top of page
  • Writer's pictureNick C. Goins Jr.

The Pissed Take - Blade Runner 2049

Release Date 06Oct2017

BLADE RUNNER 2049 -OR- Do androids have a better writing team than this? AKA Give Roger Deakins a f#$king Oscar already!!!

I want to start by saying this is one of the most beautifully shot and designed movies I've seen in almost ever. Give Roger Deakins (the cinematographer) a damn Oscar already! If he didn't prove on other shows (Sicario, Skyfall, Nineteen Eighty-Four, Shawshank etc) that he's one of the best director's of photography out there, he just dunked on the rest and shattered the backboard.

In almost all ways an improvement on the original film and logical progression.

Set 30 years after the 2019 setting of 1982's "Blade Runner", this film's story involves LAPD Blade Runner K following clues to help him solve and retire a 30 year old mystery.

Where this film slips and occasionally loses its way is how it handles this central mystery and the characters involved while also setting up for more BR movies (It has been remarked by Ridley Scott that there are up to 4 more in various states of development). It asks some interesting questions yet fails for the most part to give satisfying answers and it's resolution of the central question would be at home in a "My first books" story. In many ways the movies that the original film inspired ask and resolve the "Humanity" questions far more intelligently and satisfyingly than it and this film.

Characters appear, are introduced and disappear for long stretches of time and simple conversations are drawn out in hushed voices and long pauses (Way to pad that run time). Gaff, a character played by Edward James Olmos in the original, makes an appearance that isn't needed and adds nothing to the movie.

The acting is for the most part fine and the actors seemed to have fully stepped into their characters, so it's easy to slip back into this world.

My biggest issue with this film is the 2h 43m runtime. Seriously, this film's story only really needed maybe 100 minutes. It's thin. Gorgeous audio-visual feast aside, there isn't enough story to fill this film without the photographic and VFX slow jerk. Really.

In summation, this film is much like the first: a sumptuous visual feast with superb sound design but hollow on the inside. If that's what you came for (as I did) you will not be disappointed.

Definitely pee first.

6 views0 comments


bottom of page