BLADE RUNNER 2049 (2017) FAITHFUL AND OUTSTANDING SEQUEL. MOVIE REVIEW.

Hard task ahead.

Making a sequel to one of the most revered films in the history of cinema is an extremely difficult and delicate task, and Denis Villeneuve has achieved it with a more than satisfactory work in Blade Runner 2049. The overall manufacture of the film is of the highest quality possible, and with a fidelity to the source that will make even the most hard core fans embrace it.

It’s 2049, and we find Agent “K” (Ryan Gosling), LAPD agent, part of the new generation of Blade Runners, Replicant hunters. After a mission, «K», a Replicant himself, discovers long-buried secrets that can alter the already precarious order of society, and that leads him to investigate what happened in the original story of Blade Runner (Ridley Scott, 1982), thirty years earlier.

Faithful to the original Blade Runner.

Villeneuve was not only faithful to the original story, with Blade Runner 2049 being a direct sequel to Blade Runner, but it even maintains the same slow pace. A situation that may upset some viewers. But it is because of this situation that it makes it possible for us, the viewers, to place ourselves immediately in the same world. As in the first film, the actors deliver the dialogues with pause, giving them time to convey the emotions required for the scene. Also, the long contemplative shots maintain the same rhythm as the original. So much so that at times it seems like Ridley Scott himself is directing. (he was only an executive producer).

If Villeneuve had used fast-paced editing with lots of short scenes, the pacing of the film would have been much different, distancing itself from the contemplative pacing of the original film. Remember that the first installment was made in 1982 before the influence of music videos with their multitude of takes and quick cuts influenced cinema.

Experienced cast working with a subtle script.

Ryan Gosling does a good job as another unflappable Blade Runner, similar to Deckard’s character, in his seemingly low empathy and lack of emotion. But behind closed doors, we can see that he is not  that aloof. He has a close and and heartwarming relationship with Joi, played by Ana de Armas, a virtual reality partner. This is right in the same tune with the general thematic of the series about the dehumanization of the human being and, on the opposite side, about how machines can acquire feelings and become «more human». It is the character of Joi who gives a warm touch to the film and Ana de Armas does it convincingly. Harrison Ford returns to play Deckard and achieves good moments with little time on screen.

The script is full of subtlety. In one scene, Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright) tells «K» what would happen if she «finished the bottle». This is a veiled sexual invitation that can go unnoticed by most viewers. The movie is full of these kind of moments.

Production design and special effects are top-notch.

While in the first part we were able to appreciate the city more on a street level, this time they focused more on aerial views, giving us a wider perspective of the city. Magnificent set designs were made to present the same polluted L.A. as in the first installment, but the wasteland of San Diego and the desert radioactive of Las Vegas were equally good. Also, since Joi is a holographic image, and her presence is part of the everyday life of the «K», the SFXs are made in such a convincing way that permits the viewer to focus on their close relationship, instead of questioning the plausibility of the situation. In general, all the holographic images are excellent.

The sound mix is outstanding.

The fidelity and clarity of the sounds are spectacular. From the initial big rumble with which the movie starts to the tiniest details that happen off-camera. The musical score also maintains a very similar tone to the first film, and sometimes the compositions are very similar to those of Vangelis 40 years ago.

A visual cinematographic achievement.

The film’s greatest technical achievement is the cinematography of Roger Deakins. With a successful use of a green and gray color palette, he brings a somber tone to this futuristic world. But it is the scenes with an ocher palette where they achieve the most beautiful results. Although they no longer use as many neon lights and nor as dark as the first film, when these elements are used they achieve scenes with great contrast. It certainly is a feast for the beholder’s eyes.

Why Blade Runner 2049 was a box office flop?

A cinematic achievement, but still considered a moderate box office failure. Although the film did not lose money, it did not collect what was expected. We can attribute this to the fact that it is a movie that requires a strong commitment from the viewer. Like the first film, it was not to the liking of the majority due to its slow development. Also, the long-running time of almost three hours did not help.

The common viewer is no longer used to seeing this type of productions nor is he willing to compromise himself with an unconventional film of this kind, seeking more immediate gratification with more accessible and superficial productions.
Only hard-core fans of Science Fiction, Cyberpunk, and cinephiles have the patience to appreciate these types of films, which, unfortunately, we are likely to see less and less. Producers will not want to risk their money on such economically uncertain kind of stories.

Delirium Score