The sequel 35 years in the making...

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS.

"Blade Runner 2049" is directed by Denis Villeneuve (Arrival, Sicario) and stars Ryan Gosling (La La Land, Drive), Harrison Ford (Star Wars, Indiana Jones), Ana de Armas (War Dogs, Knock Knock) and Jared Leto (Suicide Squad, Dallas Buyers Club). "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". The announcement of this sequel seemed a little random but was in line with the current 'nostalgia' trend. Can Denis Villeneuve build on the beloved cult classic?

I had not seen the first film until 24 hours prior to seeing the second. I'd heard that "Blade Runner 2049" played better for those who had seen its predecessor and after watching it; I'd recommend you watch the first if you haven't already- most of the plot details centre around what happened in the first film. I am so glad that I decided to watch both of these as they are equally great films that I thoroughly enjoyed. The only off-putting (understandably) thing about this film is it's extremely long runtime- this is a 165 minute long feature! Other than that, I can't think of a reason as to why someone would leave the cinema disliking "Blade Runner 2049". It's a triumph for everyone involved. 

Denis Villeneuve is one of my favourite directors working today- for the past two years a film directed by Villeneuve has made my top 10 of the year ("Sicario" in 2015, "Arrival" in 2016)...2017 could be his third year running as he perfectly captures everything great about what Ridley Scott created 35 years ago. All of Villeneuve's films so far are very similar in the way they tell their respective stories. It's a slow burn that is constantly unravelling to a greater mystery. Even though I preferred the reveal in "Arrival", the climax "Blade Runner 2049" builds to is certainly unexpected and effective. It would be so easy for such a dialogue-heavy film like this to become boring and dull but Villeneuve keeps things engaging with interesting stylistic choices. There are some really beautiful shots in "Blade Runner 2049"- many moments would make a great screensaver- praise should go to cinematographer Roger Deakins who produces some stunning imagery. Even though Villeneuve is behind the wheel, his work is heightened even more by all of the crew working on the film; whether that be the visual effects team or those working on production design. As well as making the film look great, Villeneuve's storytelling and style construct a sense of mystery that lingers over the film. The audience want the questions it poses to be answered. 

What I liked about the first film was that the story was easy to follow but Ridley Scott and the writers appealed to an active audience who could figure things out themselves and didn't need every minor plot detail explained to them. For example, the film wasn't afraid to cut out unnecessary portions of time that would otherwise distract from the story. "Blade Runner 2049" follows the same lines. Every scene is important to the story which means that even scene is interesting; the story never pauses. Even though I had never seen the original when the sequel was announced, I did wonder why there was actually a need to revisit this property after so much time had passed. After watching the original, I felt that it was a standalone feature that didn't even tease future instalments. Yes, fans have had questions for years that they wanted answered but I think that is what has built the film's cult fanbase- every fan has their own theories and no straight answers have been given since. However, "Blade Runner 2049" steers well away from answering the questions audiences are dying to know the answers to, the big one being 'Is Deckard a replicant?'; I film teased an answer to this early on when it's revealed that Deckard has retired, a phrase usually associated with terminated replicants. However, it turns out that Deckard has literally retired from his job and gone off of the radar. Now, "Blade Runner 2049" has a whole new set of questions for fans to think about...

It's revealed early on that Ryan Gosling's K is a replicant. I found this quite surprising but it made sense with how the film's world has evolved as time has passed (which is explained in the opening credits). The next reveal is that Deckard and Rachael (who is definitely a replicant) were able to successfully conceive a baby; K comes across Rachael's buried body when on another case and that is when it is revealed she died during or after giving birth. The film then takes the audience on a misdirect by convincing K (and therefore everybody watching) that he is the baby, and therefore they 'key' that everybody is after. K's memories seem legitimate due to the wooden horse which he left in a furnace at an orphanage actually being there many years later when he revisits. However, the truth is unveiled when it's announced Deckard and Rachael had a daughter by Freysa and that daughter is the memory maker that K visited earlier on in the film- that's why she cried along with K when experiencing the memory. I definitely did not see this twist coming and even though it is unfortunate that the protagonist, K is was just a plot device used to misdirect the audience and lead us to the truth, I still find the reveal itself clever- it's a well thought out twist that makes sense when looking back. The big question still remains as to whether Deckard is a replicant or not- could a human conceive a child with a replicant? what makes Deckard or Rachael so special that they have this skill? what part does K now have to play in all of this?

Admittedly, the film is light on action. However, that's not what this film is so as long as audience members are aware of that beforehand, nobody should leave the cinema disappointed for that reason. There is a really interesting and different action sequence towards the end of the second act between K and Deckard in a Vegas showroom. The music choices, the visuals and the editing were all spot on. Even though the action choreography itself was nothing too memorable, everything else about the scene elevated it. The finale action sequence was a little anticlimactic- firstly, Mr Wallace (Jared Leto) who has been marketed as the villain is not involved in it at all and secondly, Deckard is tied to a chair the whole time and honestly looks a little pathetic. The fight is between K and the ruthless Luv (Sylvia Hoeks). It's by no means good and takes place in an interesting setting but it doesn't tie up loose ends and seems like the end of a chapter rather than a whole story. "Blade Runner 2049" definitely sets up for a sequel, after poor box office performance it's unclear whether that sequel will go ahead, it looks like the film is heading down the 'revolution' route which has been done many times before so I am intrigued to see a more arthouse take on the plot line. I really hope the character of Mr Wallace actually has more to do next time (if there is a next time). 

Ryan Gosling's performance tops Harrison Ford's performance in the original. Ford was good as Deckard in the predecessor but there's definitely a reason that this is arguably his THIRD most iconic role. As for Gosling, he had to be good as all of the other characters really are sidelined and have little to do in comparison...Gosling is pretty great. This is probably the closest we're going to get to seeing Gosling in a blockbuster epic and I think both this role and film are perfect for a guy who has spent most of his career making smaller, indie projects...he's made one of those again but this time with a $150 million budget. I thought his character was likeable and Gosling was able to tap into something to make a replicant feel like a human. I was really impressed with Gosling; an excellent performance. As for everybody else, Harrison Ford reprises his role and doesn't disappoint. Outside of Star Wars, Ford has recently been slacking when it comes to his performances so its nice to see him remain committed and dedicated to one of his more iconic characters...this definitely wasn't just for the paycheque. If I was Jared Leto, I would be embarrassed that audiences will discover a performance much smaller than advertised. Anybody thinking of seeing this film for Leto should approach with caution (unless you want to see a generally great film) as Leto literally has two scenes. I don't know if most of his scenes have been left on the cutting room floor or if this is literally the only material he had to work with but his role is much smaller than I expected. Leto doesn't really do anything that interesting or quirky with the character but I don't think he was given the time to. There must have been something I liked about his performance and character though as it left me wanting more. 

Since its release, there have been discussions surrounding the treatment of female characters in this film. For the most part, I agree that female representation in this film is problematic. Even though are performance is good, it's unfortunate that Ana de Armas has found herself stuck in a role that is the epitome of objectification. Joi is literally a piece of technology that has been purchased and K literally activates her as and when he wants to. The character is also profoundly sexualised. However, there are a couple of stronger female characters that counter balance Joi. Robin Wright's Joshi is the equivalent to Bryant in the first film, a strong character in a position of power. Sylvia Hoeks' Luv is ends up being the main villain for this instalment. Yes, she is essentially the property of Leto's Wallace but she is certainly strong, powerful and unrelenting. The representation of women in this film is problematic and it is worrying considering the film portrays a near-future. Let's just hope nobody involved with the film actually predicts this for the women of the world. In some respects, this film is a step backwards for the portrayal of women. 

"Blade Runner 2049" is a mesmerising visionary from Villeneuve, adding yet another exceptional feature to his filmography. Ryan Gosling leads the film better than Harrison Ford did in the first with a more memorable and dramatic performance. Ford still has his heart in this IP and it shows as he reprises his role well. The story constantly unravels and never becomes dull. The sense of mystery is always present and the twist is unexpected and effective. The cinematography and visual effects are stunning and creative. Everybody behind the camera puts their all into "Blade Runner 2049" and it really pays off. This is one of my favourite films of the year so far and this time I hope we get a sequel...but sooner than 35 years. 

84

/100

What did you think of BLADE RUNNER 2049? How does it compare to the original? - COMMENT BELOW

See You Soon!