I'd give it 10 stars if I could. It's funny to see so many people with such bad taste in cinema...

>comparing John Woo to Denis Villeneuve
Unironically the most racist post I've seen this month.

It was about an hour too long

I can't tell what kind of bait this is, but this movie wasn't nearly as good as the original. It's the epitome of "sequel that nobody asked for," and it shows. I mean, this is a movie with a hero and a villain and a macguffin that they're both searching for; it's action schlock set in a striking world that was created by someone else, that only seems artistic because of its slow pacing. Or put another way, it's revealing that zoomer "auteurs" think this was an improvement over Blade Runner, a movie that actually has the qualities people praise BR2049 for.

So many old genre classics are remade, rebooted and rebranded these days that it’s rare for them to compare, or even exceed the qualities of their predecessors. For the most part, they rehash the story elements and sprinkle it with references and jokes for the fans to gawk at and feel good about themselves for recognizing. Jurassic World and the most recent Star Wars movies come to mind. Only a few dare to be their own movies.

Blade Runner 2049 is an incredible sequel, drawing on the original’s strengths and giving it what it always lacked. A powerful story.

The protagonist is Officer KD6-3·7 or “K” (Ryan gosling), a replicant Blade Runner whose job it is to hunt down and “retire” renegade replicants. He’s part of a new model series with unlimited life spans (something the Nexus 6 models of the original movie wanted), but far less free will. K even mentions that he’s never retired one of his own kind, because they do not run. While doing a routine retiring, he stumbles across something buried. It turns out to be the remains of a replicant. One who had given birth. The revelation is thought to be catastrophic to the world’s current order and K’s superior (Robin Wright) tells him to eliminate all traces of this, including the child. And so begins the mystery.

The story is engrossing and has a few surprising twists and turns. It also seamlessly weaves into the narrative the themes of humanity and what it means to be human, arguably more successfully than the original.

Ryan Gosling has a real talent for playing understated characters who express more with their eyes than words, and his performance as an android carries the movie, whether it’s his interactions with the world at large, or his strange romance with his beautiful virtual girlfriend Joi (Ana de Armas). She adds a lot to their scenes as their relationship plays out.

The rest of the cast is notable, with Jared Leto as the blind head of the Wallace Corporation, his psychotic assistant Luv (Sylv

The main problem I have with this movie is that the director is obsessed with the "lingering shot" the way J.J. Abrams is obsessed with adding fake lens flare. I could easily trim 20 minutes without losing a single scene, it lingers that much. A movie is like a speech, sometimes a pause after saying something important can lend to the gravity but pausing after every single sentence while demanding that no one can leave or interrupt just makes you sound like an idiot. (Which you are if you talk like that on purpose and don't have an actual speech impediment)
I see several 5 star ratings by people who mistake slow pacing for some kind of intellectualism. The first one was hardly fast paced but it only used lingering shots when called for. Not. In. Every. Single. Scene. Try watching anything from the Ghost In The Shell anime instead.

The problem I had with BR2049 is the constant flashbacks to over explain what we just saw about 20 minutes previous. It was too exposition heavy like it did not trust the audience to join the dots.The twist and turns were heavily signposted. The original just let the viewer digest what they saw.

I don't remember any flashbacks.

>Blade Runner 2049 is an incredible sequel, drawing on the original’s strengths and giving it what it always lacked. A powerful story.
Blade Runner leaned enough into ambiguity that you can easily forgive it for not going far enough in terms of story plotlines since that was the point. Problem with 2049 is as you said it makes a point of focusing on the story but ultimately loses it's way in the 2nd half, particularly towards then end. I know Ridley Scott said it was 1.5 hours too long but if anything it was rushed in parts.

What's with all the hate for BR2049 on this board? Everywhere else people think it's great.

the flash back to Joi "childhood" was shown multiple times. Later one when they revealed the twist they flashed back to the scrambling of the birth records and the childhood scene again and the memory maker. That's just off the top of my head. They really did hit you over the head with it.

This will never be nothing over a 6 because of the fucking soundtrack

Shut your mouth, before I kick your teth down thoyr and shut it for you.