Quoted from NicoVolta:

I like slow, cerebral, contemplative films. Huge fan of the original. I also like fast shiny action thrillers.
I didn't like 2049... sorry. In fact I didn't even finish it. Took a bathroom break at 2:10 and decided to remain in the lobby and browse Facebook instead. Not to make a statement or whatever, just because it was really that boring. Wasn't angry, wasn't upset... just plain bored.
Visually, the film is elegant and the soundtrack reminiscent of the groundbreaking original. But 2049 is not groundbreaking. It won't be discussed in film school over the following decades like 2001, Blade Runner, Koyaanisqatsi, etc, because it does not belong among them. Rather, once the luster wears off, we will collectively realize several things at once:
1) Just because 2049 was the kind of slow, cerebral(-ish, but not very) sci-fi film that hasn't been made in a while doesn't mean it deserves to be the flag-bearer for all others of this type. Yes, we need more. No, not like this one.
2) The scriptwriting is weak. We are supposed to buy into the idea that replicant babies have some sort of enormous gravity that will supposedly "end everything"... period. That's it. It assumes a ridiculous amount of interest from a sophisticated audience without further exposition... which we never get... and are thus rarely invested in the outcome unless we are...
3) ...fanboys of the original. Fanboys who also happen to prefer the theatrical release where Rachel lives beyond her four-year lifespan with the "fake happy ending" because 2049 explores "what is love?" rather than "what is human?"... and to a far weaker extent.
4) Numerous opportunities for engaging our curiosity (the buried box, the sock, whatever, who cares), character building, and pushing our boundaries are either wasted on extended moments of silence which (albeit beautiful) do little for the narrative OR conversely throws opportunity for nuance under the bus of spectacle (uterus stabbing, flying rocks, gratuitous comic-book moments and dialogue). Pseudo-profundity at its best.
5) The irony of defensive reviewers telling us "you must like Thor 2 and have no attention span if you hated 2049" haven't noticed that, ironically, their own frame of reference has been hijacked by visual stimulation. A sophisticated, thought-provoking plot isn't here. Half a movie at best.
6) 2049 apes everything good from the original (a bit too closely) and adds almost nothing substantial to it. Nothing I cared about for the last 30 years, anyway.
7) At times it's really kind of "Bro Runner" with K and Deckard being boys, fightin' with Elvis, drankin' the whiskeys, doin' the sexbot/hot girl thing. Sexism seems so 80's here... I guess some things never change in post-apocalyptic-land?
8.) 2049 is stuck in the uncanny valley between art flick, cerebral thriller, and action film... and doesn't accomplish any at the fullest potential. Nor does it bother explaining itself... which of course we will be told is intentional because "it's supposed to be mysterious and thought-provoking for intelligent people like me!"
Fine... but I'm calling bulls**t. I shouldn't have to do the work of the director to fill in the blanks of a weak script... that's fanboy work. It's like firing a shotgun stuffed with pretty confetti and scraps of an incomplete story into the screen, crossing your fingers, and hoping the resulting mess is just so fascinating and complicated and "stuff" that it'll be material for film snobs for decades! BTW, sure hope we financially break even!
Just you watch. We've talked about Blade Runner for decades, and will continue to. What are people talking about after 2049? Generally only one thing, "stupid people don't like this masterpiece". Well then... time will tell what incredible spirited discussions and inspired artwork will come of it! I can't wait! The topics! The possibilities!
Of course, far more likely, we'll get something like: "oh yeah that was one of those slick post-2000 movie reboots they did a bunch of those back then... Gosling was in it and Harrison Ford and that hot VR chick and it got all weird and was awesome... can't remember much but need to see it again!"
Hmmm. Well, I guess the standard for "masterpiece" is... a little bit different today. A trifle.
But hey, what do I know? I liked the sci-fi flick Passengers and Tomato rated it 30%. Was bored with The Force Awakens and Tomato rated it 93%.
Let's end on a positive alternative: The Mill and the Cross. It's got Rutger Hauer in it! I'll just imagine a Replicant went back in time to impersonate Bruegel. Maybe that's where I'm stuck anyway. *shrug* carry on, nothing to see here, just one person's opinion...