You clearly know you are wrong about this, so I won't labour the point: you are wrong about this.

That's all there is to say on the matter really: you are wrong about this.

Because, you are … wrong about it, that is.

But you clearly know that and, so, there’s no point labouring the point that you are wrong about this and all that really need be done is to point out that you are wrong about it and leave it at that.

So, that’s what I’ll do: you are wrong about this.

I don’t feel passionately about it; it’s good in its own way and a very fitting sequel, but it’s not the original — and that was going to be tough, if not impossible, to even match, let alone surpass.

But you are wrong about it: it is good and a surprisingly fitting sequel in which, just as in the original, the humanity of the non-humans (up to and, most especially, including Joi) is juxtaposed with the inhumanity of the humans — which is precisely the point of the original (all the rest was just wallpaper/decoration/trappings).

Really, the original went on too long: it shouldn’t have even gone as far as the camera panning to the little origami figure, showing that he’d been, but ended after Gaff’s observation “But, then, again, who does?” … and fin, leaving us to ponder the tale rather than have to sit through a load of irrelevant, and vomit-inducingly saccharine, mawkish nonsense because US audiences don’t like not being left with a feewing of “Awwwwwww…” at the end of their popcorn and corn syrup — the tastes don’t blend with even ambiguity, let alone happily never after, and they stamp their infantilised, little feet when obliged to educate their palette.

So, I was inclined to be anticipatorally antipathetic … it really was, as far as I was concerned, only a question of how disappointed/underwhelmed I would be … but, much to my surprise, far from being so, I walked away from it with a sense of it being a surprisingly fitting sequel — different but in keeping with the original in many ways … most especially where it counted (exploring the core issue of the difference between ‘human’ and ‘humane’).

Did it break new ground?

No.

Thankfully, it didn’t try to.

Instead, the original story and all it was about having already been told, it was what any sequel to Bladerunner was always going to have to be: just that … a sequel — an update on ‘whatever happened to?’

So, you are wrong about this.

And that’s all there really is to say about it, so, I won’t labour the point but, instead, simply observe that you are … wrong about it … and leave it at that: you are wrong about this.

There, I said it 😜