Critics’ reviews

Blade Runner 2049 (2017)

14 reviews from 14 publications. Critics’ score 83: 10 positive, 1 mixed, 0 negative.

Back to our review of Blade Runner 2049

83
Positive
10
Mixed
1
Negative
0

Most critics welcome Blade Runner 2049 as a sequel that respects the original while finding enough of its own to justify the return. Praise centres on Denis Villeneuve’s patient direction, Roger Deakins’s cinematography and the production design, which give its damaged future a persuasive scale and atmosphere. The reviews also value its questions about memory, identity and humanity, explored through images as much as dialogue. Ryan Gosling’s restraint and Harrison Ford’s performance draw particular approval.

The main reservation is length: several critics find stretches indulgent, even when they admire what is on screen. There are smaller doubts about the screenplay and emotional engagement, but little disagreement over the visual craft. The spread runs from enthusiastic endorsement to qualified approval, with pacing accounting for much of the difference. Deadline is notably cooler, praising Ford and the technical work but finding the film too slow and occasionally confusing.

The Guardian
29 September 2017 · ★★★★★ · Peter Bradshaw
100

The critic calls the film a triumph and a stunning enlargement of the original, praising its visually staggering scale and hallucinatory quality that leaves viewers hyperventilating.

Read the full review →
Total Film
29 September 2017 · ★★★★★ · Jordan Farley
100

An exquisitely crafted sequel that stands shoulder to shoulder with the original masterpiece. Villeneuve proves a worthy successor to Ridley Scott through masterful direction, stunning visuals, and a thematically deep neo-noir story focused on identity and humanity.

Read the full review →
Screen Daily
29 September 2017
85*

A ravishing visual colossus that more than lives up to its predecessor’s legacy as a groundbreaking mixture of sound, images and mood. Villeneuve has crafted an enrapturing sci-fi dystopia with themes vividly realised through arresting images and a superbly muted Gosling performance, though the screenplay sometimes struggles to keep pace.

Read the full review →
Radio Times
3 October 2017 · ★★★★ · Andrew Collins
80

A jaw-dropping, respectful and artistic as well as philosophical triumph with stunning production design, precise direction and glorious visuals across ravaged California and Nevada. It is a thoughtful, slow and quiet epic of scale and intellect that is better than anybody could have expected.

Read the full review →
Sight and Sound
16 October 2017 · Tim Hayes
80*

The film is far above average with striking visual ambitions recreating and expanding the original's world, including ruined Las Vegas and a swollen Pacific. It explores perennial questions of memory, identity and slavery through ambiguous, image-driven storytelling that interrogates rather than prescribes.

Read the full review →
Time Out
28 September 2017 · ★★★★ · Joshua Rothkopf
80

Villeneuve pulls off the dare of the decade with a colossal retro-futuristic triumph that is the thinking-person’s sci-fi event of the year. It impresses with neon street life, existential depth, a complex hologram relationship and soulful direction that cherishes the hybrid nature of the new Blade Runner.

Read the full review →
The Hollywood Reporter
29 September 2017 · Todd McCarthy
70*

Villeneuve delivers a stylish, immersive sequel that captures the original's narcotic mood and visual splendor, with standout performances from Ryan Gosling and especially Harrison Ford; however, it suffers from excessive length and directorial indulgence.

Read the full review →
Empire
2 October 2017 · Dan Jolin

Villeneuve delivers a visually stunning, thematically rich sequel that matches the original in ambition and execution. The film excels in its world-building, cinematography, and performances from Gosling and Ford, though it has minor issues with pacing and one cameo.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
5 October 2017 · Kenneth Turan

The film is remarkably good, with Villeneuve and his team putting viewers in another world of its own devising. The critic singles out the knockout visuals, especially the work of production designer Dennis Gassner and cinematographer Roger Deakins, for praise while noting some hiccups with length and emotional engagement.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
2 October 2017 · A.O. Scott

Villeneuve mostly succeeds in honoring the original while slipping free of its shadow. The critic praises the director as a masterly visual tactician and shrewd storyteller from the opening shots onward.

Read the full review →
Den of Geek
29 September 2017 · ★★★★★ · Ryan Lambie
100

The critic calls the film a masterpiece that complements the original while standing as a spectacular story on its own. They single out its completely immersive world and Villeneuve's deliberate, atmospheric direction for praise.

Read the full review →
The Wrap
29 September 2017
80*

The critic calls the film a rare successful sequel that enriches the original's themes of reality versus artificiality without letting plot overwhelm ideas, highlighting masterful cinematography by Roger Deakins while noting it could lose some moody stretches for tighter pacing.

Read the full review →
/Film
3 October 2017 · 7.5/10 · Josh Spiegel
75

The critic praises the film's visual achievements, particularly the cinematography by Roger Deakins and production design, and strong performances from Ryan Gosling and Harrison Ford, but criticizes its overly long runtime which makes it feel indulgent and plodding at times.

Read the full review →
Deadline
2 October 2017 · Pete Hammond
60*

The critic praises Harrison Ford's return as Deckard and the film's technical achievements in visuals and design but finds the 2-hour-44-minute runtime overly long and the pacing too slow and occasionally confusing.

Read the full review →

Ordered by the weight we give each publication, then by score. Scores are normalised to 100; * means inferred from an unrated review. Summaries are ours, not quotations; follow the links for the reviews themselves. How we rate