Uploaded by yerisan710 | Size 4.21 GB | Health [152/39] | Added 20/08/23 03:49 |
Uploaded by webmaster32 | Size 97.85 GB | Health [61/25] | Added 07/06/24 17:41 |
Uploaded by chesley96 | Size 37.74 GB | Health [31/13] | Added 21/03/24 09:14 |
Uploaded by PortalGoods | Size 2.64 GB | Health [25/13] | Added 22/02/24 20:08 |
Christopher Nolan's biggest talent is making 'Dumb' people feel smart through storytelling. Not bashing cause there's not many that can do that.. But its not like you get an epiphany months after either Just like Stephen King can create a good horror story about.. anything, everything(BOOKS,NOT MOVIES), but you dont get car or sand phobia from reading it |
Steller upload, highly rated, one of McConaughey's best, an he has some great ones. An the best part is the high bitrate and display AR. Thanks a bunch for this one. Cheers,S420 .. |
Eh? This movie was billed as high-concept sci-fi, but turned out to be an incoherent mess. McConaughey's acting is fine, the visuals are fine, but the overall storyline is at best a C grade effort. The writers (Jonathan Nolan and Christopher Nolan) really overextended themselves here. |
Guest-2005 I'm not saying this to insult because really there's no way most people could understand this film. Which maybe you have a point if no one gets your art maybe it's no good. But it's a retelling of The Fisher King (TS Elliot's The Wasteland a well-known example). Just like The Big Lebowski. Or The Natural. |
@Guest-2302 The main problem here is that the movie has way too many jumps in logic. All movies require a degree of suspension of disbelief, but in this one it's difficult to join the dots together without heavy mental gymnastics and accepting gaps in coherence. It's not art if it's not accessible to the audience. |
Thanks for sharing. I enjoyed this movie. Definitely one of the good sci-fi in the last 10 years. Might not be Matthew McConaughey's greatest role but I think he worked well with Anne Hathaway. Highly recommended. 8/10 star-rating. |
This is NOT totally correct, not sure how this was done, but apparently it was released from the studios like this Resolution = 1920x1080 Display AR = 1.778 | 16:9 After DL'ing this what I see is jumping from the 1.778(16:9) to 2.39 (DCI Scope) [1920x804]. But from 01:49:43 till 02:35:11 it's 2.39 (DCI Scope) [1920x804]. Then it goes back to 1.778(16:9) @ 02:35:11 till end. There are other jumps as well. Apparently it's like this in my old DL of: "Interstellar.2014.IMAX.1080p.BR.x264.anoXmous.mp4" from 3/27/2015 VERY STRANGE, what the heck is up with dat? Apparently like that in all encodes out there. Guess back in 2015 I wasn't that much into encoding as I am now. S420 |
Even some of the posted pics above show both aspect ratio's.... |
Aspect ratio 1.43 : 1(IMAX 70 mm: some scenes)1.78 : 1(IMAX Blu-ray & 4K UHD - some scenes)1.90 : 1(Digital IMAX - some scenes)2.20 : 1(70 mm prints)2.39 : 12.39 : 1(35 mm prints, Digital) |
Having followed some theory's of physics before watching this, id say they have a lot more to prove before claiming any kind of scientific accuracy here. Are you sure this wasnt just a really long Lincoln car commercial? Felt like it to me. |