Sci-fi is not my bag. We all have a genre (I have two - sci-fi and westerns) we can't get on with and, Denis Villeneuve's faultless Arrival aside, sci-fi carries that misfortune for me. Despite being dubbed a cinematic masterpiece, I was largely unimpressed with the original Blade Runner (more extensive thoughts here) - but Villeneuve's involvement in the sequel had me on board instantly. Critical acclaim has propelled hype and excitement to tremendous heights - but how does the picture stand-up for someone largely disconnected from the franchise?
Set 30 years after the original, Blade Runner 2049 follows replicant blade runner, K (Ryan Gosling), and his mission to 'retire' old models. When he requires the help of an expert, he searches for Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) who has been in hiding for years. Throughout promotion, 2049's storyline has been heavily-guarded, shrouded in secrecy and hidden from promotion; I'll attempt to withhold that tone throughout this review, because a lot of the beauty of 2049 is not quite sensing where it is going.
Quite simply, Blade Runner 2049 may be the most visually spectacular film of the year, oozing with sophistication and finesse. Villeneuve, one of Hollywood's most consistent directors, transitions the beauty of his smaller-scale dramas and thrillers (Arrival, Sicario and Prisoners) to this big-budget sci-fi epic exceptionally. From sweeping shots of the city to tighter, more intimate moments with the the characters, Villeneuve showcases a plethora of emotions on screen, operating effectively in delivering a film of both beauty and depth, as is now to be expected from the man. He lays the foundations of a tremendous film through his talent and skill alone, and finds a fantastic team to accentuate it further.
2049's beautiful cinematography - courtesy of Roger Deakins, a key player in elevating this piece to thrilling heights - rivals Dunkirk's for the title of the year's best. Every shot feels like a lavish photograph; playing with light, shadows, palettes, colours and hues, Deakins paints a stunning aesthetic that means it will be held up as masterclass of the art for decades to come. If the future is as pretty a picture as Deakins paints, I'm excited for it.
It obviously helps too that the production and art design is second to none. Populated with grand, ostentatious set pieces demonstrating how you should handle a budget of this scale - splash it on to screen for our enjoyment - the scale is immense and you are immersed visually in this detailed, flashy world in awe and admiration. Whether its a wasteland, lab or palace, the screen is bursting with stunning flourishes that ensure you are continually captivated, pouring over every last detail pervading our screen. So much effort and thought has gone into each scene, from the precision of the palettes to the ripple of the water on the wall - that budget really has been well spent (even if it turns out to be the film's undoing commercially).
Blade Runner 2049's talent behind the camera is matched by those on the screen and Ryan Gosling is the perfect leading man. He provides a layered and textured performance as Joe: he is elusive, magnetic and charming, providing audiences with a genuinely intriguing central character who anchors the piece through the conveyor belt of rotating set pieces and scenes. As Villeneuve has, he has proven himself to be one of the most reliable talents of his field, with this going down as another testament to the impressive filmography he has crafted over the years.
Harrison Ford returns as Deckard, bringing with him a decent performance, particularly explosive when sparring with Gosling. A tremendous chemistry and energy is formed between them. While his surprisingly late-in-the-game appearance felt like an unneeded cameo to begin with, his character does fit back into the world rather seamlessly and adds to the narrative efficiently. Ana de Armas is particularly endearing as a soulmate for Gosling's Joe, while Robin Wright makes for his headstrong, potential dangerous boss. Jared Leto and Sylvia Hoeks (in particular) provides two menacing performances operating as the film's big-bads. Hoeks is especially towering, physically and mentally attempting to break the explosive duo down. The whole ensemble is solid, offering audiences new characters to help expand the Blade Runner universe, as well as some familiar faces along the way.
Hampton Fancher and Michael Green's screenplay, based on characters from Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, finds a strong story to tell for the sequel, utilising a recognisable Blade Runner template but heading off in a far more personal, intimate direction (despite keeping expanding the scope). It was a smart move to keep the main body of the story hidden from promotional material, as you feel the story unfurls in a surprising, unconventional way. It was a relief that the narrative moves away somewhat from the original, as I found the first outing rather dull on account for the increasingly complex and frustrating story which quickly became one of the most glaring issues with the original for me. The sequel is still an intelligent, thought-provoking piece but without the pretentious frills that undermined the first from my viewpoint.
Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch's soundtrack enhances each and every moment fantastically: I can see award season success for many of the film's technical elements, but the soundtrack is one of the most deserving; it is a varied collection of tracks scoring the film excellently, provoking emotion, excitement and danger effectively and where appropriate. With ebbs and flows it dips and peaks in intensity and power, capturing the mood and operating with terrific effect at every turn.
Blade Runner 2049 deserves to sweep the Oscars on the same scale Mad Max: Fury Road did in 2015, for its visuals, direction and soundtrack are particularly masterful.
But.
With so many indisputable technical achievements and successful elements to it, I question why I left Blade Runner 2049 feeling so cold - disconnected almost. My general, muted reception to the original almost certainly has something to do with that, but it seems to be more than that: I couldn't quite connect to the film emotionally, distant to the world that was being created and unable to immerse myself in it, visuals aside. An excessive runtime and a handful of moments provoking real confusion (again, likely my own fault) did nothing to help, but the root problem for my detachment can't be pinpointed to one thing - it seemed like a concoction of components that failed to bring it together as a satisfying whole.
Now, I can recognise a good film when I see one, and Blade Runner 2049 most certainly is a good film, a clear improvement over the original - but not one I could fully invest myself in. It was visually astounding, stunningly directed, narratively solid, terrific in its performances and bolstered by an impressive score - but the coldness I felt (both metaphorically and physically, because I'd forgotten my jumper at home) dampened the experience. Maybe a second watch will help alleviate some of my issues with a piece (not that it will miraculously be cut down by half an hour overnight...), but I'll have to let you know in due time...
Summary: Blade Runner 2049's technical achievements are astounding, containing some of the year's most impressive visuals, helmed by a director at the top of his game - but I left the theatre feeling cold and disconnected.
Quite simply, Blade Runner 2049 may be the most visually spectacular film of the year, oozing with sophistication and finesse. Villeneuve, one of Hollywood's most consistent directors, transitions the beauty of his smaller-scale dramas and thrillers (Arrival, Sicario and Prisoners) to this big-budget sci-fi epic exceptionally. From sweeping shots of the city to tighter, more intimate moments with the the characters, Villeneuve showcases a plethora of emotions on screen, operating effectively in delivering a film of both beauty and depth, as is now to be expected from the man. He lays the foundations of a tremendous film through his talent and skill alone, and finds a fantastic team to accentuate it further.
2049's beautiful cinematography - courtesy of Roger Deakins, a key player in elevating this piece to thrilling heights - rivals Dunkirk's for the title of the year's best. Every shot feels like a lavish photograph; playing with light, shadows, palettes, colours and hues, Deakins paints a stunning aesthetic that means it will be held up as masterclass of the art for decades to come. If the future is as pretty a picture as Deakins paints, I'm excited for it.
It obviously helps too that the production and art design is second to none. Populated with grand, ostentatious set pieces demonstrating how you should handle a budget of this scale - splash it on to screen for our enjoyment - the scale is immense and you are immersed visually in this detailed, flashy world in awe and admiration. Whether its a wasteland, lab or palace, the screen is bursting with stunning flourishes that ensure you are continually captivated, pouring over every last detail pervading our screen. So much effort and thought has gone into each scene, from the precision of the palettes to the ripple of the water on the wall - that budget really has been well spent (even if it turns out to be the film's undoing commercially).
Blade Runner 2049's talent behind the camera is matched by those on the screen and Ryan Gosling is the perfect leading man. He provides a layered and textured performance as Joe: he is elusive, magnetic and charming, providing audiences with a genuinely intriguing central character who anchors the piece through the conveyor belt of rotating set pieces and scenes. As Villeneuve has, he has proven himself to be one of the most reliable talents of his field, with this going down as another testament to the impressive filmography he has crafted over the years.
Harrison Ford returns as Deckard, bringing with him a decent performance, particularly explosive when sparring with Gosling. A tremendous chemistry and energy is formed between them. While his surprisingly late-in-the-game appearance felt like an unneeded cameo to begin with, his character does fit back into the world rather seamlessly and adds to the narrative efficiently. Ana de Armas is particularly endearing as a soulmate for Gosling's Joe, while Robin Wright makes for his headstrong, potential dangerous boss. Jared Leto and Sylvia Hoeks (in particular) provides two menacing performances operating as the film's big-bads. Hoeks is especially towering, physically and mentally attempting to break the explosive duo down. The whole ensemble is solid, offering audiences new characters to help expand the Blade Runner universe, as well as some familiar faces along the way.
Hampton Fancher and Michael Green's screenplay, based on characters from Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, finds a strong story to tell for the sequel, utilising a recognisable Blade Runner template but heading off in a far more personal, intimate direction (despite keeping expanding the scope). It was a smart move to keep the main body of the story hidden from promotional material, as you feel the story unfurls in a surprising, unconventional way. It was a relief that the narrative moves away somewhat from the original, as I found the first outing rather dull on account for the increasingly complex and frustrating story which quickly became one of the most glaring issues with the original for me. The sequel is still an intelligent, thought-provoking piece but without the pretentious frills that undermined the first from my viewpoint.
Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch's soundtrack enhances each and every moment fantastically: I can see award season success for many of the film's technical elements, but the soundtrack is one of the most deserving; it is a varied collection of tracks scoring the film excellently, provoking emotion, excitement and danger effectively and where appropriate. With ebbs and flows it dips and peaks in intensity and power, capturing the mood and operating with terrific effect at every turn.
Blade Runner 2049 deserves to sweep the Oscars on the same scale Mad Max: Fury Road did in 2015, for its visuals, direction and soundtrack are particularly masterful.
But.
With so many indisputable technical achievements and successful elements to it, I question why I left Blade Runner 2049 feeling so cold - disconnected almost. My general, muted reception to the original almost certainly has something to do with that, but it seems to be more than that: I couldn't quite connect to the film emotionally, distant to the world that was being created and unable to immerse myself in it, visuals aside. An excessive runtime and a handful of moments provoking real confusion (again, likely my own fault) did nothing to help, but the root problem for my detachment can't be pinpointed to one thing - it seemed like a concoction of components that failed to bring it together as a satisfying whole.
Now, I can recognise a good film when I see one, and Blade Runner 2049 most certainly is a good film, a clear improvement over the original - but not one I could fully invest myself in. It was visually astounding, stunningly directed, narratively solid, terrific in its performances and bolstered by an impressive score - but the coldness I felt (both metaphorically and physically, because I'd forgotten my jumper at home) dampened the experience. Maybe a second watch will help alleviate some of my issues with a piece (not that it will miraculously be cut down by half an hour overnight...), but I'll have to let you know in due time...
★★★★★★★✬☆☆
(7.5/10)
Summary: Blade Runner 2049's technical achievements are astounding, containing some of the year's most impressive visuals, helmed by a director at the top of his game - but I left the theatre feeling cold and disconnected.