Rutger Hauer talks about why he dislikes Blade Runner 2049

Most critics have praised Blade Runner 2049 for being a marvelous movie and a worthy successor to Blade Runner. However, Rutger Hauer thinks otherwise.

More from Movies

• The story of a French emperor: Here’s where Napoleon will stream after theaters
• The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes honors its origins and far surpasses them
• Thanksgiving movie death toll: Why [SPOILER] is still alive
• No, Thanksgiving is not streaming yet (But here’s where it’ll land)
• Trolls Band Together soundtrack guide: Which songs play in the movie?

When Blade Runner 2049 hit theaters, its box-office numbers didn’t reflect the number of people who were hyping about it on the internet and the film was considered a financial flop. Nevertheless, Denis Villeneuve’s sci-fi epic was hailed by critics as one of the best sequels in existence and it eventually garnered more attention as fans began to analyze its philosophical aspects and Roger Deakins’ visual mastery. However, despite being nominated for 5 Oscars and bagging a plethora of other awards, it looks like Rutger Hauer isn’t impressed with it.

Before the movie’s October release, Hauer had voiced his concerns about Blade Runner 2049 to Digital Spy, and how he felt it was unnecessary to even make the sequel. After watching the movie, the actor recently sat down with The Hollywood Reporter and reiterated his thoughts on Blade Runner 2049 and why it felt emotionally vapid.

"“I sniff and scratch at it. It looks great but I struggle to see what that film was necessary. I just think if something is so beautiful, you should just leave it alone and make another film. Don’t lean with one elbow on the success of that was earned over 30 years in the underground.”“In many ways, Blade Runner wasn’t about the Replicants, it was about what does it mean to be human? It’s like E.T.. But I’m not certain what the question was in the second Blade Runner. It’s not a character-driven movie and there’s no humor, there’s no love, there’s no soul. You can see the homage to the original. But that’s not enough to me. I knew that wasn’t going to work. But I think it’s not important what I think.”"

Hauer had played Blade Runner‘s quintessential antagonist, Roy Batty and his “Tears in the Rain” speech still remains to be one of the most heart-wrenching moments in cinematic history. In addition to that, it was Hauer’s chilling performance that elevated the original’s tense atmosphere and provided a worthy adversary to Harrison Ford’s Deckard. However, while Hauer has appropriately praised Blade Runner 2049‘s visuals, he seems to have barely scratched the surface of Hampton Fancher’s layered story-telling. And since an opinion can’t be deemed incorrect due to the subjective nature of films, I’ve to respectfully disagree with Hauer.

What is wrong with Rutger Hauer’s statements about Blade Runner 2049?

Hauer began his criticism of Blade Runner 2049 by questioning the necessity of its very existence. However, the answer to that lies in the original itself. Blade Runner follows Deckard and Batty through the damp streets of a post-modern L.A. to show two different sides of morality. In doing so, it merely plants the idea of what it means to be human and who should define the rights of a Replicant. Considering how fans have pondered over these deep questions, and ones that Blade Runner itself never solved, it was necessary to present them with an answer they deserved. And what better way was there to flesh out these aspects other than a sequel?

Hauer followed that up by objecting to the lack of an over-arching theme in Blade Runner 2049 due to its focus on Replicants. However, what he failed to understand is that by switching the perspective from someone who may or may not be human (Deckard) to a Replicant (Officer K), Villeneuve managed to delve deeper into the definition of being human. We got to witness the atrocious repercussions of Wallace’s reign (a human) and how Replicants are forced into different forms of slavery. In addition to that, by showing the stark contrast between how Humans and Replicants view organic life in this dystopic world, the film not only explored the boundaries of humanity, but also answered how Replicants are “more human than humans”.

Lastly, Hauer’s statement about the lack of love is quite confusing because Blade Runner 2049 showcases so many forms of relationships. It illustrates K’s love for a normal lifestyle through his relationship with the A.I. Joi. The movie also shows Lt. Joshi’s motherly affection for K and further blurs the line between Humans and Replicants. By introducing Luv, Villeneuve demonstrates a form of religious love that she possesses for Wallace and the lengths she’s ready to go for him. And finally, by telling the story primarily through the eyes of Replicants, Blade Runner 2049 displays their love for life – something that Humans have forgotten all about – and how it drives them to overcome such extraordinary odds.

Next: Dear Black Panther haters, let people enjoy things

Although Blade Runner and Blade Runner 2049 are both exceptional movies, it should be noted that while it took multiple edits for the original to find its true identity, Villeneuve did it in his first attempt. While the original had defined sci-fi during its time, given the enormous amounts of praise it’s getting, it’s likely that Blade Runner 2049 will emulate that effect in the 21st century. That’s why instead of rushing to compare one with the other, fans of the original and the sequel should take some time to contemplate and enjoy the opportunity to analyse such deep concepts that the films are providing.

What are your thoughts on Rutger Hauer’s comments about Blade Runner 2049? Let me know in the comments.