgier' should tell you all you need to know. A profit-hungry studio hack job that destroys the story line of the original. Pretending I never saw it so the original remains beautiful in my mind. Nothing against the director, but the nudity was unnecessary and gratuitous.
If you love the original, you won't miss anything if you skip this sequel. The number of shill reviews on metacritic is getting out of hand.… Expand

2 of 12 users found this helpful210

All this user's reviews

0

HonestViewerOct 6, 2017

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Whoa, make sure you are wide awake for this 3 hour event or it will put you to sleep. But on second thought, they increased the volume so loud, quite a few times, we had to cover our ears. It woke us. Harrison Ford arrives more than half way in and not many lines.… Expand

13 of 84 users found this helpful1371

All this user's reviews

4

KaprawiecOct 16, 2017

This is long SONY/PEUGOT commercial, exactly like new car promotion. Beautifull visuals (especially gorgeous Ana de Armas which takes 3 out of 4 points given to the movie;) and audio but the substance is lacking. This should be at least halfThis is long SONY/PEUGOT commercial, exactly like new car promotion. Beautifull visuals (especially gorgeous Ana de Armas which takes 3 out of 4 points given to the movie;) and audio but the substance is lacking. This should be at least half shorter. The story is nonsense, dialogues were dumb and dragged like some Dynasty sitcom.… Expand

3 of 20 users found this helpful317

All this user's reviews

7

rpmJan 20, 2018

I have to admit that when I love a film as much as I did the original Blade Runner I was both very excited and very nervous to watch a sequel. Will it add to the story? Will it cheapen the story? Will it take it directions I don't personallyI have to admit that when I love a film as much as I did the original Blade Runner I was both very excited and very nervous to watch a sequel. Will it add to the story? Will it cheapen the story? Will it take it directions I don't personally feel the original pointed? Well, I will say that this sequel is a well made film but to me it is very different from the original...even though it borrows some of the same characters, settings, and sounds. The original was at its core a detective story that just happened to take place in the future. The philosophical elements about topics such as slavery, religion, and technological vs. organic "life" were present and dealt with within the action, but in the sequel they are the story and it is handled in such a heavy, depressing way that I can't really say I enjoyed it. I respect it, I appreciate the artistry in its creation, but I really didn't have fun watching it...and I recall having immense fun watching the original. This sequel is just so damn bleak. What is the point of even existing in that world?… Expand

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

6

DavidpaOct 23, 2017

First one was more action based this one was more discovery be trying to uncover the mystery to the aspect of the plot Where is world directed what could’ve been a little bit shorter

1 of 8 users found this helpful17

All this user's reviews

0

Chris454Feb 11, 2018

One of the most overrated movies of all time. None of it is that great or memorable

4 of 34 users found this helpful430

All this user's reviews

5

Dr-spacemanOct 21, 2017

This has a fantastic visual style and is probably the best movie ive seen as far as special effects and artistry is concerned. However the plot is not great and lacks a hook as compelling as the original blade runner. The villains are muchThis has a fantastic visual style and is probably the best movie ive seen as far as special effects and artistry is concerned. However the plot is not great and lacks a hook as compelling as the original blade runner. The villains are much less interesting when compared with Roy Batty in the original and the film's just too darned long. It needed more scenes like the opening one which had a compelling character. Only decent other character was Harrison Ford's. It is not gonna become a cult film like it's predecessor.… Expand

1 of 9 users found this helpful18

All this user's reviews

2

ElijahloveDec 7, 2017

Style over substance does not a great movie make. Cool visuals. Nice sound. That's it. Period. Had trouble staying awake. That's the first test. Does a film grab the audience and take them to a different place. The original is farStyle over substance does not a great movie make. Cool visuals. Nice sound. That's it. Period. Had trouble staying awake. That's the first test. Does a film grab the audience and take them to a different place. The original is far superior. Especially the end of the original with Rutger Hauer's monologue. Great stuff. This 2049 film though . Doa. This film is way too long and boring. Excite us. Take us on an adventure. Show us what you are thinking. The movie makers failed. Ruined a great franchise.… Expand

1 of 9 users found this helpful18

All this user's reviews

0

wanderlei2Dec 27, 2017

I gouged my eyes out with burning sticks because it was less painful than watching Blade Runner 2049.

5 of 52 users found this helpful547

All this user's reviews

7

MetachevitaFeb 20, 2018

Gorgeous cinematography, great screen chemistry between Ford and Gosling. The story wasn't all that fantastic. There was too much unnecessary nudity. Music score was fantastic! The ending was flat. The director's work in Arrival was much better.

1 of 13 users found this helpful112

All this user's reviews

7

tamcwlmmJan 23, 2018

Great story and visual effects. I liked this one more than the original. Great performances by Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford. Sometimes it was hard to keep up because some much is happening in this movie. I like the throwbacks to the oldGreat story and visual effects. I liked this one more than the original. Great performances by Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford. Sometimes it was hard to keep up because some much is happening in this movie. I like the throwbacks to the old movie, with the old recordings, that was a nice touch. People say this is the best Sci-fi of 2017. I say it's one of the best, as there were great, and for me personally better sci-fi movies in 2017.… Expand

1 of 15 users found this helpful114

All this user's reviews

7

phillyjeffJan 28, 2018

BR 2049 is visually stunning, just like the first movie. At almost 3 hours it is too long. They should of edited it down to 120 minutes

1 of 23 users found this helpful122

All this user's reviews

0

Nikita98kDec 10, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I watched it 3 years ago when i was basicallt kid. And it was worst film ive ever watched and oh yea i watched ton of films.… Expand

1 of 57 users found this helpful156

All this user's reviews

4

MikefromAngusMar 13, 2018

Blade Runner was ahead of its time. Blade Runner 2049 was just made to make money. The whole story is non sense. One of the worst things about the movie is that its boring and slow. a Huge disappointment of a movie coming from a blade runner fan.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

ZiekMar 5, 2018

One of the best I have seen, and I’m no spring chicken, crossing all genres including landmarks like Ben Hur (1959), Titanic, Casablanca, 2001, Inherit the Wind (not Gone with), Amadeus, Saving Private Ryan - the list is not long. BladeOne of the best I have seen, and I’m no spring chicken, crossing all genres including landmarks like Ben Hur (1959), Titanic, Casablanca, 2001, Inherit the Wind (not Gone with), Amadeus, Saving Private Ryan - the list is not long. Blade Runner 2049, for the mature of all ages, is immersive, moving and stunning both visually and aurally and indeed it stands on its own, albeit the impetus for me was the original Blade Runner, making it the perfect sequel - as well. Purchased the movie in 3d to match my theatre viewing experience...and on my fifth home viewing....still incredible! The speculative, marketing inspired demise of 3d in North America is undoubtedly and assuredly premature. 3d format or otherwise the movie remains a masterpiece. It should be the Oscar pick for best movie of 2017, and the cast including Ryan Gosling, Harrison Ford, Ana de Armas and others nominated in respective roles. Consummate actors all, not to mention Denis Villeneuve as Best Director. Thank Ridley Scott for recognizing his genius.

The reality is that Science Fiction, even as a statement on the human condition, has never won an Oscar for Best Movie, as far as I know. The Academy Awards will likely miss this, caught up in the social media swamp and the cause of the day. The Academy will likely instead vote for an odd duck or more common place take on the triumphs and tribulations of the human condition, all destined to become mediocrities and also rans for 2017. This in turn, as it continues to demonstrate, makes Oscar night nothing more than a gossips’ social gathering and more redundant and meaningless than ever in what it’s function should be - rewarding real achievement in film.

Meanwhile like the first Blade Runner, Blade Runner 2049 will continue to attract an ever growing following and challenge current and future movie makers to raise the bar on what is now possible.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

fredjesusFeb 7, 2018

um bom filme com bons efeitos visuais, porem muito lento e previsível, grande de mais e sem muito conteúdo pra justificar, não chega a ser um fracasso mas não se compara ao original

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

wl-humeJan 6, 2018

My favourite movie of the year, I made an account just to grade this. It takes its time getting there but it's worth it, it's the kind of movie I wanted the first bad Blade Runner movie to be. Also a small side note it does a better job withMy favourite movie of the year, I made an account just to grade this. It takes its time getting there but it's worth it, it's the kind of movie I wanted the first bad Blade Runner movie to be. Also a small side note it does a better job with female characters than its prequel and most movies nowadays and does so effortlessly.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

10

marinosvalJan 9, 2018

If humanity ever created a perfect movie, this is it. I don't want to say anything else because I feel it would spoil this piece of art.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

section20mi6Jul 1, 2018

Much like it's predecessor but better, Villeneuve's take on Blade Runner recreates the original atmosphere, but also implements surprising twists and turns that do not bore the audience through the whole course of extensive run time.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

HotelCentralFeb 13, 2018

This is the film that's persuading me that Hollywood, or the current generation of directors and writers, probably have nothing more to offer that's going to interest me, now or ever.

I mean, I hardly know what to say about this film. ItThis is the film that's persuading me that Hollywood, or the current generation of directors and writers, probably have nothing more to offer that's going to interest me, now or ever.

I mean, I hardly know what to say about this film. It does nothing to compete with the visuals of the original. The soundtrack is numbing. Gosling's character is so utterly devoid of emotion throughout 99% of the film that it's a bit like watching an old-time steam train chugging down the tracks. And, oh look, it's Rick Deckard! What's up with him? Does it make any difference? Probably not. And Deckard has a dog! Same questions. Same answers. Sad.

Ok, so spoiler alert: There's this "miracle", see? And Mr. Wallace, the super-genius, can't figure how it happened, and he desperately wants to know how it happened so he can make it happen again. The only problem, of course, is that no one ever explains how come this thing that happens is such a big damn miracle when the human race has already previously produced people smart enough to design replicant "brains." (His name was "Tyrell.") I mean, compared to a "brain" that seems to function a lot like an actual human brain, designing a human reproductive tract probably shouldn't be all that difficult. And if I-the-viewer don't believe it's all that difficult then the whole point of the film starts looking contrived and silly.

Now, if I wanted to nitpick, I could point to crazy things like a "blade runner" laying his gun on a table while confronting a dangerous fugitive, or, say, dopey things like the same guy being told to surrender his badge and gun two scenes in a row, or, say, things from bizarro world, like a police official telling a blade runner to murder somebody who is NOT a replicant, because blah blah blah, you'll be saving the world--but why even get into it?

Blade Runner 2049 did nothing for me. I don't think the original film was the greatest film ever made, but it was sure a lot more interesting than the sequel, and the original film with the narration was the best version of all, and all these cute stories from the 30 years in between about Deckard being a replicant were absurd from word one.

Oh and the one funny bit in Blade Runner 2049? Deckard bragging about his skill as a blade runner. The unfortunate truth is that Deckard's main skill was projecting his Every-Man Charm while getting himself ambushed and beaten to a pulp.

And one more thing. Mr. Wallace seems to think that Deckard fell in love with Rachel when they first met. Was that before or after Deckard asked Tyrell, "How can it not know what it is?" I mean, give me a break.

Peace. Out.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

CraigEcholsFeb 11, 2018

Slow. Slower. Slowest. It really feels like Blade Runner 2049 was made for people who wants to feel special by picking up on complexity. I get that movies need some complexity for a good story, but BR2049 seems to throw everything that it canSlow. Slower. Slowest. It really feels like Blade Runner 2049 was made for people who wants to feel special by picking up on complexity. I get that movies need some complexity for a good story, but BR2049 seems to throw everything that it can in order to make itself stand out. Granted, the original Blade Runner was long and complex, but the story made sure you understood the key points. This movie throws dialogue after monologue after slow pacing scene after long walk down the street after you. This movie was about 50 minutes too long for scenes that weren't necessarily needed (the menage a trois scene). I get that action movies don't need to feature lots of explosions and car chases and raining bullets and acrobatics, but you can literally count on your hands and toes how many shots were fired in this movie (I counted 11....I'm not even kidding). The plot twist at the end sort of screamed deus ex machina to me as well. I don't know. It just sort of felt cheap like, well than what was the point of the movie then? The biggest issue to me was I just never ever felt any sense of urgency in the movie. It's like "We have this big problem that could cause a massive war, but let's take our time solving it." The soundtrack did a good job of providing tension, but....I never actually felt there was any. There was little show of any conflict or struggle. This would have made a great thriller/mystery, but I got bored for the most part. The beginning scene with Gosling vs. Bautista was honestly the best scene in my opinion. Overall, this movie is a SLOTH to get through with very little sense of antagonism to be found.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

xNukeFeb 19, 2018

What an absolute piece of crap. Thought it would never end. The plot wasn't terrible, but damn it was painfully slow to develop. Not a lot of action either.

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

10

PanchogulJun 6, 2020

Blade Runner 2049 es una de las mejores películas que he visto en toda mi vida y una secuela sencillamente perfecta, pese a lo larga que es para mi fue un viaje alucinante y para nada es lenta, el ritmo es constante a la hora de contar suBlade Runner 2049 es una de las mejores películas que he visto en toda mi vida y una secuela sencillamente perfecta, pese a lo larga que es para mi fue un viaje alucinante y para nada es lenta, el ritmo es constante a la hora de contar su historia y la cinematografía está en completa armonía con todo. Espero que no pase demasiado tiempo para que se estrene otra secuela porque definitivamente tiene madera suficiente para una tercera entrega.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Zaine6Jan 28, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Felt the story was a bit hard to keep up with, forced complexity. The lack of expressions from Ryan Gosling also turned me off, other robots appeared to have a little more expression and Ryan's was just a tad too much. Finally I found the plot twist at the end where Ryan was not the Son to be very disheartening and even more so that he does not get to be with his AI wife in any form. In fact we do not see where he will go from this at all.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

3

LightsideFeb 8, 2018

Not Blade Runner in the slightest. Basically a reimagining. The movie as a whole is crafted well visually but plot holes, weird moments, laughable music, changes to locations, empty acting can't save it. For example the LAPD headquarters forNot Blade Runner in the slightest. Basically a reimagining. The movie as a whole is crafted well visually but plot holes, weird moments, laughable music, changes to locations, empty acting can't save it. For example the LAPD headquarters for Blade Runners is completely different. Why? Less rain throughout and instead a dusty ash like setting is used. Almost sterile locations compared to the original Blade Runner. Then you have a political motive by the end thrown in to make you roll your eyes even more. The pacing is almost comical that most shots linger on actors just starring off into space. As for the performers funny enough only Harrison Ford knows how to act and surprisingly the only part of the movie I enjoyed. If what you call acting is Gosling, the overrated Jared Leto and all the others just standing still not doing anything.. then it's time we really asked the question why these performers are paid high figures for this sort of thing? Acting has becoming modeling these days. Only Ford like I said made any sort of impact. Back to the very depressing plot, everything about it sucks including the revelation replicants can now have babies.. (wtf?!) and have skulls like humans? and what's the point of having replicants when you have AI holograms interacting with humans now? I know they don't do physical work but Pris was a pleasure model right? So why AI lovegrams all of a sudden? I mean there are so many plot holes and stupid ideas you wonder how this ever got off the ground. An insult to Ridley's original frankly. I guess maybe that's why they called it 2049 instead of Blade Runner 2. I was reluctant to see this but finally gave in because some were slamming Ford's appearance. Well Ford's expression and role in the whole film sums up my thoughts about it that you just want to retire and get as far away from LA as possible.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

4

dr0nzerDec 30, 2017

I didn't see the first one but the concept was intriguing and was hoping this would bring me up to speed on the original, sadly it was not the case.
I feel that this film is for the fans of the series and you have to know the universe, itI didn't see the first one but the concept was intriguing and was hoping this would bring me up to speed on the original, sadly it was not the case.
I feel that this film is for the fans of the series and you have to know the universe, it does not really engage new comers and thus limit it's audience.
I sit in the latter group of people and this film was too long, sitting just shy of 3 hours, it's slow paced and pretty boring, I didn't have the patience to finish it and called it quits 1hr.45mins in.
If I was in the former group as described above, I'm sure my reaction would be different and it's a shame the film did not to do more to capture new audiences...… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

7

CoKronakanOct 26, 2018

I loved the fact that the movie had this typical sci-fi world. But I know this world was built up in the first Blade Runner movie and I appreciate this but the thing is that it's not enough now to be fresh, and to stand out from theI loved the fact that the movie had this typical sci-fi world. But I know this world was built up in the first Blade Runner movie and I appreciate this but the thing is that it's not enough now to be fresh, and to stand out from the agglomerated genre. The actor did a enormous performance, especially Ford and Letho. But I felt like Ryan's performance on the character was a little forced and he didn't have any real face gesticulation. The cinematography was slightly above average with the shots and scenes taken, and the writing of the movie was very absent, but on point for the events. The sound effects where very realistic, but the visuals where mind blowing, and gorgeous. Really stand out in this genre. Even the environment was on point for this universe, but it was disappointing that we didn't see any off worlds. There wasn't any humor which made the movie quite dull, and didn't help the overall fact to make the movie more fun to watch. But it was entertaining as it got, apart from the fact that it got some pacing issues. Like it was to slow, at times and lost me or the general audience. The plot was complex with it's twists and awesome narrative, and it was delivered with an amazing style. Also the message was pretty clear, and amazing for me. But that might shift for others. Also the action was lacking a lot of choreography and innovation.
Overall it's a good movie, but it hasn't done enough to be considered as good and original as the old one. I think other critics are influence by the nostalgia of the previous movie.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

Kirollos-NoahNov 29, 2018

Blade Runner 2049 is definitely a great movie, it was only missing some stuff. Those stuff didn't blow up the movie, but they annoyed me though!

The soundtrack was totally annoying and in some important scene like the final fight (the oneBlade Runner 2049 is definitely a great movie, it was only missing some stuff. Those stuff didn't blow up the movie, but they annoyed me though!

The soundtrack was totally annoying and in some important scene like the final fight (the one between Luv and Officer K), actually, most of the fights, there wasn't any music, it really really annoyed me, I really expected more from Hans Zimmer!
The surprising element was totally poor.
Sometimes the movie was hard to digest.

But on the other hand, it kept the excitement that I want and need to see in any movie.
The performance was impressive, I didn't expect that actually, but the cast surprised and got me into the movie.
The CGI was mistake-less.
There wasn't a lot of action scenes, but the action scenes -as it's not too much- were really thrilling!
The story was good.
And most important thing, that this movie did not get me bored in any second.

So it was really good and catching. I loved that brilliant movie! So I'm gonna give it an A-.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

helorareygaysDec 11, 2018

Blade Runner 2049 is a great movie, maybe not as good as the original but still holds the viewer with a good plot, performance, direction and a beautifull cinematography but i found it a bit too contemplative

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

NileOuroborosJan 21, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This is the first time I've come out of a movie wishing I could have seen the producer's cut. You know, the way we normally see movies. Where the director's tendency to get too artsy is tempered by the necessities of expedience and concise storytelling and budget. It was visually stunning of course, with many memorable scenes and good performances. But the plot, not the writing, is by far the weakest element. And while it would be fun to dissect every stupid point (replicant procreation as the McGuffin; replicants who obey despite the lack of any substantial control mechanism; evil torture that can only for some reason happen off world so that Harrison has the chance to be rescued in transit), the real, core problem is the bad guy.

And the real, core problem with the bad guy is that he's bad. The key that held the original all together was the complete absence of evil - the full and total surrender to and embrace (narratively) of dystopia. In a proper dystopia, a truly depressing one, there are no bad guys. Everyone's just in it for themselves, trying to survive, trying to make the right choice if that's even possible. In the original we are misled into thinking anyone could be the bad guy: cops, replicants, the genius Tyrell, even hyper-objectified Rachel maybe? And they all just turn out to be self-involved and surviving, one way or another. Until ultimately we find out, if there was a bad guy at all, it's our hero: running around killing soon-to-die-anyway, often brilliant, and generally peaceful replicants as part of a full on genocide. There are no good choices, no right decisions in a proper dystopia. The whole system is broken and the only appropriate final response is depression and escape if possible. And the good stories about these dystopias are about the impossibility of behaving morally in these worlds, how our protagonists deal with it and either do or don't find small victories within the larger perpetual defeat. It's compelling emotionally, relatable to in our real and generally uncaring world, and wonderfully fertile ground for great storytelling.

What the new Blade Runner does is give us a bad guy. And not just a bad guy looking for profit, or power - not only. No. This guy is creepy, properly evil, kills one of his own wholly innocent and palpably afraid creations just to add emphasis to his evil speech (to himself basically - how's that for forced exposition?) about how desperately he is incapable of producing birth capable replicants. He is pure evil, he looks, smells, breathes evil. He has evil eyes and evil floating cameras attached to an evil port on his evil neck. He enjoys the suffering of others and wants to build a galaxy full of slaves. His evil minion is, again, repeatedly and unnecessarily and unbelievably just pure hateful evil. Our villain here is all one color. And being all black, he by necessity makes Gosling all white.

And, seriously, how boring is this guy - our hero? He basically just slowly mopes around all over the place, emoting real hard - when he isn't running through walls or shooting stuff (people, things, replicants... who cares). He has a digital girlfriend that he can't touch, and everything about both of them reads as uncaring of each other, but the plot says love is there, so let's just pretend. And how infuriating are the vagaries of how tough or strong, exactly, is this thing? He can run full speed through a concrete wall no problem, but gets knocked out by a mild crash. He can't beat evil minion chick until after he's mortally wounded and floating in water with her - suddenly stronger than the thing that 30 seconds ago was handing him his ass. All that stuff's just lazy.

But anyway, perhaps this might have worked as some simple morality tale à la Snow White - pure hero, rotten villain, love conquers all in the end. Except the story is so convoluted, unclear, and above all stretched out for miles - even the morality tale that might have been is lost in the susurrus. Love does, kind of, conquer all in the end, but it's got pretty much squat to do with the fake human with borrowed memories we've been watching wandering around all this time. Deckard thought he was human, so he was human. Joe (Gosling) knows he's a fancy robot, so he's a fancy robot. But the most damaging effect of the simple evil/good dynamic here is that there is no doubt, no uncertainty. Ultimately it makes caring about anyone or anything in this story impossible. It's just something you can watch happen, predictably. Our bad guy will exclusively do horrible things. Our good guy will exclusively do noble things. You expect this from a Transformers movie. You don't expect this from a story in the lineage of Philip K. Dick. Who wasn't even all that great of a writer, just an absolutely astounding world-builder. The foundations of that world were transferred to the original Blade Runner, and that's why it worked. They were ignored in this sequel, and that's why it doesn't work.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

DjakeirFeb 20, 2019

The film makers in trying to create a new world on screen have created a new world of film making off screen. This film has elevated every aspect of the art form, from directing to visual effects, sound editing to acting.

This is an extremlyThe film makers in trying to create a new world on screen have created a new world of film making off screen. This film has elevated every aspect of the art form, from directing to visual effects, sound editing to acting.

This is an extremly long film with a muted story but my eyes did not wander off screen, I was never not entertained and I truly felt amazed seeing this incredible work on a big screen. I know this film got recognition by the academy but I think the best recognition this film has received is its influence on modern day culture, storytelling and pop culture. The popularity of cyber punk has been looming under the surface with fashion and manga's, however, Blade Runner 2049 propelled this genre into a highly realised and modern genre that would cement itself as one of the most successful genres of modern day films.

This film is very much rewatchabe despite its extreme running time and every single name that featured on the rolling credits deserves a lot of compliments for what has been achieved here.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

NeotisFeb 25, 2019

Not bad reboot, visual graphics are amazing and this cyberpunk around seems so real.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

1

Dante7886Mar 7, 2019

Quite disappointing movie. The style of cyberpunk is perfect, but the emotional part of the movie, really horrible. I can't even feel anything from that bad actor play. We must to empathy to Key, but he can't provide even a chance to do it.Quite disappointing movie. The style of cyberpunk is perfect, but the emotional part of the movie, really horrible. I can't even feel anything from that bad actor play. We must to empathy to Key, but he can't provide even a chance to do it. So I expected something more, than I got recently.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

zNeverSleepingNov 14, 2019

Visualmente lindo. O enredo é rico e apresenta diálogos interessantes. As reflexões são validas, ainda mais pra nossa geração, e não devem passar batidas para a total compreensão do filme e, consequentemente, aproveitamento dele.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

KawanMay 6, 2019

Beautiful pictures but very long and slow even if trying to keep intense, quite disapointed and prefered the 1rst Blade runner far more !

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

o_retyJul 19, 2019

Boring in terms of pace, pretentious and hollow in terms of aesthetics, aimless and contrived in terms of plot, feminist in terms of agenda. And to top it all off there's some uncanny valley exploration at the end. Truly, a fine specimen ofBoring in terms of pace, pretentious and hollow in terms of aesthetics, aimless and contrived in terms of plot, feminist in terms of agenda. And to top it all off there's some uncanny valley exploration at the end. Truly, a fine specimen of today's cinema… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

KadirovJan 18, 2021

Трижды пытался начать смотреть фильм, трижды не осилил больше минуты. Еще ни одно кино не было таким унылым на моей памяти.

0 of 14 users found this helpful014

All this user's reviews

7

aukalenderFeb 13, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. A deserving follow-up to the legendary Blade Runner. This is a movie that tells its story subtly, and slowly, but it is still easily understandable. Gosling conveyed feeling very well with very little face gesture. Ana de Armas was great. Above all, Roger Deakins killed it. I thought the movie was too long, and there were some parts where I couldn't make the connection - like how did Gosling know who Ford's daughter is? Yes, she did meet the dreammaker, but how did he make the connection, positively identifying her as his daughter? Maybe I missed it. I also thought Ana de Armas' role was a bit of a rip-off of "Her", but those are little gripes. I enjoyed the movie, and would give it an 8 if it was a little shorter and tighter.… Expand

0 of 6 users found this helpful06

All this user's reviews

7

MglovesfunMar 24, 2020

While for the most part superior to the original, it's at least 30 minutes too long, and the ending is underwhelming.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

Satanski666Jan 28, 2021

Women, women, women and one child in the fog... i mean man. Women's version of equality.

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

ReibmagJan 17, 2020

As if its predecessor was watered down and bland. Nice story, but there where too many events. While Blade Runner wins by K. O. Blade Runner 2077 wins by points. Most of the times is nicer to watch a well execute K. O than a prolongued 12As if its predecessor was watered down and bland. Nice story, but there where too many events. While Blade Runner wins by K. O. Blade Runner 2077 wins by points. Most of the times is nicer to watch a well execute K. O than a prolongued 12 round fight, especialy if you aren't a boxing expert. .… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

2

SepherimJun 28, 2020

Vista Blade Runner 2049 y, como he dicho mil veces, no tendría que haberlo hecho. Menuda basura de película. Empecemos por un guión con unos agujeros enormes por los que cabe un trasbordador espacial. Una lentitud que no aporta nada más queVista Blade Runner 2049 y, como he dicho mil veces, no tendría que haberlo hecho. Menuda basura de película. Empecemos por un guión con unos agujeros enormes por los que cabe un trasbordador espacial. Una lentitud que no aporta nada más que tedio y aburrimiento. Una fotografía que no tiene nada de especial, por mucho que intente aportar su visión al original. Unos personajes que tampoco tienen especial sentido ni coherencia ni profundidad. Y falta la música de Vangelis, que solo aparece en momentos contados y para hacer escenas que mejor no hubieran hecho. El resultado de todo ello es que han hecho una mala película, que empeora por pretender ser continuación de una obra maestra. No hay segunda parte de Sueñan los Androides con Ovejas Eléctricas, ni debería haber habido segunda parte de la película, pues ni los guionistas, ni el director están a la altura.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

6

SinewsMay 24, 2020

The biggest problem facing Blade Runner 2049 is that it's dishonest in its presentation. It wants so desperately to be this huge story with a huge scope and massive impact, and while it's certainly not a bad story, the film tries so hard toThe biggest problem facing Blade Runner 2049 is that it's dishonest in its presentation. It wants so desperately to be this huge story with a huge scope and massive impact, and while it's certainly not a bad story, the film tries so hard to make us think that it's more than it is that pisses on the bonfire of what it actually has going for it. It has the epic shots and epic score and larger-than-life landscape, as well as a monolithic length, but it lacks the substance to live up to the great dystopian sci-fi films that came before it. Blade Runner became an epic story not because it tried to make think it was, it just was, and the acclaimed just followed it in time. This is why that movie is a cherished classic and Blade Runner 2049 will most likely be forgotten midway through the decade.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

HaydnengelMay 7, 2020

Real rating: 79/100
What happens when you pump millions into a film that will not make it back in theatres. The obvious answer is that you market it as something it is not. This is a standard practice in cinema, and it does nothing butReal rating: 79/100
What happens when you pump millions into a film that will not make it back in theatres. The obvious answer is that you market it as something it is not. This is a standard practice in cinema, and it does nothing but exploit viewers and upend the general public's views of a particular film. Which destroys the ability of artistic directors to follow their vision, and it has always made me wonder if it would be at all possible to have two versions of a film in theatres at the same time. You could have a studio cut of the movie in those 64 screen multiplexes and in the indie theatres, where they serve spiced tea and apples behind the counter, you could have a director's cut because at the moment this ploy of marketing an arthouse flick as an action movie is doing no one any favours.

DE: The directing is superb, though that has become a standard for Villeneuve. However, unlike his other films, this one draws on its shots for far too long and you could certainly feel like the editor could have stepped in a cut a good 10 minutes of this film and still leave that lingering desolation feeling. It almost feels like Villeneuve was trying to mimic Stalker in his approach, but unlike Stalker, the lingering shots feel inauthentic as in Stalker we are meant to be contemplating existence, religion, purpose, but in 2049 we are sitting at the heart of a mystery that feels like we are not trying to solve.

W: The dialogue is decent, yet a little clunky and on the nose. And sadly that is the best part of it. Though I am not shocked Hampton Fancher, the man who penned the original script is back, however in the subsequent 25 years he has written nothing of note, so obviously the studio brings in the standard scriptwriter in the guise of Michael Green, who did pen Logan but also penned Alien: Covenant and the much-maligned Green Lantern. This combination leaves us with a film that barely has a plot and does not delve into anything of note. However, it does likely explain why Villeneuve structured the film the way he did and why there are so many drawn-out shots.

C: This is so beautifully shot that it should be taught in schools and, sadly, this film was Deakins's first Oscar out of 13 noms, though his second would come with the gorgeous 1917. His use of the camera and understanding of a shot is fantastic, and if one sees the rest of his works, they can see a shift in style for this film, and while those long lingering shots may be a pain for the storyteller visually, they are perfect representations of what you are trying to get across. The mood and notion are there in every frame. The angles and shadows that are being cast on Gosling throughout the film speak volumes. The special effects, while excellent, do not feel genre-defining or like 25 years have passed since the original.

A: Ford cannot act at a level beyond a 6, and that is fine. He is there because he has to be. Gosling's muted touch was decent enough though I worry he is going to get typecast as wooden if he keeps on the path he currently is on. Sylvia Hoeks, one would assume was hired for her visual aesthetic rather than her ability to emote, which if this was Tarrantino flick, I think she would have worked. But in this nuanced, subtle drawn-out film her character comes off cartoonish.
I was incredibly impressed with Ana de Armas and found her performance soulful yet understated. The mechanical I am saying what I suppose to yet am still a creature with almost a concept of feelings really elevates Goslings numbed performance.

S: I would have scored this higher if I had not seen Arrival, whereas the industrial style sound design should have been more engaging. I could not help feeling they were reusing it. Of course, the sounds were meant to be jarring given all the silence we were fed, but ultimately it feels like that opening sequence in the remake of Funny Games, it is not shocking or grating in the sense the creator wants, but more in the sense, please turn down the TV those noises are starting to give me a headache.

PD: The PD in this film was quite good, the sets feel real and lived in. Especially the opening sequence. Rebuilding on a franchise that is famous for its visual effects and the PD is not easy, but they were able to meet a standard that has been heralded for decades. Dennis Gassner did well here as is expected. He has almost always been brought in when you need a world that feels distant, yet somehow still retains elements of the one we live in. See his work in the Truman Show, Big Fish and 1917 for this.

BA: Well done throughout, especially Leto's character, though I will say the only real negative was Wright's outfit. What is this 2049 and she is channelling the 50's or was she literally a copy of the police chief from Futurama? Also, Ford's entire presence was uninspired.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

0

SavageJimMar 29, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Absolute garbage of a movie, and severe disappointment from the original. This film is simply too long and dragged for its own good, the plot is all over the place, barely any character development, and a very poor attempt to save the ending with a **** twist. Do yourself a favour and don't waste three hours of your time watching this hunk of crap. If anything, go watch the original, it's way better… Expand

0 of 6 users found this helpful06

All this user's reviews

8

annual_ringJun 21, 2020

A slow-paced movie，I enjoy it.very beautiful.the story is okey,not bad.a BLADE RUNNER film,it worth this name

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

7

MrPajamasJul 26, 2021

I consider the original Blade Runner to be a very good movie, so I was quite curious about Blade Runner 2049. I was satisfied. Although not as good a movie as the 1982 one for me, it was still a good movie. The story again has a slower pace,I consider the original Blade Runner to be a very good movie, so I was quite curious about Blade Runner 2049. I was satisfied. Although not as good a movie as the 1982 one for me, it was still a good movie. The story again has a slower pace, only this time much, much slower. There is hardly any action. The film probably won't be to everyone's taste. But it suited me. I enjoyed the different locations, which are again beautiful, and most importantly there is a dusting off of a character, specifically good old Deckard, so quite nostalgic. The storyline nicely picked up on the events of the previous film and for me, a good film to recommend.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

BalliarnoOct 11, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. BLADE RUNNER 2049 REVIEW The original Blade Runner came out way back in 1982 and was closely adapted from the short story that is “Do androids dream of electric sheep” by Phillip K Dick. When I heard that there was a new film coming out in the Cyber Punk world of Blade Runner I was instantly interested but after watching Blade Runner 2049 I got to thinking I’m sure this didn’t need to be made although the story was unique . Before I really get into this film I will say that while I think you can watch 2049 without seeing the original it would help and be of great interest to many things that pop up throughout 2049. I will give just a little rundown of what the idea of its all about for those of you who haven’t seen the first film- No spoilers here!
Both Blade Runner films are set on a futuristic Earth that has clearly passed its golden years and most people are struggling to survive with the signs of desperation everywhere. In this dystopian world the human population are now joined by AI called Replicants that are so closely matched with humans almost nobody can tell them apart and this is where the trouble begins. The first film sees a LA cop that goes by the name of Deckard and he’s a Blade Runner, someone that has the difficult job of finding rogue replicants and retiring them aka killing them. The reasoning behind tracking down and taking out these replicants is for certain reasons that I wont give away but just know there is violence. With that out of the way I’ll now move on to Blade Runner 2049. The film as a style looks great and everything from the city, apartments , wastelands and characters all look how you’d think they would but sadly none of these really explored. The world is so interesting looking that I found myself thinking that I wanted to see more of the city and what other places looked like and with a runtime of well over 2 hrs they could have squeezed some more strange locations in. The acting is also top class but I wouldn’t expect any less from Ryan Gosling who plays the lead Officer K and those of you who remember the first film I can confirm that Harrison Ford who plays Deckard makes his return in 2049 but is pretty much such a minor part I’m not sure him being in it really made for the complete film.
Blade Runner 2049 is such a hard film to review as I don’t want to give anything away because as a story there is so little to give away, from the very beginning the story gives us the reason as to why this story is taking place but it doesn’t give any excitement with twists or turns as most of it is just culled out just when you think there might be something exciting and different. It is one of the most straight forward films I have seen in quite a while and I think this film could have been 1 hr shorter, dragging shots out way past there welcome just to try and provoke a feeling from the original just felt forced to me but cinema is art so whatever style the director picks so be it. I did really like 2049 for its storytelling even though it was slow and the world does keep your eyes glued to the screen but if it hadn’t been made I don’t think anyone who liked the original film would have been asking for a new one, in fact who were these people asking for a part 2 follow on of a classic? Blade Runner is a fine film that didn’t need to be made if this is what it is- I didn’t hate it nor did I love it but I did wish for so much more.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

ZaganEDFNov 16, 2020

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. I won't be surprised if Villeneuve actually consulted incels while making this movie. So we have K, a lonely social outcast with a virtual gf. He's very stoic and heroic. But omg he actually can experience emotions. Who would have thought? Except, like incels, his emotions aren't coming from the depths and richness of his inner world, they are reactions to the extremely negative outside events. He's devoid of any humanity just like a machine that's preprogrammed to experience emotions but is empty otherwise. And his heroic journey is that of a Mary Sue character. He doesn't do anything wrong, he's powerful and indestructible, and for the most part of the movie he's the chosen one or so he believes. And even when it's revealed that he's not the chosen one he still manages to become a hero, the saver of the world. Now let's look at the women in the film and you will see why it's an incel kino. All "real" women are depicted in negative ways. We have K's boss, a **** and cruel careerist who works in the police. And we have Luv, another **** and cruel corporate careerist who wants to do nothing but serve her male lord. They both are ready to kill our poor guy K. And we also have a bunch of other real women but they're literally just whores. Now let's contrast them with K's virtual girlfriend Joi. Well she's a perfect waifu. Unlike Luv and K's boss, Joi is a very traditional depiction of female archetypes. She's loyal, not ****, not a careerist, doesn't have any power, doesn't want to harm anyone, doesn't work in male dominant environment (she doesn't work anywhere. she's just K's virtual housewife). Just like incels' anime girls, she is perfect. And in a very direct and blunt statement of how bad real women are, we are shown how Luv, a real woman, crushes and destroys Joi. Just a few words about Deckard's daughter Ana. Our guy K is deceived by her in two ways. First when she told him that the memories are real, making him believe that they are his memories. And then by the memories themselve. So all that time he had the memories of a woman in his head that were trucking him into believing they are his real memories. How very manipulative of a woman to get even inside the man's head. One really dumb and unrealistic scene is when Luv just leaves K in the casino to die. Instead of just killing him she playfully kicks his ass and just goes away. That's just stupid writing. The film is visually beautiful with amazing aesthetics. But substance over form please. It's time to stop praising movies based just on the surface of what they are.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

RPFDec 17, 2020

I will make this concise: 9/10 for the way this movie was filmed. Incredible colours, Lighting perfect (not surprising as Roger Deakins was the DP), well directed. The screenplay was 8/10, well written and compelling. Didn’t like theI will make this concise: 9/10 for the way this movie was filmed. Incredible colours, Lighting perfect (not surprising as Roger Deakins was the DP), well directed. The screenplay was 8/10, well written and compelling. Didn’t like the character of 'Niander Wallace'. Found him a to be a bit of a cartoon villain. Not that interesting. The hark backs to the original are not too relied upon. overall a good watch, not the best film ever but easily in the category of "Good".… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

soahknamApr 4, 2021

Good movie, very enjoyable.

Story: 9
Actors: 9
Photograpy: 10
Music:8

PERSONAL SCORE: 8 GOOD !!!

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

AJ_13Apr 30, 2021

I must admit that I'm not a big fan of the "Blade Runner universe", but this film can't be overlooked. Visuals are more than amazing. Definitely better than the original.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

2

lilliamMar 20, 2021

A very sweet tribute to the original Blade Runner.
I didn't care much for it though. I recognize this film was made for mega-fans of the original film, and since I have mixed feelings about that movie, I realize I'm not the intended audienceA very sweet tribute to the original Blade Runner.
I didn't care much for it though. I recognize this film was made for mega-fans of the original film, and since I have mixed feelings about that movie, I realize I'm not the intended audience for Blade Runner 2049.
Regardless of how I feel about the original BR, I gotta say it was VERY groundbreaking and unique. This film however, really lives in the shadow of it's predecessor. The music, cast, set designs, characters and cinematography of BR2049 are nowhere near as strong as those from the original BR.
The only new idea it brings to the table is the concept of the replicants having babies (don't worry, is not a big spoiler), and these babies being special since they were born, therefore they (probably) have a soul, or are "more human" that the rest of the replicants, but I don't care much for that idea. I mean, replicants and humans are, deep down inside, really the same. What difference would it make if the baby was made or if it was born? The whole point of Blade Runner was to show that in the end it doesn't matter.
The other disappointment I had with this movie is the same one I had watching the original Blade Runner: the two major concepts of the book it was based on (Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?), like the interactive religion, the artificial animals that have such a deep meaning in the novel, the concept of never knowing for sure who's "real" and who's not, are completely absent or completely sidelined and serve only as background decorations. I know is not fair to compare a film to the book i'ts based on (and in this case, this movie is probably only based on the movie BR), but when you have such a great book with such great ideas, and you choose to ignore those ideas, I can't help but look at the filmmakers sideways.
Also disappointing was Leto's character. He's a god actor when he has something to work with. But in this case his character was pretty cliché and flat.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

mimaisnotdeadFeb 26, 2022

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Blade Runner 2049 isn't even the shadow of the original Blade Runner from 1982. The plot is extremely convenient, agent K gets selected out of ALL Blade Runners to a mission and he finds out that there is some Replicant who had a child. After this he conveniently decides to play the "broken" key of the piano and conveniently finds a place on the tree which has a date carved in. The scenarios are mostly uninteresting, there are monotonous, they don't pay attention to detail, there are good scenes, like the opening one, for instance, which does a good job of presenting us with this world in which exploitation of the planet has lead to having to create synthetic food. The music is sometimes good and impressive, but sometimes it's so loud it doesn't allow me to hear what the characters are saying. The bonds in between characters feel extremely forced and weak, so do their motivations and the characters themselves. Talking about interesting things, this movie is almost 3 hours and nothing happens in the entire film! The pace of the plot is painfully slow and the characters love to chit chat about absolutely nothing, apparently throwing "deep" phrases which are completely superficial, like the themes it throws in. The film constantly tries to ask what is humanity, what makes us human and the foundations of morality and human rights by throwing analogies with slavery, however, it does nothing to explore these themes, touching them at a superficial level. The worldbuilding is also bad compared to the original film. In a world in which technology is everywhere and is extremely important to the plot you may think that with 3 hours they would develop the logics of how the AI and other technology works, but... no, it doesn't. Women in this film are either objects of lust or cartoonishly evil, very misogynistic. The exploration of morality in the film is also bad, it doesn't present a more neutral/grey tone than the original has, it presents shallow villains which are simply evil and throw superficial phrases constantly. The film also has plot holes and some illogical things (how can bees survive in a desert without flowers?). Blade Runner 2049 is an unnecessary film which can't compare itself to the original Blade Runner. It's pretentious, superficial, convenient and technically mixed. The characters are uninteresting, and as much as the actors do a great job with their acting, they cannot make interesting badly written characters. It both fails as a rule of cool film, as it takes itself seriously, and as a philosophical film. 3/10.… Expand

0 of 6 users found this helpful06

All this user's reviews

8

TheQuietGamerMar 23, 2018

Denis Villeneuve's immaculate visuals and the score from Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch lend themselves well to the Blade Runner experience, expertly recreating the tone and look of the original. This worthy follow up takes every elementDenis Villeneuve's immaculate visuals and the score from Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch lend themselves well to the Blade Runner experience, expertly recreating the tone and look of the original. This worthy follow up takes every element of it's predecessor and builds upon them. Even the idiosyncrasies of Ridley Scott's groundbreaking sci-fi film like the weird moments and awkward humor are used to much greater effect here. The latter feeling actually intentional this time around (because it is). Something that enables the laughs to feel natural and fluid, as opposed to at the movie's expense. The plot is an absolute rollercoaster ride of emotion, suspense, and surprise depth. The nods to the first Blade Runner are more than just fan service. They cement 2049 as not just a follow up, but an actual continuation of the previous movie's story. Even right down to the themes and concepts. There are moments here so strange, imaginative, and crazy that they could only come from the science-fiction genre and be taken seriously. There are so many fascinating aspects built into the world itself that make it feel real and worth exploring deeper. It's these futuristic anomalies and the visual splendor that kept me engaged whenever the story started to dawdle.

While it is never outright boring like the first often was during it's middle act, there's little denying that some scenes simply exist for no reason other than to show off how pretty things are. 2049 does a much better job at keeping viewers interested, but still wasn't quite able to avoid the original's pacing issues. This really didn't need to be almost three hours long. There are things that could have met the chopping block or have been edited down without sacrificing the material's potency. I had to give myself an extended intermission about half way through the film because of how dang long it is. I was never not enjoying the movie, but a break felt very necessary nonetheless. Blade Runner 2049 is a beautiful, grand, and even an exhausting experience that is backed by incredible performances (Jared Leto redeems himself after Suicide Squad) and continues the Blade Runner story in ways both spectacular and moving. While it's stands very well on it's own I do recommend watching a version of the 1982 film first just to get the whole picture of why this movie is so great. Not only is it a welcome return to a world you may or may not have come into contact with 35 years ago, but it's one that manages to be even better than the first outing. Denis Villeneuve blew me away once again and I hope to see more from the Blade Runner universe in the future.

8.9/10… Expand