Watched Blade Runner 2049.
It is not a cheap cash grab, but a worthy follow up that probably does better than the original (my ‘original’ is Director’s Cut). I would say the knowledge of the original is strongly recommended in order to understand the theme, story and tone. Of course you can deliberately ignore my advice, but if you end up disliking 2049 that way, that’s clearly your problem.
I think the common misunderstanding among those who haven’t seen the original Blade Runner is that it’s an action film. You have Han Solo with a big gun in the poster (above), so the assumption is warranted.
And most people’s first impression, myself included, would be that it’s boring. You feel that you misunderstood the film, adjust your expectation, and watch it again. That’s how I came to like it. I think that’s the case for many other people; it didn’t do well when it was released, and gained popularity later. Being tonally faithful to the original, I think 2049 will also have a similar reception. It’s a slow burn and a first timer may find it boring. (That’s not to say everyone will love it after multiple viewing)
2049 is good at keeping you engaged the whole time despite the slow pacing, because of strong art direction and cinematography. The visuals absolutely live up to the original, and give you plenty of time to appreciate each shot.
The dystopian LA cityscape is beautifully decorated with flashy advertisements, rain, and air pollution, so are deserted outskirts. CGI human characters are also impressive, in fact I found it more impressive than buildings or machines.
You might think 2049 is cheating because it is using CGI, but it is just as hard to make a convincing CGI to a point where everything seems natural. Even in 2017 we have lots of movies with shabby CGI effects that immediately put you off, but this film cannot be further from it. The 2049 team is doing the best job humanly possible today, and I pay equal respect to both the original and new art team.
Blade Runner 2049 takes place 30 years after the original. I do not explain the story here, but I’d say it’s written and told better than the original. In my opinion, the story was the weakest part in the original and metaphor and implication of it was more interesting. Those elements are given very clever twists.
The storytelling is supported by great acting. I am usually not a fan of Ryan Gosling, but his weakness in acting (in my opinion) was used to the movie’s advantage, which makes his casting perfect. Harrison Ford’s acting in the original was inconsistent and intentionally terrible in some parts, but he is much better this time around. Jared Leto’s performance was terrific compared to recent Joker role from Suicide Squad.
The original was a visual and philosophical masterpiece that compensate for its rather weak storytelling. Its slow pace helped us taking in the universe, and remains captivating to this day. Blade Runner 2049 totally keeps up the same standard in every department, if not better. It is very confidently made, and puts a lot of trust in the audience’s intelligence and patience, which I appreciate.
It could be 10/10, but I need to see it again to confirm that score. For now, I settle with 9.
There was another favourite film despite starring Ryan Gosling, which is LA LA Land. Blade Runner 2049 also takes place in Los Angeles, so my accidental sweet spot is Gosling + LA.
—toshi omagari
Flommist Toshi Omagari fights many things, most recent of which is the auto-correction of his title to florist. Copyright © 2017 Toshi Omagari.
PLEASE SUPPORT FLOMM
TIPS + DONATIONS DISCREETLY ACCEPTED