Being a fan of the original “blade Runner” in 1982, I managed to make out the film to pieces as from the perspective of the more emotional perception of children and older analytically, analyzing the structure and philosophy of the film. But at all times remained unchanged for me, a sense of mild horror and rejection of the world “Running”. This monumental and dead world, without a doubt beautiful on the outside, but absolutely lifeless. When viewing each time one had the feeling that the world is like draws all life out from where this is life left, and including the viewer. Later I attributed this to the effect of a dead valley, but quite indirectly.
Now 2017. In the presence of computer graphics, which can not yet boast realism as well as other principles of creating big budget films did “blade Runner 2049” become a worthy successor to the original? Surprising to me, but Yes a new “Running” like a grown independent child against the background of its parent. It is specific, but still they are one of kind, that with nothing to confuse.
Dark neo-Noir in the style of cyberpunk and the cyberpunk reference that was created in the original film. The philosophy of the significance of life, the right to feelings and to be to someone necessary topics in no way inferior to the depth of the issue raised by the original. The story that develops the character Kay (Ryan Gosling), who is completely independent but beautifully continues the story of Rick Deckard (Harrison Ford), bringing her to a certain point, though not the final one. Gentlemen, we are talking about an ideal sequel.
And for many it will be a major problem. “Blade runner 2049”, like its predecessor, is a classic of neo-Noir, who is a detective, not a fighter. Action beautifully, but slowly and gradually. Slowly not just. Danny Villeneuve, the Director of the sequel, sharpens each your frame of mind on the aspects of the world, visual narrative and progression of the story. But what a pity that many simply are not taught to read the language of cinema, and according to this it will be like reading the neon signs in Japanese it’s beautiful, but damn is unclear. This is not a negative aspect of the film. Rather, I would like to warn still unaware of what it expects of the viewer, what happens next is not what he used to see.
To see a rather strange history as a Replicant Kay (the fact that he is a Replicant, it becomes clear even from the trailer, this is not a spoiler), who believes that it may be more humane than conceived by his Creator. The story is framed by the endlessly depressing decline of cyberpunk machine, here here aderrasi over the human race. Powerful, atmospheric, but the same lifeless sound that periodically forces you to press the chair from the tension and dissonance. And just lots of beautiful visual solutions, and powerful language for which there is a backbone of philosophy and even part of the story. Just think the essence of the unexpected turn in the film by anyone not pronounced verbally. We understand what happened just looking at the hero. Not beauty it?
Beauty is not for every viewer. Not so scary if you don’t take in and will not understand the film each is good in its. But one thing I can say for sure is to go to a movie, definitely worth it, because it’s comparable to going to the art gallery. A kind of filling the soul and intellect culture, it is never harmful or meaningless.
10 out of 10
Because it is the best science fiction in recent years.