Jump to content

 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Sign in to follow this  
RMeingast

National Film Registry Selections for 2012

Recommended Posts

Today, U.S. Library of Congress National Film Registry announced 25 films chosen for inclusion in the registry:

 

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-national-film-registry-20121217,0,1057524.story

 

The 25 are the choices for 2012. You can suggest films for next year here: http://www.loc.gov/film/filmnfr.html

 

The 25 added this year include some oldies:

 

"3:10 to Yuma"

 

"Anatomy of a Murder"

 

"Born Yesterday”

 

“Breakfast at Tiffany’s”

 

“Dirty Harry”

 

“The Corbett-Fitzsimmons Title Fight” (1897)

 

“Sons of the Desert”

 

“Uncle Tom’s Cabin” (1914)

 

“The Wishing Ring; An Idyll of Old England” (1914)

 

Website for "L.A. Times" also has some photos (unrelated to announcement above) titled

"Behind-the-scenes Classic Hollywood" of "Hollywood Back lot moments":

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-classic-hollywood_pictures,0,1853771.photogallery

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are IMHO a few good choices, but I don't agree with "The Matrix" choice or "3:10 to Yuma" either.

 

I am disappointed for the most part.

 

 

Lori

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

RMeingast, thanks for posting this. The National Film Registry often makes its choices on the basis of historical importance, and they make a special effort to include documentaries, which, because they usually draw from different film sources, are often in particular need of restoration.

 

 

I could even defend THE MATRIX as being of historical importance. The enhanced, unrealistic approach to action scenes has been much copied.

 

 

I'll agree that the fiction film choices are not very exciting. TWO-LANE BLACKTOP was one of the most boring films I'd ever seen, with incredibly inept lead performances by James Taylor and Laurie Bird. Before the film was released, Esquire Magazine proclaimed it the film of the year, and then at the end of the year gave themselves a Dubious Achievement Award for doing so. BREAKFAST AT TIFFANY'S is iconic, even if we tend to like it less nowadays than previously, and ANATOMY OF A MURDER is one of Preminger's best films. BORN YESTERDAY was a favorite film in its day, though to me it doesn't age all that well. 3:10 TO YUMA is a good western, and the recent remake probably made more people aware of it.

 

 

As little as I like DIRTY HARRY and its sequels, you can scarcely argue that it's historically important. Alas.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=finance wrote:}{quote}I'm surprised that ANATOMY wasn't already in........ A significant film for a number of reasons..

>

> Edited by: finance on Dec 19, 2012 5:23 PM

You can read more here about each of the 25 from the Library of Congress:

 

http://www.loc.gov/today/pr/2012/12-226.html

 

You can read what it says about "Anatomy of a Murder" at the link above.

Doesn't explain how that film was chosen 'tho (who nominated it? How many voted for its inclusion, etc...)... Oh well... Maybe it's been nominated in past years and just made it in this year?

(Sorta like how people get into Baseball Hall of Fame or whatever...)

Me know not?

 

Oh well, TCM aired "Anatomy of a Murder" just recently, as I caught it...

 

Anyway, you can nominate films for next year beginning today:

http://www.loc.gov/film/vote.html

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=aimalac wrote:}{quote}I have to admit some of those films are deserving of inclusion. But, can you believe the 1950 Jimmy Stewart movie "Harvey" is not in the Registry?

 

Are you sure it's not there? Maybe we just can't see it. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two big howlers are:

 

THE MATRIX

A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN

 

Give me a break. What a joke. Not a single Bob Hope (without Bing Crosby) movie in the entire film registry?

 

These kinds of things are so stupid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're correct in pointing out the fact that "A League Of Their Own" celebrates the accomplishments of women. This title like "Thelma And Louise" and "Beaches" are often thought of as 'chick flicks'. Being 100% male, I will admit I love all three of those films, and a lot more that don't come to mind at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob Hope was the consummate American and showman, actor

who tirelessly made films and entertained millions and military

troops.

 

He made a lot of money and was a conservative.

 

He belongs on the list.

 

Jake in the Heartland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Nice try, guys, but still doesn't work for me. Both films are basically contemporary crap. Nothing that has Tom Hanks or Keanu Reeves or Madonna belongs in anything sounding like a National Film Registry. There are better films about baseball, women, and matrixes :)

 

Especially when you consider the classic films they've overlooked.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe you missed the point. Exactly what does the National Film Registry represent? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't some of the criteria. is the film inovated of of some social redeeming quality or enlightening in some way? Before seeing "A League Of Their Own", I had no idea of the womans baseball league during WWII. The movie showed women that they could other things besides cook & clean. I'm sure the movie had to inspire many young women with the idea that they could accomplish things if they try. Just because it doesn't fall within the "studio era" of films (like a bunch of know nothings believe defines 'classic'), if it meets the Registrys criteria, then it qualifies for inclusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay FG, I suppose I can understand the whole dislike of Madonna and Keanu, or at least their apparent lack of range in their acting styles, but c'mon now, Tom Hanks?

 

Look, the guy CAN act and has a pretty good range...though I'm sure you'll also disagree with me on this.

 

And so, because you apparently aren't big on Hanks(no pun intended ;) ), then I'm going to have to assume because he was the lead in one of the best docudramas in recent years, namely Apollo 13, a film which even though we all knew how the story ended in a triumph of American problem-solving at its best, it still had many of us on the edge of our seats, AND because Hanks also starred and I thought was excellent in one of the best films ever made about the AIDS epidemic, Philadelphia, another film spotlighting a certain time in our history...well, because he was in both of these films, I suppose you would think both of these films should be precluded from induction onto this list too, right?!

 

(...or it is STILL mainly that both of these films where made years after Louis B. Mayer was dead and buried along with the studio system???) :smirk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would think the films should be added after 25 years. So many films I would have add that deserve to be. My 25 would for next year would be films like these.

 

Angels With Dirty Faces(1938)

I'm No Angel(1933)

Make Way For Tomorrow(1937)

Imitation of Life91934)

Stella Dallas(1937)

KIngs Row(1942)

I Married a Withch(1942)

Leave Her To Heaven (1945)

I Wake Up Screaming(1941)

Sorry, Wrong Number(1948)

The Five Pennies(1959)

Pal Joey(1957)

The Ten Commandements(1956)

Niagara(1953)

Imitation of Life(1959)

Bye Bye Birdie!(1963)

Hush Hush Sweet Charlotte(1964)

The Party(1968)

Barefoot in the Park(1967)

Yours,Mine and Ours(1968)

Sleeper(1973)

The Goodbye Girl(1977)

The In-Laws(1979)

Where's Poppa?(1970)

Paper Moon(1973)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Matrix is definitely the most ridiculous selection, but Two Lane Blacktop is pretty overrated as well.

 

Personally, I think film lists are dumb, as is the idea that a limited number of films must be selected every year for preservation. Film in general should be preserved, as much as is possible. Part of me also has to wonder whether or not some rights to the film are lost once a master is handed over to the Library of Congress...

 

I also have to say that there are a lot of films out there whose negatives and prints are in *nowhere near as good a condition as many of the titles chosen-* I Married a Witch, Cyrano de Bergerac, Penny Serenade, Detour, Love Affair. Judging from their recent airings on TCM, most of their prints could stand a *good cleaning* (much more so than the existing negatives of Slacker, at least. )

 

 

*One also has to wonder whether or not the rights issues that have plagued any number of films- from The Constant Nymph to Dangerous to Letty Linton- could be resolved were a film to be selected by the registry.*

 

 

(we'll probably never know)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I've heard it said that he possesses that "everyman" quality reminiscent of Jimmy Stewart.

 

 

While Tom Hanks may not be my favorite actor, I enjoy some of his films and respect that he's come a long way since TV's "Bosom Buddies."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Addison, great point about wishing that the NFR would choose to preserve some of the public domain films which are obviously in need of restoration.

 

 

Studios don't even preserve their recent films well. I've heard that THE GODFATHER, of all films, was found to be in poor condition before it was restored.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

finance wrote: "So what is the secret of Hanks' success? His looks will certainly never make anyone forget Tyrone Power."

 

And then dpommper replied:"I've heard it said that he possesses that "everyman" quality reminiscent of Jimmy Stewart."

 

And now I'LL respond with....

 

Exactly Ms. dpommper. That's pretty much it. Nope, he's not the "Pretty Boy" type like Power. He's always been more the "likeable presence" on screen....well, I suppose other than in the TikiSoo household anyway. Though then again I'm wondering if the TikiSoo household might prefer the New York "ethnic" type, like say the De Niro or maybe the Pacino type? The type that often chew the scenery.

 

(..."Ya know wot I'm talkin' 'bout heah?!") ;)

 

LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OH! And btw, Tiki baby...

 

I have to admit I've always agreed with ya about Costner, anyway. How THAT guy ever became a star is STILL a mystery to me, lady!

 

(...can you say, "BOR-ing"???!!!)

 

(...OH, and one MORE aside here, Tiki...NOT that there isn't a time and place for De Niro and Pacino-esque scenery chewing occasionally...didn't want ya to get the mistaken impression I don't like those guys ya see, 'cause I do...occasionally!)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

© 2019 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy
×
×
  • Create New...