What made Blade Runner 2049 worthwhile were the visuals and spotting the Atari logo, but it seemed more concerned with replicating the first film than telling something fresh. Otherwise, it’s pretty bad. The musical score doesn't measure up to Vangelis’ original work. The plot felt like studio-driven fan service, riddled with inconsistencies. It throws in biblical allusions and elements from Ray Bradbury’s _Fahrenheit 451_—which also happens to be set in 2049—and George Orwell’s _1984_, seemingly to appear smart, but it falls flat and feels clumsy. The movie largely disregards Phillip K. Dick's _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep_; the original film did too, though, at least that one was engaging. This installment doesn't offer anything new or genuinely innovative. The editing is a mess; scenes are needlessly extended in an unsuccessful attempt to seem profound or imitate ‘Blade Runner’ because there's no narrative justification for it. It has qualities reminiscent of a Zack Snyder film. The performances were uninspired and stiff. Harrison Ford seemed disinterested. Ultimately, the movie lacks depth and misses its mark. A better approach would be to actually adapt _Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep_ properly. I can’t grasp why so many people consider this superficial production to be intelligent or intellectually stimulating.

Source on TMDB