The one disappointment of Blade Runner 2049 [spoilers]

Roger Deakins' cinematography is utterly worthy of the sublime lighting and camera-work of the 1982 original, and visually Blade Runner 2049 is a gorgeous work of art. But the beating heart of Ridley Scott's classic was its original score by Vangelis, which blended dark, pulsing synths with the smoky-bar jazz of noir to create a soundscape which, like the film's characters, seemed like an artificial creature with vestiges of humanity pulsing through it, surfacing at the most poignant moments.

2049's soundtrack certainly manages to replicate the sound of Vangelis' synths, but it completely abandons all semblance of melody in favour of percussive, distorted pulsing, which sounds impressive and suitably intense during some scenes, but utterly falls flat in the scenes which are meant to be putting the viewer in touch with the 'human' side of the story.

Other than in the occasional bit of diegetic sound (i.e. Elvis) the use of acoustic instruments is completely gone. I feel this is such a missed opportunity. The scene in the original film where Rachael has to come to terms with her childhood memories being false is accompanied by the most haunting piano solo, a piece Vangelis called 'Memories of Green'. The whole piece is the perfect melancholy representation of a machine trying to convince itself it is still human. It's a masterpiece, and it's certainly that - and not Sean Young's unremarkable acting - that makes this scene so heart-wrenching.

But take the equivalent scene from 2049: Office K learns (as a sort of inverse of Rachael) that a memory he believed to be false is actually true (though of course he later finds out he's wrong about that). It's meant to be an emotional scene, and the two actors and camera-work do a great job of conveying this. But what is the music doing? Well, not much. It's not really there until K steps outside and we're treated to a few loud "BWAAAARRRRRRR"s in the same vein as the rest of the soundtrack. How much more sensitive and involving could it have been with a more melodic - a more human - approach to its scoring?

Or, to take another example, 2049's lovemaking scene. In the original, the 'love scene' is scored with a rasping, yearning sax solo which conveys all the primal lust and violence and desire of the scene. Why did 2049 not feel fit to create some equivalent? I mean, I'm aware that no-one can just be Vangelis, but Hans Zimmer is perfectly capable of writing powerful, moving and melodic music (see: Interstellar, Gladiator, The Lion King).

But this brings me to the only aspect of 2049 that I felt was just utterly awful: the decision to do a complete copy & paste of the 'tears in rain' piece from the original and plonk it into the final scene of the new movie. I appreciate that the scene has parallels to the 'tears in rain' scene: K, after all, is sort of the Roy Batty figure in this film (even if he isn't its villain) and his act of reuniting Deckard with his daughter marks the second time a replicant has done Deckard a favour after learning 'what it is to be human'. But as soon as that piece kicked in, I was no longer watching 2049. Well, physically I was, but mentally I was back with the original film. It was so distracting: especially as it was the only instance of re-using music from the original in the film (other than the aesthetic style and tone of the synths). The original score was in such perfect synchronicity with the action on-screen: the three notes of the melody even echoed the rhythm of Rutger Hauer saying "tears... in rain". To lift this wholesale felt utterly lazy. It felt cheap. It spoilt what was otherwise a solid and involving ending.

Agree? Disagree?

For the record, if you aren't aware, Vangelis actually composed a sequel album to Blade Runner: music inspired by the movie but not used in it (for example). Imagine if this album hadn't been released and had been saved up to be the soundtrack for 2049. That would be been phenomenal.