Good in lots of ways but ultimately undone by a bloated script that tries too many things

Rating: 6/10 (5 December 2018)

I'm not adverse to long films but there's long films that need it for the right reasons and there's ones that need it for the wrong reasons. I think Blade Runner 2049 falls into the latter camp. It's long because it has way too much going on and this goes all the way back to the script.
It would have been easy to shape a better - and simplier - film at the development stage but, as is often the case with scripts originating from Ridley Scott and Scott Free Productions, it just wasn't addressed. I feel a bit sorry for Villeneuve because he was exactly the right director to tackle this - he gets so much right here - but I'm starting to suspect he might be a bit like Scott himself: he's good when he has a good script and less so when he doesn't. Personally I believe a good director should 'also' be a good enough writer to be able to shape a script when it needs it (i.e. when the writers fall short). I had the impression Villeneuve was that kind of director, but now I'm not so sure.
Anyway, the bottom line for me is this... this could have been a bonafide classic but it's fatally flawed and the finger points directly at the writers and the script editors imo - more specifically Michael Green I suspect, who's got 'Scott appointee' written all over him (and from his CV should never - ever - have been anywhere near a property like Blade Runner). Shame... so much effort (and talent) went into it and the foundations weren't quite there. Criminal really.