Visually stunning, but not much emotional impact

Rating: 6/10 (2 January 2018)

'Blade Runner 2049' comes 35 years after the original - and you have to ask, "why?" Directed by Villeneuve ('Arrival') and only produced by Ridley Scott (why is he involved in his own sequel, but not directing?), it doesn't even attempt to answer the main question of the first film - is Deckard (Ford) a replicant? Why is it always raining? Why do Ford & Leto only have a total of about four scenes between them? Why does it go for over 2 & a half hours?
There is some plot, with K (Gosling) being a replicant Blade Runner, tasked by Joshi (Wright) to track down runaway replicants, which leads to uncovering a mystery surrounding Deckard & Rachael. It takes 100min for Ford to even appear. In the meantime, Hans Zimmer tries to recreate the original's iconic score, but not as synth-y and sometimes a bit too overwrought. There's a lot of K interacting with Joi (de Armas), his 'Her'-like holographic maid. Most of this is handled quite well, with the CGI of Joi interacting with the light and her surroundings done excellently. But, it doesn't help move the film along at all.
There is occasional bits of action/violence, mostly thanks to Luv (Hoeks), but not enough to sustain the first two hours, with the clues slowly unravelling and not much excitement. It does pick up in the final 45min and has a passable ending, but mostly I'm left with the feeling of "it looks cool, but why do I care?" Good to see heaps more of the flying cars, and like 'Star Wars', everything looks realistic and "lived-in", but most of the concepts have now been explored better by 'Terminator' and 'Mad Max'.