Torrent Hash - Hash of all existing torrents
Please, pay attention to the fact that you are about to download the torrent NOT from torhash.net
torhash.net is just a torrent search engine, no torrents are hosted here.

Prospero's Books (2010) ISO

Infohash:

E8234B730BBC20EAA9E1C04E87B2FFEAE1396736

Type:

Movies

Title:

Prospero's Books (2010) ISO

Category:

Video/Movies DVDR

Uploaded:

2010-02-07 (by stainpeter)

Description:

This is the 2010 release that was remastered from the same materials that horrible 2003 release was made from, and is the best digital copy I've ever seen and heard ... plus all of the books are chaptered.

Tags:

  1. prospero
  2. books
  3. Greenaway
  4. Shakespere

Files count:

4

Size:

3871.34 Mb

Trackers:

udp://tracker.openbittorrent.com:80
udp://open.demonii.com:1337
udp://tracker.coppersurfer.tk:6969
udp://exodus.desync.com:6969

Comments:

Aga1980 (2010-02-07)

Thanks! Thanks! Thanks!

russell1nash (2010-02-09)

thanx!

totsubo (2010-02-17)

Definitely not DVD quality. Ratio is off, and picture quality is not so good.

funkingonutz (2014-05-12)

While I deeply appreciate the upload and the effort behind it, I generally agree with 'totsubo'.
Also available is the 1991 version found at
http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/6948882/Prospero_s_Books_%28Peter_Grenaway__1991%29
:
A visual comparison between this version, and the 1991 (1.9GB) version: http://i.imgur.com/3UISsTq.png
I find the 1991 version superior in several ways.
======= 1991 version =======
PROS:
1) Much better detail in each frame
2) Correct aspect ratio (it is 'widescreen')
3) Subtitles in 4 languages
4) Smaller file (but still gives more detail (sharp), and gives you the entire picture (not cropped))
CONS:
1) Chapters are not marked
2) Somewhat higher contrast (but this can be adjusted pretty well in most players)
======= 2004 version =======
PROS:
1) Chapters are marked (so you can jump around)
2) Warmer color tones and lower contrast might be more pleasant to some (but that is a matter of taste/preference, and some of this can be adjusted in your player if using something like VLC, for example)
CONS:
1) Loss of detail
2) Cropped to "old style" non-widescreen ratio (the picture is basically 'square' more or less)
3) No captions/subtitles
4) Large file
Conclusion: I much prefer the 1991 version, but you can see the samples linked above, and decide for yourselves. Again, I appreciate the effort and the upload, I just wanted to provide some insight into the differences, so that some folks might be able to avoid 'double-downloading' just to compare these two versions.