The film is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Arrival, Sicario) and be warned, start this film early, it has a nearly three-hour run time. And to be honest, I think Villeneuve really hit his stride in replicating the feel and realm of this world and the original film. Maybe too much so.
"A young blade runner's discovery of a long-buried secret leads him to track down former blade runner Rick Deckard, who's been missing for thirty years."Officer K (Gosling) finds a replicant from years past hiding a secret. This secret gets K put on this assignment to make sure this secret stays secret. But along the way he's starting to find things he may have never wanted to know, but none-the-less, finds out.
Then there's the case of his personal hologram, one he takes everywhere with him, including when it overlays itself over hookers so they can, well, you know...
As in the last film, the world is populated by more evolved and civil replicants, or so people think.
I think if you liked the first film, you'll like this one. And if you didn't care for the first film, you'll not care for this one. AT ALL.
But the one thing that really hit me was that the run time could easily have been cut in half to tell the very same story, considering how many scenes were drawn way out and extremely too long. (Or, artistically expounded on.) An example is in one scene, Gosling finds a toy horse from a childhood memory. It's a seemingly 30 second scene, but it takes quite a few minutes to reel it out to the audience. Sigh.
If you're coming into this to see Ford as Deckard, well, we FINALLY get to see Deckard just before act three and it's quite the meet up, but once the dust settles from that... well, you'll see.
With that said I thought I'd let some review snippets from Rotten Tomatoes say what they have to say... (with my snark following)
"A meditative and moving film, sumptuously photographed by legendary cinematographer Roger Deakins in the finest and most astonishing work of his career." (If you like dwelling on dreary ass, depressing, dull landscapes peppered by severely depressing shots of our future, then sure, it's astonishing work.)
"This movie is visually stunning. It is so beautiful. Every single shot in this movie feels like a work of art." (Wow... I want whatever this critic is drinking!!! Do you remember when the latest Mad Max, Fury Road came out, and critics drooled all over themselves about the George Miller's filming of a road race back and forth through the desert? Yea... lots of career pandering reviews happen here too.)
Ah, here's one more along my line of thinking...
"All spectacle and no substance describes Denis Villeneuve's predictably overwrought yet lightweight sci-fi snoozefest." ( Yea... watching paint dry in a movie could be artistic, depending on your mood.)
I was almost confused about who... or what, K was through some of the film. At one point you think one thing, but then at other points, you wonder. But it is clearly stated more or less up front. And if you do get slightly confused, the question resolves itself around the middle or end of act two.
To be honest, I really liked the story and how it expounded on the franchise, I just wish it weren't so damn long. If you liberally use the 30-second jump button, you won't miss anything and possibly get through it in two hours. To be honest, I'm glad I didn't go see this film in theaters. I would have been squirming relentlessly in my seat wanting out... wondering when it will end.
But Blade Runner 2049 is a good story, and a nice addition to the Blade Runner franchise. I wonder if there's a director's director's cut that shortens the film down to human standards of tolerance though?
- - -
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =