Like a Marvel sequel at 1/10th of the speed

Rating: 4/10 (8 October 2017)

I'm sorry, but "Blade Runner 2049" is a ponderous bore. Deakins' photography is marvelous but the dystopian landscape overstays its welcome. It is oppressive, sad, and nihilistic. There is a reason why "The Orville", the new Star Trek-in-everything-but-name series by Seth McFarlane is well received by tired viewers: the sense of wonder needs at least the possibility of optimism.
All the pensive decades of Ryan Gosling does not mean depth. The only interesting and relevant part, and the only shot at feelings, come from a virtual AI made to replace real human contact. The bridge between virtual and real is the standout scene of the film, and it is disconnected from the grim proceedings.
Why do mainstream critics herald such nightmarish work as a near-masterpiece? Have they lost any sense as to what makes a piece something more than a religious lash on our backs?