By MCN Editor editor@moviecitynews.com

THE OSCAR® NOMINATED SHORT FILMS 2012 BEATS BOX OFFICE RECORD

Posted Tuesday, February 14th, 2012 - Comments Off on THE OSCAR® NOMINATED SHORT FILMS 2012 BEATS BOX OFFICE RECORD
Be Sociable, Share!

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Los Angeles, CA, February 14, 2012 – An early Valentine’s Day present was received by The Oscar Nominated Short Films 2012, which opened on 120 screens across the United States and Canada last Friday, February 10, 2012 when the release beat expectations and broke its previous record from the year before.  Ever since the programs started playing in theaters leading up to the Academy Awards seven years ago, they have been consistently outpacing expectations.

The box office grosses for the weekend of 2/10 – 2/12 totaled $412,304 with a per-screen average of $3,436.  Besting last year’s previous record of $300,706 with a per-screen average of $3,165.  This represents a 37% increase over last year and a consistent, significant increase in gross income every year since the program’s inception in 2006.

“We had a great opening weekend-our best ever.” said Carter Pilcher, ShortsHD’s Chief Executive.  “This just shows the enduring popularity of first-rate short movies while increasing the odds of winning Oscar pools.”

The program will roll out to additional markets in the coming weeks and will eventually be in over 200 screens nationwide and Canada prior to the 84th Academy Awards® ceremony on February 26. The Oscar Nominated Short Films 2012 is comprised of three programs, Animated, Live Action and Documentary.

The Oscar® Nominated Short Films has become a key fixture of the awards season.  Last year, the theatrical release broke all records, grossing over $1,350,000 nationwide and playing in significantly more theaters than in previous years.  Since the inception of the program in 2005, attendance has grown by 800%.

Nominations for the 84th Academy Awards® were announced on January 24th. For more information, visit www.shorts.tv/theoscarshorts or find us on Facebook:  facebook.com/shortshd and twitter: twitter.com/shortshd

ABOUT SHORTSHD

ShortsHD is the first high definition channel dedicated to short movies and is available on DIRECTV (Channel 568), and AT&T U-Verse (Channel 1789).  ShortsHD is operated by Shorts International, the world’s leading short movie entertainment company with the world’s largest movie catalogue dedicated to short movies. Shorts International also operates ShortsTV, which is available in France, Belgium, Luxembourg on Numericable (Channels 134 and 52) and in Turkey via TTNET’s Tivibu service. Shorts is the short movie on-demand service available on iTunes movie stores in the US, Canada, Mexico, Japan, Taiwan and throughout Europe. The company is headquartered in London, England with additional offices in Paris and Los Angeles and is led by Carter Pilcher, Chief Executive. Shorts International is owned by Shorts Entertainment Holdings and Liberty Global Ventures.

ABOUT MAGNOLIA

Magnolia Pictures is the theatrical and home entertainment distribution arm of the Wagner/Cuban Companies, a vertically-integrated group of media properties co-owned by Todd Wagner and Mark Cuban that also includes the Landmark Theatres chain, and the high definition cable network HDNet. Recent and upcoming releases include Lars Von Trier’s MELANCHOLIA, TIM & ERIC’S BILLION DOLLAR MOVIE, and Sarah Polley’s TAKE THIS WALTZ.

# # #

Be Sociable, Share!

Posted in Movie City News, Press Releases | Comments Off on THE OSCAR® NOMINATED SHORT FILMS 2012 BEATS BOX OFFICE RECORD

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