Ryan Gosling is still trying to be "a real human being"

Rating: Null/10 (8 October 2017)

The best part about Blade Runner 2049 is how visually engaging it is. The editing has a steady, rich pace. The film did feel very long, but this never distracted from the slow and occasionally ambiguous plot. The direction and composition holds your attention on the world of the film.
Although the visual effects are consistently realistic, the environments aren't as imaginative nor as atmospheric as the bulky retro L.A. in the original Blade Runner, which was bursting with character and life. Some places in BR2049, such as the farm and the orphanage K visits, have a believably unique design; other places, like the memory manufacturer, er, don't. The art design on Denis Villeneuve's other sci-fi films (i.e. Enemy, Arrival) should give you a good idea of what to expect. The costume design is brilliant - possibly better than the original's.
The biggest problem is the plot. The original BR had two narratives building at the same time - Deckard's hunt for the escaped replicants, and the replicants' hunt for their creator - and as the film goes on, we develop empathy for both parties. This is crucial, as a key theme in BR (and especially the book) is empathy; it separates androids from humans. We can empathize with all the characters' actions, even the immoral ones. Everyone feels human, which might, y'know, have something to do with the whole theme of the film? Y'know? In contrast, BR2049 has a polarizing "good vs. bad" plot. The goodies escape from the baddies. Not much to contemplate, really. The protagonist is asked to find and kill someone, which could be an opportunity to explore some complex morality; but the film never takes the time to expand on this, because it's so caught up in it's own "goodies versus baddies" plot.
Jared Leto and Sylvia Hoeks play villains as forgettable as the fifteen billion other film villains exactly like them. But at least Hoeks is able to breathe some personality into her role, delivering some intense scenes - Leto's performance had next to no character. Neither come close to the brilliance of Steven Berkoff.
In fact, with BR being an atmospheric and human film, the only excuse I can find for BR2049's complete lifelessness is that it was done on purpose. Maybe it's a metaphor for how it feels to be a slave android, with no free will? If that's the case, it's not a rewarding one. Villeneuve is notorious for ambiguous plots - my man Channel Criswell argues that ambiguity is the genius of Villeneuve's craft(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NJYnoNxLek)- but whilst films like Enemy (which has very similar themes to BR) are so confusing that the viewer feels almost obliged to work out what it all meant, BR2049 feels cold and detached. This is partly due to the acting.
Ryan Gosling isn't a good actor. He is a guy who smiles slightly. That's all he does. He can only pull one face. Has anyone else noticed this? Because he seems to be getting a lot of roles recently. In which all he does is slightly smile. Enemy makes a good comparison: Jake Gyllenhaal plays a man going through an overwhelming psychological struggle, and his brilliant performance expresses this. The struggle is completely internalized, yet we still understand; and if we don't, we want to. Gosling's character contemplates things throughout BR2049, but we can't possibly work out what he's thinking. Narration and flashbacks have to be used, and even then it's unengagingly confusing. The other performances were fine. Mackenzie Davis was impressive, and Harrison Ford held up.
The film was an entertaining pair of hours, but I doubt it'll stay with you, because I'll probably forget about it soon. It's not the ind of film I want to think about, nor had enough action scenes to warrant a rewatch.