Sequel to classic a visual masterpiece
HOW do you make a sequel to one the greatest cult classic sci-fi films ever produced?
Blade Runner 2049 revisits the dark dystopian future world Ridley Scott created in the original and does not disappoint.
It’s produced by Scott and directed by Denis Villeneuve who was behind films such as Prisoners, Sicario and Arrival.
Villeneuve has worked hard to give fans a film worthy of being a sequel to the original.
Thirty years after the original this sequel follows the story of a Blade Runner named K, played by Ryan Gosling, as he “retires” older replicant models.
To say any more would ruin the riveting and satisfying narrative for you.
This sequel is a visual masterpiece, the attention to detail to make this world 30 years on from that of when the original was set, is truly stunning.
But not unexpectedly, it was not so easy to make a visual masterpiece in 1982 as it is in 2017.
This film doesn’t answer all the questions the first one raised, nor does it intend to, and audiences will have more questions than they did at the end.
The ambiguity is one of this film’s great strengths.
But unlike the first, it gives too much away and treats the audience as a little dumb.
Jared Leto is a little too creepy to be taken seriously as the mysterious head of the Wallace Corporation, which now develops replicants.
The score, composed by Jóhann Jóhannsson, Hans Zimmer and Benjamin Wallfisch is brilliant if not indulgent.
This isn’t the perfect film. The original does move slowly, but in this sequel it almost moves at a glacial pace.
I just couldn’t help but feel, isn’t there any other story to tell? All Hollywood seems to be producing is sequels.
What made the original the cult classic it is, was that nobody had really seen anything like it. Was it necessary to revisit this story?
There is plenty to explore in the Blade Runner universe and I’m sure this won’t be the last outing. ★★★✰
REVISITED: Ryan Gosling in a scene from the movie Blade Runner 2049.