Liked it, but definitely not for everyone

Rating: Null/10 (9 October 2017)

This is not a "review." This is what I thought of the movie. TL;DR: I liked it more than I disliked it.
Before I start: I've seen plenty of these "don't believe the lies" reviews for this movie, and to everyone who says that, I say "Grow up!" It isn't "lying" to write a review you disagree with, regardless of which side you fall on.
This is one of those movies that when the credits rolled, I felt some initial disappointment--not because the movie was over, but rather for the following reasons (spoilers ahead): I felt Luv (the character, not a misspelling of the emotion) should have met her end about half an hour sooner. I get tired of characters who seem unstoppable until the very end, and it seems to me she gets away with far too much, no matter how rich her owner is.
Jared Leto's performance didn't convince me that Niander Wallace was a credible threat. I found his motives too nebulous. I wasn't convinced that Wallace wanted the secret of replicants being able to reproduce just to meet production demands without once considering possible ramifications of replicants who can reproduce.
I left the theater with the impression that this film basically defines Deckard as a replicant since I could've sworn the big deal was that the child is the offspring of two replicants. I've always preferred the cinematic release of the first movie (voiceover narration and all) over the versions where Ridley Scott tinkered with it, so I've never bought into the "Is Deckard a replicant or not?" stuff--the answer's always been "no" for me.
But on the drive home, talking with my other half, I realized I liked the movie more than I thought, for these reasons: I ended up rethinking my last "dislike" point because on the drive home my other half pointed out that the movie really doesn't say whether or not Deckard a replicant, and for that I'll give props to Villeneuve for not stomping on either fan theory.
I liked the overall atmosphere of the movie. It's set thirty years later, so I expected the "feel" of the movie to be somewhat different. I also like the "Blackout" as an explanation for why things haven't changed even more than they have in those thirty years.
I found the movie to be a satisfying mystery. The clues are in front of the viewer so that the viewer can solve it him/herself, like I've been taught a good mystery should do. Seems like reviews that complain the "twist" was "obvious" ignore that in any mystery there's a chance you'll solve it before the characters do.
I loved seeing Edward James Olmos as Gaff again. In fact, I think I liked him better as the old man.
The movie covers some of the same thematic territory I've seen in other movies (e.g. the question of whether replicants who can reproduce mean we're seeing the birth of a new race), but I like how it handles the themes and how it left me thinking about it instead of force-feeding me a specific way I'm supposed to feel about the themes.
The pluses outweighed the minuses for me. YMMV. I'm planning to see it again.