^which is such a damned shame
they were so incredibly beautiful
Literally no one looks better all plastic
they were so incredibly beautiful
Literally no one looks better all plastic
Diary: A NolanFans Story
I think they still look great, but yeah, right after they get the procedures done, it looks very uncanny valley.
Kidman's surgeries were kind of bad during the Australia period of her career but it looks like she's relaxed a lot more on it.
Kidman's surgeries were kind of bad during the Australia period of her career but it looks like she's relaxed a lot more on it.
i finally saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm the other day, and it was amazing. the theater was packed, and half the audience hadn't seen it before, so the laughter and groans were audible and super cool to experience over 50 years after its release
the print i saw was done from a 4k restoration, and i don't know. i'd like to see what Nolan and co. did for 2001 recently, but for this. the colors and sharpness were insane, but the grain level seemed kind of low, like it had been touched up, and the black levels - as always happens with these digital to film transfers - were almost nonexistent.
regardless, this is a movie made for the theaters, and i'm so happy i finally got to have this experience
the print i saw was done from a 4k restoration, and i don't know. i'd like to see what Nolan and co. did for 2001 recently, but for this. the colors and sharpness were insane, but the grain level seemed kind of low, like it had been touched up, and the black levels - as always happens with these digital to film transfers - were almost nonexistent.
regardless, this is a movie made for the theaters, and i'm so happy i finally got to have this experience
Didn’t Nolan’s 2001 restoration get a ton of criticism?Michaelf2225 wrote: ↑November 26th, 2018, 1:17 pmi finally saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm the other day, and it was amazing. the theater was packed, and half the audience hadn't seen it before, so the laughter and groans were audible and super cool to experience over 50 years after its release
the print i saw was done from a 4k restoration, and i don't know. i'd like to see what Nolan and co. did for 2001 recently, but for this. the colors and sharpness were insane, but the grain level seemed kind of low, like it had been touched up, and the black levels - as always happens with these digital to film transfers - were almost nonexistent.
regardless, this is a movie made for the theaters, and i'm so happy i finally got to have this experience
Watching one of Kylie Jenner's makeup tutorials on YouTube and in my mind I was like "is this bitch really only using two taupe colors in her palette?"
Why would I want to buy her makeup if she's not going to use the more unusual colors and create great looks?
There's no doubt that her makeup technique is good and that she is pretty, but she shouldn't have a makeup line if her makeup is going to be that boring. I don't think I've ever seen her with fun and interesting makeup.
Why would I want to buy her makeup if she's not going to use the more unusual colors and create great looks?
There's no doubt that her makeup technique is good and that she is pretty, but she shouldn't have a makeup line if her makeup is going to be that boring. I don't think I've ever seen her with fun and interesting makeup.
It must be tiring being youAllstar wrote: ↑November 26th, 2018, 9:46 pmDidn’t Nolan’s 2001 restoration get a ton of criticism?Michaelf2225 wrote: ↑November 26th, 2018, 1:17 pmi finally saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm the other day, and it was amazing. the theater was packed, and half the audience hadn't seen it before, so the laughter and groans were audible and super cool to experience over 50 years after its release
the print i saw was done from a 4k restoration, and i don't know. i'd like to see what Nolan and co. did for 2001 recently, but for this. the colors and sharpness were insane, but the grain level seemed kind of low, like it had been touched up, and the black levels - as always happens with these digital to film transfers - were almost nonexistent.
regardless, this is a movie made for the theaters, and i'm so happy i finally got to have this experience
i'm not saying this is allstar, but, i am
Did he?Allstar wrote: ↑November 26th, 2018, 9:46 pmDidn’t Nolan’s 2001 restoration get a ton of criticism?Michaelf2225 wrote: ↑November 26th, 2018, 1:17 pmi finally saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70mm the other day, and it was amazing. the theater was packed, and half the audience hadn't seen it before, so the laughter and groans were audible and super cool to experience over 50 years after its release
the print i saw was done from a 4k restoration, and i don't know. i'd like to see what Nolan and co. did for 2001 recently, but for this. the colors and sharpness were insane, but the grain level seemed kind of low, like it had been touched up, and the black levels - as always happens with these digital to film transfers - were almost nonexistent.
regardless, this is a movie made for the theaters, and i'm so happy i finally got to have this experience
Hey Cil, what's Tejas?
