The sequel came out 35 years after the original, but I've got to say, the visual continuity of the films is pretty amazing. When I was reviewing Blade Runner (1982), I wondered about the "emptiness" and "loneliness" of Los Angeles. I was curious about the darkness and the perpetual rain. The sequel doesn't necessarily go into much more detail, but we get to see brief glimpses of life outside the city center. We are also told about the "blackout," which is a rather vague but ominous event. And, of course, there is the outer planet colonies, which may indicator that the rich people have gotten the hell away from a destroyed Earth. The sequel makes it a little bit clearer: All forms of life, from trees to animals, have become extinct. Somehow humans survive. Los Angeles, or maybe "Lost Angeles," is a community that feels diverse, but maybe it's a diversity of survivors. Maybe they ended up stuck in Los Angeles during the blackout and the...
Los Angeles in 2019 is oddly empty. Yes, the market areas are full of people, but where do the real people live? The big company that makes the Replicants, it only has the owner and J.F.? Deckard (Harrison Ford) is a retired Blade Runner. He's asked to do one more job, I guess, and he agrees, I guess. Why? What's in it for him, or does he just fall into doing it? The Rogue Replicants are dangerous, which might be why Deckard is okay hunting them down. But Rachael (Sean Young) isn't? What does he feel about her, other than the attraction that a man would feel for a woman? This is where the "object" point of view doesn't help, because it would be nice to know why Deckard becomes so invested in, well, a robot. She's not human, but she's enough for Deckard. This, again, makes me wonder where all the humans are. J.F. (William Sanderson) has to make friends just to have friends, and we never see Deckard interact with anyone but marketplace vendors and the ...