The ultimate debate that Yea Forums has never been able to answer

They are too different

Didn't like it, because it felt like it was doing two stories at once, once the goose died, what was the point, I thought the baton would have gone to Mahershala Ali, but that did not happen and his character felt underutilized, it seemed like it had some nice camera work going on but could not decide on how to edit the story, reminded me of Crash for some reason I can't explain.

I haven't seen either, but I'll go with BR2049 because the girl is cute

This is objectively the best goose movie

Attached: 920x920[1].jpg (920x539, 67K)

Blade Runner is okay, but Drive will go down in history as a masterpiece of the 21st century

Both are masterpieces but BR2049 should not be as good as it is in this current era of Hollywood.

Drive

Both are complete shit.

Both of them are good at best. The people who claim that these film are masterpieces are autists or people who don't watch many films beyond typical Hollywood schlock.

Plebs not allowed in this thread

Drive has better music and more interesting characters, BR2049 has better visuals

And a better story and more depth.

Love Drive but there's a clear difference disparity in production and expertise here.

>these two movies have anything in common to debate

That’s the first part of the autistic Goose trilogy in my mind.

>trilogy
Autistic Goose is an entire saga.
Lars and the Real Girl
Drive
Only God Forgives
Blade Runner 2049
First Man

And let's not forget the non-autistic but still our guy Goose spin-offs.
Blue Valentine
The Place Beyond the Pines
The Ides of March
Nice Guys
La La Land

Where does crazy stupid Love fit into all this?

Shitty post-love actually ensamble rom-com because Goose has to pay the bills.

kino recognize kino

Attached: the goose in love wall lean.jpg (960x800, 298K)

The great debate...

Attached: movies.jpg (800x600, 200K)

Both films are extremely good and if you think either of them is bad you're a certified mental midget pleb. Fact.

BR has a better atmosphere and soundtrack.
2049 has a better storyline and acting.

If they are extremely good why where they both box office bombs? Art is created to make money, if it doesn't how can it be good?

@119495532
low effort bait 2/10

What really unfortunately holds BR2049 back for me a little are the bad antagonists. I do not like Jared Leto as an actor, and I did not like his character either, the woman replicant was better than him but still a far, faar fucking cry from Roy Batty.

other than that I think BR2049 is a much better film. The original Blade Runner is a movie I want to love, but I just can't, it looks really good and has fantastic music, but I don't connect with any of the characters except Roy Batty, and that's honestly not because he's written super well, it's because of his performance and that final monologue.

It's not bait. Since the dawn of time artists created art for rich patrons in exchange for not having to plough the earth as peasants. Art has always lived in a symbiotical relationship with those who had excess of wealth. Art is a means for the artist to feed himself without hard work, if it doesn't do that it's a failure. What's good art and what is bad art is decided by those who spend money on it.

Well, Leto is more of a side character and Luv is the main antagonist. I think she’s great character, especially because she mirrors K. They both feel a longing to be human, but in her case it fosters hatred and anger, while for K it inspires sadness and hope.

@119495867
a tiny bit more effort, 4/10

>liking BR 2049 and Drive
>not pleb
Hahaa, watch more films kid.

Only Gooded part is good

Watch Half Nelson for crackhead goose

Artists were basically allowed to live in the estates of rich people because the rich didnt want them to work, they thought it was good enough for them just to produce art

You ever heard of Impressionism, my dude?

based

BR2049 hands down

I love dying in poverty too brah. If art doesn't sustain the lifestyle of the artist it's bad art. Simple as.

I guess Starry Night is trash then

geniune question...

why do people like either of these movies?

i've seen both and they're both awful. like the lowest iq "just turn your brain off" core

i don't get it.

is it the colors you like?

Kafka was a bad artist?

LONDON
O
N
D
O
N

2049 EASY

Attached: 1565382847977.png (502x527, 155K)

It is from the objective and logical standpoint. Just because a lot of people subjectively like the Starry Night long after he died doesn't make the life of Van Gogh any less miserable.
You're judging it from the perspective of the viewer, you look at it and it makes you feel things, therefore you think it's good art. From the perspective of the artist it is a failure.

Death of the author my dear mental midget pea brain.
Kubrick maybe died thinking 2001 is the worst film he ever made, that doesn't suddenly not make it one of the most praised films of all time.

The Goose is a NEET trapped in a Chad’s body. he is /ourguy/

Praise doesn't make art good or bad, unless it's followed by financial compensation to the artist while they're living. Art is created so that the artist might prosper.
The 19th/20th century mentality of everything is art or the creation of art for art's sake is why we have so many un or underemployed humanities majors. You're setting people up for failure. Art is just another industry like oil, electronics or steel. If you don't make money you're a failed business. Nobody praises a company for having losses, why are you so quick to praise artist that can't make a buck?

>2049 has a better storyline and acting.
only if you directly compare Deckard to K but not if you take into account all the other characters from the original, who all have satisfying arcs and almost poetic conclusions. I think Roy Batty and Rachael both manage to be much more compelling than K.

Attached: rutger hauer.jpg (1920x800, 64K)

t. Shlomo Shekelstein

What if I'm a highly praised AND highly paid artist and I make the best film of my life and literally die on the day of it's release never seeing a single penny from it?

What's Goose doing these days? He doesn't have any new projects announced and it's already been a year since First Man came out. Did he retire?

>Art is created to make money

Attached: 1376602956082.jpg (409x409, 36K)

this is a really nice way of putting it user

Attached: t4Hue.gif (245x190, 778K)

For you it's completely irrelevant, since you're dead. For others it's completely subjective on a case by case basis. Just because someone likes or dislikes a piece of art doesn't make it good or bad. It makes it liked or disliked by them, and that's ok.

Film criticism is also completely subjective that and that's what the aggregate websites will never understand. Anyone who knows anything about art will seek to find critics that have similar tastes as them, as that's the only way to more or less gauge if you will like or dislike a given piece of art.

Financial success is the only objective measure of success for an artist. All the awards and accolades are just a glorified popularity contest with no financial stakes behind the votes, making them meaningless.

Drive, easily

why the comparison? just because they have ryan gosling and (sort of) similar aesthetic?

Read the thread before responding brainlet. I've explained this over and over again.

Both are also the most obsessed over and memed movies on this board. Drive in the past, BR49 in the present. The only movie that ever reached those two was TDKR with baneposting, but even that died. Goose is forver.

They’re top Yea Forums cult films

shoo shoo Goldstein

One has Leto hamming it up, the other doesn’t, so makes my choice easy. Fuck 2049

Drive for sure

Wanting to be productive and successful is being a kike now? With that mentality I can see why the west is falling apart.

Back to truefilm faggot

honestly neither of those are great movies.

The thing that REALLY sets Blade Runner apart from other movies, sadly including the sequel, is the amazing, unparalleled soundtrack.
2049's soundtrack is honestly terrible, and the only thing that they really fucked up with. Denis said he wanted "brutalist" aspects in the soundtrack which apparently just means "DUDE SCRAPING METAL AND LOUD TUBA" with the occasional decent track. Actually, the only really good tracks are ruined.
>Mesa: first half is beautiful; second half is scraping metal
>Sea Wall: very long and repetitive in the middle
>Flight to LAPD: very short, but still the best track since it doesn't overstay its welcome or involve scraping metal sounds
Name one movie with a better soundtrack than Blade Runner.

Go watch Spielberg

>dude a soundtrack can only be subtle and in the background lmao
also there is not a single tuba in the entire soundtrack you dummy dum

>DUDE
>SCRAPING
>METAL
Also, what the fuck are you talking about? BR's soundtrack isn't subtle at all. It takes front and center in a shitton of scenes.

Is there anything in 2049 that’s as memorable as the elevator scene in Drive

>Name one movie with a better soundtrack than Blade Runner
youtube.com/watch?v=WYeDsa4Tw0c
youtube.com/watch?v=8a-HfNE3EIo

why?

>

Attached: GoodJoe.jpg (1920x789, 154K)

Memory Facility of course

Attached: AAAAAA.jpg (970x545, 50K)

Hans Zimmer is a terrible composer, the most overrated hack in hollywood. The only good track on the soundtrack is "Someone Lived This", feels like the only fucking track on the entire soundtrack with restraint.

Both soundtracks are based on and made on the same exact Yamaha CS-80 analog synth my dear mental midget friend. The "le scraping metal" is not metal, but a bullroarer.

Why the FUCK wasn't Vangelis brought on for 2049?

INTERLINKED

Fuck off bourgeois scum, you are a product of your horrible uprising in the renaissance

youtube.com/watch?v=WcLzUZSGT6Q
(2:15)
>YESS HANS ZIMMER FEED US YOUR SHITTY SCRAPING METAL MUSIC I REMEMBER THE DARK KNIGHT I LOVE THE JOKER YESSSS!!!!!

Attached: soy.png (680x760, 48K)

Because Vangelis is now a 76 year old fuck who didn’t make anything relevant in a decade or two, besides his Rosetta album that just sounds like Vangelis didn’t do anything new since the 80s.
At best he would make a forgettable soundtrack that tries to hard to be like the original just like Williams did that for TFA.

And the point of the new one is not to recreate the original soundtrack but to make something entirely standalone that only expands on the original.

>And the point of the new one is not to recreate the original soundtrack but to make something entirely standalone that only expands on the original.
>Hans Zimmer re-uses TDK's score for the fiftieth time

The Tribune of the Plebs has the floor

>tribune
Retard

>he's still posting

Attached: sol6jvxuexc31.jpg (576x768, 108K)

Drive received a 15 minute standing ovation at Cannes.

pls respond

R E N T F R E E