Was another installment truly necessary? The visuals were stunning. I mean, it appeared beautiful—even though one scene triggered a queasy sensation in me, even that felt visually striking. And I suspect that was more about the lighting than anything to do with the set design or special effects. You really notice the lighting; it’s something you recall like the way people remember the ambiance of an Edward Hopper painting. But did it require a sequel? The performances were excellent, genuinely so. There wasn't a discernible fault in how the film appeared, how it was guided, or how the actors performed. It was enjoyable... …yet it also felt somewhat hollow. So, did it need another chapter? The questions raised were resolved, but perhaps those inquiries would have been better left unresolved. Those small enigmas sparked discussion and contributed to what made the initial film so... widely discussed, even if it faced criticism at first. Why was it necessary to provide answers to those questions? They functioned best as intriguing puzzles for contemplation. The outcome is that empty sensation you experience when a diverting puzzle is finally completed. There’s that moment of satisfaction… and then the slight disappointment realizing the mystery has concluded, and you can proceed. From this point forward, all inquiries will have definitive answers, and while it doesn't detract from this film itself, it diminishes the impact of the original. Now that everything is known, the first *Blade Runner* won’t evoke the same feeling upon viewing.

Source on TMDB