Did they even see Blade Runner when it came out?

Rating: 10/10 (24 January 2018)

I always wonder why people who hated something RUSH to post an iMDB review about it. It's just a waste of time. I think it is because Franklin Graham told his congregation to log in here and write 10 1-stars per recent film. This might explain the large amount of identical 1-star reviews that can be seen, repeating themselves throughout the reviews section although apparently written by "different people". Different people from the same IP address, or Anonymiser. I come in here to read the diversity of reactions to film, and when I do not see diversity, but 1-stars written according to a formula (You'll notice these people always list the same 4 points for every movie playing in the theater that they attack), then I know that I am not seeing diversity, not true diversity. Real diversity is not a rubber stamp replica of 10 other reviews.
Reviewer "Horrorgasm" has it spot on: I'm tired of people panning this film based on opinions of the original, which they never saw when it came out. I however, did see the original when it came out, and I saw this today. I was in shock and awe when I saw Roy Baty decide to love life at the end of Blade Runner, even Rick Deckard's life, and I was in shock when I watched "K" (Ryan Gosling) start piecing together the story of Rick and Rachel out of nothing but bones in a Box.
The original Blade Runner got panned more for the differences to the Phillip K Dick novel than the Narration that was added without Ridley Scott's permission. And of course, adding the narration like that sucked. But I preferred the narration because it made the original flow like a 40's Noir film, and Ridley Scott got the look and feel of 40's Noir. When it comes to film, we always prefer what we had originally seen. There have been a few extended versions of films which I liked more. Normally, director's cuts are alternate edits, like Ridley's version of Alien, which has a few different scenes in it, but is not really an "extended" cut. But extended versions always have the original scenes, but with more added.
But here, the same 10 "people" are complaining about "Sequels". They can relax, this is not a sequel. It's a seamless continuation. Denis Villeneuve had great respect in reconstructing the world of Bladerunner. Sets, Costumes, MUSIC. The moment this film starts, we know we are in the Replicant Universe, and we stay in that universe for about 2 and a half hours. My only real gripe is that Gaff, when we meet him in this film, is no longer talking in his colourful Street Speech, but it could also be that sometimes, when we get older, we drop things that were affectations.
It is 30 years later, and Replicants are up to Nexus 8. There was some incident that EMP'd all of the electronics. No trees left on the planet. hard to tell which animals are real or if there are any left that are not cloned. and 'Skin Jobs" are now allowed on Earth, but they have all the crappy jobs, the ones we hired slaves and immigrants to do in the past.
This film continues the statement made in Blade Runner that "disposable people" have always been used to make civilizations. In Old Testament times, in Babylonian times, in Roman Times. Slaves built and died building the monuments. Slaves picked the cotton that made the south rich. And today, immigrants do all of those jobs for low pay, no benefits, and they even have taxes taken out for benefits they will never get, while the ICE waits to split up their families and deport them after 30 years of paying taxes.
In this film, and the original, there are references to slaves and immigrants, in the representation of the Replicants. Their lives just do not matter. But there are a few, like "Luv" (Sylvia Hoeks) who works for "Mr Wallace" who somehow think they are equal and superior, while their owners (Jared Leto) continuously display contempt for her kind right in front of her, over and over again.
There is a MacGuffin which has come to the attention of "K", his boss Lieutenant Joshi (Robin Wright), Luv, and Mr Wallace, but it is "K's" efforts which show us his discoveries. In Fact, our attention is directed to the wrong person the whole time. A Memory points "K" to a certain course of action. But...
Who has the best memories?