*videogamedunkey voice* A MASTAHPIECE!

Rating: 10/10 (19 November 2017)

In the movie, Steve Jobs, Jobs says, "The people don't know what they want until you show it to them." Never before has a quote been so correct than for Blade Runner 2049. This movie is one of the best science fiction movies of the 2010s, as well as one of the best movies of the 21st century so far.
No movie is without a flaw, so let's start off with this movie's short list of flaws:

For me, the villain, Niander Wallace played by Leto, didn't have the gravitas and commanding presence as the villain in the original Blade Runner, Roy Batty, had. Wallace played more of a back role to Luv, giving her the main purpose of the movie. However, this flaw could also be seen as a positive because the movie never places a huge focus of Wallace because it isn't meant to. The movie is about K and his journey. - The pacing. This flaw is more of a critique for general audiences and why this movie is being bashed by them. The pacing at times is a little slow for those who entered the movie expecting a sci-fi action adventure as marketed by the trailers. Again, this flaw is inconsequential because the movie is not meant to be a sci-fi movie; however, the general audience will want it.

Moving onto the pros:

The writing and plot: This movie could have been ridiculously unoriginal; the original and movies like Tron, Terminator, and the Matrix explore the concept of AI and its place in our evolutionary timeline. However, the thing that separates 2049 apart from the rest is placing human conflict and exploring the human condition. K, **SPOILER** a replicant, discovers a mind-bending truth that makes him question his very existence and creation. The character is written extremely well, making the audience feel like they can relate to the character on his journey discovering what it means to be human. There is also an element of the chosen one storyline that is seen in many movies, with a decent twist on it. Dialogue between characters is perfect, laden with philosophical discussion and double entendres.

Film Making and Editing: Directed by Dennis Villeneuve, this movie is a visual orgasm. Beautifully shot by the legendary Roger Deakins (if he doesn't win his Oscar this year, it'll be the biggest injustice since Leo), the movie looks and feels like an accurate representation of future California. Villeneuve minimized use of CGI in favor of miniature buildings and physical backgrounds, and the result is amazing, capturing the aesthetic and feel of the original, while also building up more of the world around LA.

Soundtrack: I see many reviews that are critical of the loud and bombastic soundtrack that Zimmer has come up with. I believe that the score works perfectly in order to portray the characters as small in the grand scale and scope of the world. It also uses elements of the amazing and mesmerizing original Blade Runner soundtrack while also sounding unique in its own right.

Performances: Gosling as K plays it very well. Emotionally reserved and speaking very few words, he creates a mysterious vibe around K, while also investing the audience into the character. Joi played by Ana de Armas is good as the bubbly love interest. Sylvia Hoeks steals the show in scenes as Luv, portraying a menacing yet eloquent servant to Wallace. Harrison Ford manages to excel yet again as Rick Deckard, portraying a similar reserved Blade Runner as Gosling and his performance in the original.

Ability to stand as its own movie: This pro is very important and for good reason. Every sequel nowadays seems like it must either be filled with universe building, intertextuality, and plot beats similar to the original. Examples of this are The Force Awakens which, while a great film in terms of film making and acting, has an overabundance and over reliance on callbacks to the original trilogy (i.e. relying on the appearances of such things as the Millennium Falcon and Han Solo) in order to amp up the audience and entertain them. Jurassic World suffers from this also in that it relies of points such as the T-Rex, the original park itself, and basically replicating the original plot in order to get positive marks from the audience. What sets Blade Runner 2049 apart from these movies is the fact that it is a true sequel: it doesn't rely on knowledge of the original or images from the original in order to entertain an audience. The closest it comes to intertextuality is when Rick Deckard comes back, and he doesn't enter the film until the end of the second act/the beginning of the third act. It uses its original story and new characters in order to engage the audience, which is rare amongst movies today which all seem to be in grand service to a universe, i.e. MCU, DCU, Universal monster movies, etc.

In conclusion, the movie is a grand feat in film making, story telling, and acting. Entertaining and gripping throughout, Blade Runner 2049 serves as a prime example for any film maker who wants to create a good film.