An overlong and slow paced disappointment.

Rating: 5/10 (24 November 2017)

I liked Blade Runner (both the original 1982 version and the Director's Cut). It was atmospheric, visually dazzling, and the story kept me engaged throughout. Harrison Ford's Rick Deckard was also someone that you liked and you cared about, as well as the rest of the supporting cast. It goes with out saying that Rutger Hauer's Batty was a villain that keep you intrigued and engaged throughout the entire movie. Blade Runner 2049 had some question marks over it as to whether it was going to be well worth the wait 35 years later. The early teaser trailer looked very promising with a brief throwback to the 1982 classic. Upon seeing Blade Runner 2049, I left the cinema very disappointed upon seeing the end result to a long awaited sequel to be very ordinary.
Blade Runner 2049 now takes place 30 years later after the original events which centers on the new protagonist LAPD Officer K (Ryan Gosling) who is also a blade runner tasked to hunt down and task replicants. He is drawn into an investigation following the discovery of the remains of a female replicant. K's superior Lieutant Joshi (Robin Wright) orders to have the evidence destroyed for fear of another war which could see to the end of human civilisation. K's investigation leads him to the Wallace Corporation led by CEO Niander Wallace (Jared Leto) who tasks his chief enforcer Luv (Sylvia Hoeks) to eliminate what's left of the remains as well as anyone involved in the investigation. K finds himself enlisting the help of former Blade Runner Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford) who had been living in seclusion for 30 years.
Ryan Gosling has always been a likable actor and I couldn't fault him as Officer K. Jared Leto looks like he is stuck on the bench as the main villain Wallace. Jared Leto looked like he had that fearful presence about him in the trailers and he could have been used A LOT more. Instead he is just reduced to rambling monologues. The rest of the supporting cast including Robin Wright, Sylvia Hoeks, Dave Battista, Mackenzie Davis, Ana de Armas, Carla Juri, and Lennie James do their best with what they have although some of the characters are nothing more than time fillers. Harrison Ford's Rick Deckard should have been left out of the movie altogether. I liked his character in the 1982 classic and he was very charismatic and heroic. Fans of Harrison Ford will agree that Rick Deckard was one of his very memorable roles throughout his career, right up there with Han Solo, Indiana Jones and Jack Ryan. Even though he is second billed and heavily promoted for the movie, he only appears in the last half hour. As he is 75, time is against him and he is not the nimble and agile star that he was in his prime. Even Clint Eastwood took several steps back and stopped all the action scenes and stuck with a lot of dramatic movies as well as sitting in the director's chair. I strongly felt that Harrison Ford is way too old to be doing action scenes that he could still be capable of doing 20 years ago. He definitely had it with Air Force One (1997) and he was pushing things with Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008) and Star Wars: The Force Awakens (2015). In Blade Runner 2049, he looked tired, weary and past his prime. I didn't need any more convincing that he was capable of kicking any butt and he looked as if he was ready to call it a day.
Director Denis Villeneuve takes the director's chair from original director Ridley Scott. He might be a quality director given his critically acclaimed Sicario (2015) but his vision of Blade Runner 2049 is nothing like the 1982 classic, resulting in a slowly paced and dull science fiction movie. Dennis Villeneuve should have had his editor trim down 30 minutes of unnecessary details and time fillers which has contributed to the slow pacing of this overlong movie and have the story tightened up a lot more. He should have beefed up the story and the dialogue a lot more. The original's action scenes were more thrilling, but here they are as effective as a blunt knife failing to cut through a bread roll.
Writers Hampton Fancher (who was one of the writers of the original) and Michael Green have let the best of a good opportunity slip right through their fingers. Their end result could have looked a lot better on paper but they are half the reason why this movie did not work.
Blade Runner 2049 was always going to be a hard act to follow from the 1982 classic, but I was very disappointed how it turned out to be overlong and very slow paced. It should have been wound a lot tighter, and the story should have been a lot more engaging. The action should have kept me at the edge of the seat, but it was anything but that. In fact, I felt indifferent and that the Blade Runner universe should have been left alone. At one stage, I dozed off somewhere in the middle of the movie. The only reason I stuck at it was to see how it turned out. If I viewed this at home, I would have fast forwarded through the slow parts. Even the Blade Runner game which was released on PC in 1997 was a million miles better. It stuck with the Los Angeles 2019 setting and despite its non-linear plot, I loved the game and I was amazed that the makers of the game did an excellent job recreating the universe of the 1982 classic.
Blade Runner 2049 was one of the most disappointing movies of 2017. It should have been a lot better.
5/10.