Like me, however, he has been gushing in his praise of Denis Villeneuve’s sequel – not only does it not ruin Ridley Scott’s original, but it expands, enhances and, occasionally, surpasses it. It’s jaw-on-the-floor good. One thing among many that I loved about it was the slow-burning pace at which the story unfolds, and something that Kermode mentioned resonated with me. He mentioned an experiment film students do early on in their studies, which involves them watching an older film and clapping every time there’s a cut. Then carrying out the same exercise with a modern picture and noting just how much quicker the claps come. Blade Runner 2049 is more like one of the older films; slow, detailed, and long takes, never rushing to get where it needs to go.
It isn’t necessarily that one style is always better – Steven Soderbergh, Paul Thomas Anderson and Paul Greengrass are examples of how making quick cuts can often make a strong impact – but the modern style too often becomes a dizzying Michael Bay frame fuckathon. There is no shortage of modern visual effects techniques used in making Blade Runner 2049, and they are always used to eye-meltingly brilliant effect, but it remembers that production and visuals aren’t the whole thing, and the deliberate pace and time taken to explore themes of belonging, love and what exactly it means to be human (themes raised by the original in addition to its incredible and massively influential production design) make this just about a perfect combination of modern technology in service to a more old-fashioned narrative pace.
One can only hope others learn from it…
