By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Foreign Language and Short Film Oscar® Entries Due October 2

Posted Tuesday, September 26th, 2006 - Comments Off on Foreign Language and Short Film Oscar® Entries Due October 2
Be Sociable, Share!



Beverly Hills, CA — Monday, October 2, is the deadline to submit Oscar entries in the Live Action Short Film and Animated Short Film categories as well as in the Foreign Language Film category. To be considered for the 79th Academy Awards®, entry forms and supporting materials must arrive at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences by 5 p.m. that day.

For the short film categories, filmmakers must submit an entry form, film synopsis, cast and credits list, stills, filmography, a film print and proof of qualifying exhibition or festival win. Films that advance to the branch screening round of voting will need to provide a second film print by Wednesday, January 3, 2007.

The reviewing committee of the Short Films and Feature Animation Branch will begin screening eligible live action and animated shorts on Sunday, November 4.

In the Foreign Language Film category, additional documentation, including an English-language synopsis of the film, a cast and credits list, a biography and photograph of the director, and a clipping of public notification of theatrical exhibition is due by October 2.

Foreign language film prints must be received no later than Friday, October 13. Only one picture will be accepted from each country.

The Foreign Language Film award screening committee will begin screening the eligible films on Friday, October 20.

The 79th Academy Awards nominations will be announced on Tuesday, January 23, 2007, at 5:30 a.m. PST, in the Academy’s Samuel Goldwyn Theater.

Academy Awards for outstanding film achievements of 2006 will be presented on Sunday, February 25, 2007, at the Kodak Theatre at Hollywood & Highland Center®, and televised live by the ABC Television Network at 5 p.m. PST, beginning with a half-hour arrival segment.

Additional information may be obtained by contacting Awards Coordinator Torene Svitil via phone at (310) 247-3000, ext. 190, by fax at (310) 247-2600, by e-mail at tsvitil@oscars.org, or by visiting www.oscars.org/79academyawards/rules.


Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Awards Watch, Note Pad | Comments Off on Foreign Language and Short Film Oscar® Entries Due October 2

Comments are closed.

Quote Unquotesee all »

It shows how out of it I was in trying to be in it, acknowledging that I was out of it to myself, and then thinking, “Okay, how do I stop being out of it? Well, I get some legitimate illogical narrative ideas” — some novel, you know?

So I decided on three writers that I might be able to option their material and get some producer, or myself as producer, and then get some writer to do a screenplay on it, and maybe make a movie.

And so the three projects were “Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep,” “Naked Lunch” and a collection of Bukowski. Which, in 1975, forget it — I mean, that was nuts. Hollywood would not touch any of that, but I was looking for something commercial, and I thought that all of these things were coming.

There would be no Blade Runner if there was no Ray Bradbury. I couldn’t find Philip K. Dick. His agent didn’t even know where he was. And so I gave up.

I was walking down the street and I ran into Bradbury — he directed a play that I was going to do as an actor, so we know each other, but he yelled “hi” — and I’d forgot who he was.

So at my girlfriend Barbara Hershey’s urging — I was with her at that moment — she said, “Talk to him! That guy really wants to talk to you,” and I said “No, fuck him,” and keep walking.

But then I did, and then I realized who it was, and I thought, “Wait, he’s in that realm, maybe he knows Philip K. Dick.” I said, “You know a guy named—” “Yeah, sure — you want his phone number?”

My friend paid my rent for a year while I wrote, because it turned out we couldn’t get a writer. My friends kept on me about, well, if you can’t get a writer, then you write.”
~ Hampton Fancher

“That was the most disappointing thing to me in how this thing was played. Is that I’m on the phone with you now, after all that’s been said, and the fundamental distinction between what James is dealing with in these other cases is not actually brought to the fore. The fundamental difference is that James Franco didn’t seek to use his position to have sex with anyone. There’s not a case of that. He wasn’t using his position or status to try to solicit a sexual favor from anyone. If he had — if that were what the accusation involved — the show would not have gone on. We would have folded up shop and we would have not completed the show. Because then it would have been the same as Harvey Weinstein, or Les Moonves, or any of these cases that are fundamental to this new paradigm. Did you not notice that? Why did you not notice that? Is that not something notable to say, journalistically? Because nobody could find the voice to say it. I’m not just being rhetorical. Why is it that you and the other critics, none of you could find the voice to say, “You know, it’s not this, it’s that”? Because — let me go on and speak further to this. If you go back to the L.A. Times piece, that’s what it lacked. That’s what they were not able to deliver. The one example in the five that involved an issue of a sexual act was between James and a woman he was dating, who he was not working with. There was no professional dynamic in any capacity.

~ David Simon