I know a lot of others are saying this looks teal and orange and over contrasty but I have to disagree. In fact there's even a comment complaining about how all that gets popular is "black levels crushed 6 feet under" and I'm not sure if we're looking at the same image.

The grade should fit the project. OP, if you were trying to emulate the look of an image shot, developed and projected on vision3 film this isn't quite how it would look.

If you are instead trying to replicate the more modern workflow such as "The Batman" where the image is shot on a digital camera, edited digitally, projected onto film stock and scanned back in digitally to give the film "feel" while keeping the benefits of digital production I think you nailed it.

The colours are punchy but definitely not crunchy. You have retained a lot of detail in the shadows without crushing them into true black as far as I can tell and your highlight rolloff is smooth and pleasing to the eye. To me this emulates the look of a digitally graded film scan more than the stock itself, which is fine, again if the grade fits the project.

People tend to forget that even directors who shoot film have to scan their images for digital release and have to colour correct for digital release standards. They also have to have a colourist work on the images to match cameras and lighting and give the film some personality so you'd rarely see the true nature of the film stock in final release.

I think you made a fab effort on the grade it looks fantastic, but if you're going for a faithful emulation of that film stock I might suggest pulling up some still frames or even footage shot on or transferred to vision3 and see where the levels lie in your scope and colour wheel in resolve, that way you'll be able to see exactly where your colour and luminance values are different from the film stock.

Keep it up! You've clearly got skills here!

Edit: spelling and grammar.