http://www.moviefone.com/2015/12/29/national-film-registry-2015-ghostbusters-top-gun-shawshank/
>The National Film Registry announced this week its annual selection of 25 films and recordings to add to the permanent collection of the Library of Congress, and among them are old Hollywood classics, recent Oscar winners, and beloved '80s favorites.
The full list of films added are:
Being There (1979)
Black and Tan (1929)
Dracula (Spanish language version) (1931)
Dream of a Rarebit Fiend (1906)
Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer (1974)
Edison Kinetoscopic Record of a Sneeze (1894)
A Fool There Was (1915)
Ghostbusters (1984)
Hail the Conquering Hero (1944)
Humoresque (1920)
Imitation of Life (1959)
The Inner World of Aphasia (1968)
John Henry and the Inky-Poo (1946)
L.A. Confidential (1997)
The Mark of Zorro (1920)
The Old Mill (1937)
Our Daily Bread (1934)
Portrait of Jason (1967)
Seconds (1966)
The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
Sink or Swim (1990)
The Story of Menstruation (1946)
Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One (1968)
Top Gun (1986)
Winchester '73 (1950)
So what do you think about this?
>>64385698
None of those films r good
literally what
>>64385719
>Edison Kinetoscopic Record of a Sneeze
>bad
top pleb
>>64385751
Never fucking reply to me again unless you're contributing to the thread.
and?
>3 week old news
Thanks
>>64385761
>None of those films r good
>contribution
kill yourself
>>64385783
wew lad
>>64385698
Female Ghostbusters added to the list when?
>>64385698
The ones that deserve it
>Being There (1979)
>Ghostbusters (1984)
>Imitation of Life (1959)
>The Mark of Zorro (1920)
>The Shawshank Redemption (1994)
>Top Gun (1986)
The ones that don't
>A Fool There Was (1915)
>Hail the Conquering Hero (1944)
>Humoresque (1920)
>L.A. Confidential (1997)
The ones I haven't seen
>Black and Tan (1929)
>Dracula (Spanish language version) (1931)
>Dream of a Rarebit Fiend (1906)
>Eadweard Muybridge, Zoopraxographer (1974)
>Edison Kinetoscopic Record of a Sneeze (1894)
>The Inner World of Aphasia (1968)
>John Henry and the Inky-Poo (1946)
>The Old Mill (1937)
>Our Daily Bread (1934)
>Portrait of Jason (1967)
>Seconds (1966)
>Sink or Swim (1990)
>The Story of Menstruation (1946)
>Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One (1968)
>Winchester '73 (1950)
Are any of the ones I haven't seen massively worth watching?
>>64385783
W
E
W
L A D
>>64385698
Somewhat surprised at Top Gun and Shawshank. They aren't really films that should be in the National Registry... I mean they are fictionalized accounts based on real life things. I guess they could be entered just based on the fact that they are good films but I dunno dude.
>>64385893
I don't get your logic. Are all fiction movies exempt from inclusion?
>>64385719
>Not liking Winchester '73
Why do you hate America?
>>64385698
>Symbiopsychotaxiplasm: Take One
Justice is done.
>>64385983
Only title I suggested that made it in
>>64386027
patrician swag
>>64385886
The Old Mill is an artistically nice Disney short from the late 1930's that used the multiplane camera.
Haven't seen any of the other ones.
Fuck yeah The Old Mill.
>>64385886
>Edison Kinetoscopic Record of a Sneeze (1894)
you can watch this entire film on wikipedia in gif format.
Dude most of these films or movies that get entered in the registry are just for the preservation of the medium of television and film. The Edison thing is just so old and it's one of the first copyrighted pieces of film so they enter it in the registry. Most of those films are the same or they are documentaries or they are some shitty film that was the first to shoot with some forgotten film/camera etc.
Story of Menstruation is a Disney film made back in the day for educational purposes.
>>64385761
You have to much free time.
And that's a HUGE contribution to the thread.
Also I'm not sure decides what movies go to the vault but watching the list is obvious that he just put random films he liked or watched to impress a girl or a boy.
>>64385923
nah bro I just don't think those movies are culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant. I mean Top Gun? It's definitely not historically significant and I don't think it's really aesthetically significant. Is it culturally significant? Last I checked Top Gun was popular back in the day but time has not been good to that piece of garbage.
Shawshank is the same however Shawshank is not garbage--I guess you could consider it aesthetically significant but whatever.
>>64385698
Are these films or movies?
>>64386400
Jesus christ are you retarded? Dude go to google right now and look up the National Film Registry you dipshit.
>>64386321
It faithfully describes americans fantasy view of their own militia, that's what keeping america great, and terrorist free.
>>64386464
Really? Top Gun?
I don't know man. I haven't seen it since I was a kid and I remember hating it. Seeing bits and pieces of it on television as i grew up... still doesn't seem to have any charm or goodness to it.
Maybe I'm a pleb though. I don't know.
>>64386531
cuz they use actual jets or whatever it's basically a propaganda film for how great the U.S military is
Tommy boi said he'd even do another top gun if he they get to use some of them new jets
also u r a pleb we all r it's ok.
>>64386400
>Are these films
>National Film Registry
Hmmmmmm
>>64386531
What do you think the pilots in Irak were listening during the bombing of Bagdag.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=siwpn14IE7E
That's cultural relevance for you.
>>64385817
>>64385887
I can't beieve wew lad meme caught on, it felt so forced
