Why is the original still better?

...

the narration

because whenever you appeal to the masses of normies you sacrifice substance and heart

The story wasn't so over the top.
> 4 replicants , hunt them down, kill them, the end.

Ridley >>> French Leaf guy

It's not better in all departments, for example the romantic subplot was here ten times as genuinely emotionally investing and better executed in general than the absolutely flat romance with non existent we got in the original.

non existent chemistry *

it isn't

you haven't seen it

because 2049 is too big. same with all the alien sequels. the appeal of the originals is that you got a little snapshot into a well-built existing world and not told some grand narrative with star wars tier nonsense family tree shit

Looks like Denis tried to make it a snapshot and that's why we didn't get to see the Nexus revolution or what happened to Wallace. But it just feels like we don't get a complete story.

yeah I agree, it was a weird choice, like it was halfway between the two approaches. probably sequel bait

Villeneuve has said multiple times that he made the film exactly like he wants with zero obligations or thoughts about any sequels whatsoever.

oh ok guess that settles it. directors usually say otherwise don't they?

It was not

Rutger Hauer

Yes user, they actually do. Usually the studio announces the preproduction of the sequels literally after the first opening week

>Blade Runner 2049
>over the top

>Usually the studio announces the preproduction of the sequels literally after the first opening week
it's been out for less than a week and is flopping. and I probably don't need to point out that studio =/= director but I will especially for you x

blade runner was supposed to be a si fi futuristic gumshoe story like how they did it in old hollywood then all these nerds blew it up into this whole argument of whos a robot and whos human

Villeneuve explicity said there were zero thoughts about sequels in multiple interviews that were done even before the film was released at all

So it is badly written on purpose?

yeah you said that, I'm not taking it at face value

Soundtrack.

By original, are talking about Children of Men, X-Men: The Last Stand or Her?

>better executed in general than the absolutely flat romance with non existent we got in the original.
To be fair, it wouldn't have made much sense to portray the opposite since replicants are emotionally immature.
He brought something to it 2049 lacked.

Tears in rain monologue.

>He brought something to it 2049 lacked
Yeah, humanity.

Rutger Hauer

Too much pointless dialogue in the second. The non-narrated cuts of the original are amazing precisely because they don't hold your hand and explain exactly whats going on.
You really got the sense that his character was emotionally stunted from a lack of genuine human experiences. It was well done. 2049 didn't capitalize on K's pure altruism the way the original capitalized on his 'humanity'. The whole 'child will run the revolution' bullshit subtracted from it heavily.

Deckard was monster, and far less human than the replicants he's tasked with 'retiring.' While they desperately rage against their unfairly limited lifespans Deckard is shooting them in the back and forcing himself upon Rachel. Rutger's character should've been the main character.

>since replicants are emotionally immature.
Only the ones lacking memories as explicitly stated in the movie.