Annual Report to the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
31 Days of Oscar® 2010 Schedule
31 DAYS OF OSCAR® 2010 SCHEDULE Monday, February 1 6:00 AM Only When I Laugh (’81) (Kevin Bacon, James Coco) 8:15 AM Man of La Mancha (’72) (James Coco, Harry Andrews) 10:30 AM 55 Days at Peking (’63) (Harry Andrews, Flora Robson) 1:30 PM Saratoga Trunk (’45) (Flora Robson, Jerry Austin) 4:00 PM The Adventures of Don Juan (’48) (Jerry Austin, Viveca Lindfors) 6:00 PM The Way We Were (’73) (Viveca Lindfors, Barbra Streisand) 8:00 PM Funny Girl (’68) (Barbra Streisand, Omar Sharif) 11:00 PM Lawrence of Arabia (’62) (Omar Sharif, Peter O’Toole) 3:00 AM Becket (’64) (Peter O’Toole, Martita Hunt) 5:30 AM Great Expectations (’46) (Martita Hunt, John Mills) Tuesday, February 2 7:30 AM Tunes of Glory (’60) (John Mills, John Fraser) 9:30 AM The Dam Busters (’55) (John Fraser, Laurence Naismith) 11:30 AM Mogambo (’53) (Laurence Naismith, Clark Gable) 1:30 PM Test Pilot (’38) (Clark Gable, Mary Howard) 3:30 PM Billy the Kid (’41) (Mary Howard, Henry O’Neill) 5:15 PM Mr. Dodd Takes the Air (’37) (Henry O’Neill, Frank McHugh) 6:45 PM One Way Passage (’32) (Frank McHugh, William Powell) 8:00 PM The Thin Man (’34) (William Powell, Myrna Loy) 10:00 PM The Best Years of Our Lives (’46) (Myrna Loy, Fredric March) 1:00 AM Inherit the Wind (’60) (Fredric March, Noah Beery, Jr.) 3:15 AM Sergeant York (’41) (Noah Beery, Jr., Walter Brennan) 5:30 AM These Three (’36) (Walter Brennan, Marcia Mae Jones) Wednesday, February 3 7:15 AM The Champ (’31) (Marcia Mae Jones, Walter Beery) 8:45 AM Viva Villa! (’34) (Walter Beery, Donald Cook) 10:45 AM The Pubic Enemy -
German Jews in the United States: a Guide to Archival Collections
GERMAN HISTORICAL INSTITUTE,WASHINGTON,DC REFERENCE GUIDE 24 GERMAN JEWS IN THE UNITED STATES: AGUIDE TO ARCHIVAL COLLECTIONS Contents INTRODUCTION &ACKNOWLEDGMENTS 1 ABOUT THE EDITOR 6 ARCHIVAL COLLECTIONS (arranged alphabetically by state and then city) ALABAMA Montgomery 1. Alabama Department of Archives and History ................................ 7 ARIZONA Phoenix 2. Arizona Jewish Historical Society ........................................................ 8 ARKANSAS Little Rock 3. Arkansas History Commission and State Archives .......................... 9 CALIFORNIA Berkeley 4. University of California, Berkeley: Bancroft Library, Archives .................................................................................................. 10 5. Judah L. Mages Museum: Western Jewish History Center ........... 14 Beverly Hills 6. Acad. of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences: Margaret Herrick Library, Special Coll. ............................................................................ 16 Davis 7. University of California at Davis: Shields Library, Special Collections and Archives ..................................................................... 16 Long Beach 8. California State Library, Long Beach: Special Collections ............. 17 Los Angeles 9. John F. Kennedy Memorial Library: Special Collections ...............18 10. UCLA Film and Television Archive .................................................. 18 11. USC: Doheny Memorial Library, Lion Feuchtwanger Archive ................................................................................................... -
Academy Committees 19~5 - 19~6
ACADEMY COMMITTEES 19~5 - 19~6 Jean Hersholt, president and Margaret Gledhill, Executive Secretary, ex officio members of all committees. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE SPECIAL DOCUMENTARY Harry Brand COMMITTEE lBTH AWARDS will i am Do z i e r Sidney Solow, Chairman Ray Heindorf William Dozier Frank Lloyd Philip Dunne Mary C. McCall, Jr. James Wong Howe Thomas T. Moulton Nunnally Johnson James Stewart William Cameron Menzies Harriet Parsons FINANCE COMMITTEE Anne Revere Joseph Si strom John LeRoy Johnston, Chairman Frank Tuttle Gordon Hollingshead wi a rd I h n en · SPECIAL COMMITTEE 18TH AWARDS PRESENTATION FILM VIEWING COMMITTEE Farciot Edouart, Chairman William Dozier, Chairman Charles Brackett Joan Harrison Will i am Do z i e r Howard Koch Hal E1 ias Dore Schary A. Arnold Gillespie Johnny Green SHORT SUBJECTS EXECUTIVE Bernard Herzbrun COMMI TTEE Gordon Hollingshead Wiard Ihnen Jules white, Chairman John LeRoy Johnston Gordon Ho11 ingshead St acy Keach Walter Lantz Hal Kern Louis Notarius Robert Lees Pete Smith Fred MacMu rray Mary C. McCall, Jr. MUSIC BRANCH EXECUTIVE Lou i s Mesenkop COMMITTEE Victor Milner Thomas T. Moulton Mario Caste1nuovo-Tedesco Clem Portman Adolph Deutsch Fred Ri chards Ray Heindorf Frederick Rinaldo Louis Lipstone Sidney Solow Abe Meyer Alfred Newman Herbert Stothart INTERNATIONAL AWARD Ned Washington COMM I TTEE Charles Boyer MUSIC BRANCH HOLLYWOOD Walt Disney BOWL CONCERT COMMITTEE wi 11 i am Gordon Luigi Luraschi Johnny Green, Chairman Robert Riskin Adolph Deutsch Carl Schaefer Ray Heindorf Robert Vogel Edward B. Powell Morris Stoloff Charles Wolcott ACADEMY FOUNDATION TRUSTEES Victor Young Charles Brackett Michael Curtiz MUSIC BRANCH ACTIVITIES Farc i ot Edouart COMMITTEE Nat Finston Jean Hersholt Franz Waxman, Chairman Y. -
Toy Story: How Pixar Reinvented the Animated Feature
Brown, Noel. " An Interview with Steve Segal." Toy Story: How Pixar Reinvented the Animated Feature. By Susan Smith, Noel Brown and Sam Summers. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2017. 197–214. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 2 Oct. 2021. <http:// dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781501324949.ch-013>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 2 October 2021, 03:24 UTC. Copyright © Susan Smith, Sam Summers and Noel Brown 2018. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. 1 97 Chapter 13 A N INTERVIEW WITH STEVE SEGAL N o e l B r o w n Production histories of Toy Story tend to focus on ‘big names’ such as John Lasseter and Pete Docter. In this book, we also want to convey a sense of the animator’s place in the making of the fi lm and their perspective on what hap- pened, along with their professional journey leading up to that point. Steve Segal was born in Richmond, Virginia, in 1949. He made his fi rst animated fi lms as a high school student before studying Art at Virginia Commonwealth University, where he continued to produce award- winning, independent ani- mated shorts. Aft er graduating, Segal opened a traditional animation studio in Richmond, making commercials and educational fi lms for ten years. Aft er completing the cult animated fi lm Futuropolis (1984), which he co- directed with Phil Trumbo, Segal moved to Hollywood and became interested in com- puter animation. -
HOLLYWOOD – the Big Five Production Distribution Exhibition
HOLLYWOOD – The Big Five Production Distribution Exhibition Paramount MGM 20th Century – Fox Warner Bros RKO Hollywood Oligopoly • Big 5 control first run theaters • Theater chains regional • Theaters required 100+ films/year • Big 5 share films to fill screens • Little 3 supply “B” films Hollywood Major • Producer Distributor Exhibitor • Distribution & Exhibition New York based • New York HQ determines budget, type & quantity of films Hollywood Studio • Hollywood production lots, backlots & ranches • Studio Boss • Head of Production • Story Dept Hollywood Star • Star System • Long Term Option Contract • Publicity Dept Paramount • Adolph Zukor • 1912- Famous Players • 1914- Hodkinson & Paramount • 1916– FP & Paramount merge • Producer Jesse Lasky • Director Cecil B. DeMille • Pickford, Fairbanks, Valentino • 1933- Receivership • 1936-1964 Pres.Barney Balaban • Studio Boss Y. Frank Freeman • 1966- Gulf & Western Paramount Theaters • Chicago, mid West • South • New England • Canada • Paramount Studios: Hollywood Paramount Directors Ernst Lubitsch 1892-1947 • 1926 So This Is Paris (WB) • 1929 The Love Parade • 1932 One Hour With You • 1932 Trouble in Paradise • 1933 Design for Living • 1939 Ninotchka (MGM) • 1940 The Shop Around the Corner (MGM Cecil B. DeMille 1881-1959 • 1914 THE SQUAW MAN • 1915 THE CHEAT • 1920 WHY CHANGE YOUR WIFE • 1923 THE 10 COMMANDMENTS • 1927 KING OF KINGS • 1934 CLEOPATRA • 1949 SAMSON & DELILAH • 1952 THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH • 1955 THE 10 COMMANDMENTS Paramount Directors Josef von Sternberg 1894-1969 • 1927 -
Rose Marie: I Don't Love You Ron Smith, Thompson Rivers University, Canada
Rose Marie: I Don't Love You Ron Smith, Thompson Rivers University, Canada Pierre Berton, in his book Hollywood's Canada, challenges the Hollywood image of Canada, particularly the Canadian frontier. Berton states: And if Canadians continue to hold the belief that there is no such thing as a national identity – and who can deny that many hold it? – it is because the movies have frequently blurred, distorted, and hidden that identity under a celluloid mountain of misconceptions. (Berton, 1975: 12) Berton's queries about film images seem to suggest that without a clear understanding of history, we might be subject to the dreams and imaginations of others. In Berton's case, "the others" are Hollywood producers and directors. Geoff Pevere and Greig Dymond state that Americans have made many more Mountie movies than Canadians have, noting that "the inadvertent or intentional kitsch value of these is almost always rooted in the image of the Mountie's impossible purity or sense of duty." (Pevere and Dymond, 1996: 183) Michael Dawson, in That Nice Red Coat Goes To My Head Like Champagne: Gender, Antimodernism and the Mountie Image, points out that "Mounted Policemen appeared as central characters in over 250 feature films." (Dawson, 1997) Pierre Berton notes that by the early 1920s Hollywood had made 188 Mountie movies, forty-eight of them in the feature length mode that had become popular after 1914 (Berton, 1975: 112). Dawson adds that by the 1930s and 1940s "the film industry produced a body of work that consolidated the fictional Mountie position as both a mythic hero and commercial success." (Dawson, 1997) Rose Marie (1936) continued a theme that was associated with love and duty, but which had very little to do with "true story claims" about the Mounted Police. -
“The Spice of the Program” Educational Pictures and the Small-Town Audience
3 “The Spice of the Program” Educational Pictures and the Small-Town Audience “What the hell’s educational about a comedy?” asked slapstick producer Jack White in an interview toward the end of his life. “Something that was very offen- sive to me,” he continued, “was [the slogan] . ‘This is an Educational Comedy.’ There’s no such thing as educating yourself with a comedy. It’s a stupid name.”1 The object of White’s ire? The company for which he had produced and directed two- reel shorts for over a decade—the comedy distributor with the most unlikely of names: Educational Pictures. The company had been formed in 1915 as the Educational Films Corporation by real-estate man Earle W. Hammons, with the intent indicated by its name: to provide educational subjects for school, church, and other nontheatrical pur- poses. But by the late 1910s Hammons had realized little profit from this idea and began to target the commercial field, setting in motion a process of expan- sion that would see Educational become the dominant short-comedy distributor of the late silent era. “It did not take me long to find out that the demand [for educational films] did not exist and that we could not survive by doing that alone,” Hammons later recalled.2 As early as the 1918–1919 season, Educational had begun to diversify its product lines, adding Happy Hooligan and Silk Hat Harry cartoons to its weekly program of travelogues and informational sub- jects.3 In April 1920, Hammons signed director Jack White and comedian Lloyd Hamilton from Fox’s Sunshine Comedies to produce two-reel comedies under the brand name Mermaid Comedies, and began immediately taking further strides into the comedy market.4 The program for Educational’s 1920–1921 season, which represented the company’s first year of general commercial release, included four comedy series: the Mermaids, produced by White; C. -
The Survival of American Silent Feature Films: 1912–1929 by David Pierce September 2013
The Survival of American Silent Feature Films: 1912–1929 by David Pierce September 2013 COUNCIL ON LIBRARY AND INFORMATION RESOURCES AND THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS The Survival of American Silent Feature Films: 1912–1929 by David Pierce September 2013 Mr. Pierce has also created a da tabase of location information on the archival film holdings identified in the course of his research. See www.loc.gov/film. Commissioned for and sponsored by the National Film Preservation Board Council on Library and Information Resources and The Library of Congress Washington, D.C. The National Film Preservation Board The National Film Preservation Board was established at the Library of Congress by the National Film Preservation Act of 1988, and most recently reauthorized by the U.S. Congress in 2008. Among the provisions of the law is a mandate to “undertake studies and investigations of film preservation activities as needed, including the efficacy of new technologies, and recommend solutions to- im prove these practices.” More information about the National Film Preservation Board can be found at http://www.loc.gov/film/. ISBN 978-1-932326-39-0 CLIR Publication No. 158 Copublished by: Council on Library and Information Resources The Library of Congress 1707 L Street NW, Suite 650 and 101 Independence Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20036 Washington, DC 20540 Web site at http://www.clir.org Web site at http://www.loc.gov Additional copies are available for $30 each. Orders may be placed through CLIR’s Web site. This publication is also available online at no charge at http://www.clir.org/pubs/reports/pub158. -
Stan and Ollie'
'Stan and Ollie' A Screenplay By Jeff Pope Stan and Ollie - Goldenrod Revisions 20.04.17 1 BLACK. UNDER THIS this we hear a conversation. HARDY (V.O.) ... so Madelyn turned up. LAUREL (V.O.) Madelyn turned up? HARDY (V.O.) Completely out of the blue. Haven’t seen her in fifteen years... 1INT. DRESSING ROOM/ROACH LOT/STUDIO - DAY 1 Oliver HARDY leans against the door to a dressing room, worried expression, talking to his friend Stan LAUREL. Both are in their late-40s, (at the peak of their movie careers), but to begin with we have no real clue as to who they are, where they are or what they do. They are just two guys in cheap suits talking to each other. HARDY lights up a cigarette as he talks. HARDY There she was, all gussied up on the front door step. And that’s something I never thought I’d see again. LAUREL picks up a boot (the right one) with a large hole in the sole. Using a knife he levers off the heel. LAUREL What’d she want? HARDY Twenty thousand bucks. LAUREL Twenty thousand? HARDY Fifteen years of back alimony. I ** said ‘what alimony? When we broke ** up I gave you whatever money I had ** and you took the car.’ We both ** agreed that was that. LAUREL Jeez even Mae wasn’t after that much - and she wanted me to pay for a chauffeur. It’s because our faces ** are plastered all over town. ** Probably some lawyer’s bright idea. ** LAUREL levers off the other heel. -
The Playwright As Filmmaker: History, Theory and Practice, Summary of a Completed Thesis by Portfolio OTHNIEL SMITH, University of Glamorgan
Networking Knowledge: Journal of the MeCCSA Postgraduate Network, Vol 1, No 2 (2007) ARTICLE The Playwright as Filmmaker: History, Theory and Practice, Summary of a completed thesis by portfolio OTHNIEL SMITH, University of Glamorgan ABSTRACT This paper summarises my doctoral research into the work of dramatists who became filmmakers – specifically Preston Sturges, Rainer Werner Fassbinder, David Mamet, and Neil Labute. I began with the hypothesis that there is something distinctive about the work of filmmakers who have a background in writing for text-based theatre, an arena where the authorship is, on the whole, not a vexatious issue, as is the case in commercial cinema. Through case studies involving textual and contextual analyses of their films, I found common threads linking their work, in respect both of their working methods and their approach to text and performance. From this, I evolved a theoretical position involving the development of a tentative ‘dogme’ designed to smooth the path between writing plays and making films, and produced short no- budget videos illustrating it. KEYWORDS Theatre/film, Dogme, theoretical practice, Mamet, Fassbinder. Introduction The aim of this project – a thesis by portfolio, completed at the now-defunct Film Academy at the University of Glamorgan – was to contribute to that area within film theory where creativity is taken seriously as a field of study; an attempt to reconcile theory with artistry, without attempting to theorise artistry. The ‘theatrical’ is often characterised as the ‘other’ of the cinematic, within both popular and scholarly discourse. My intention was to examines the interface between the two forms, and isolate those aspects of the theatrical aesthetic which can be profitably employed within cinema, looking at the issue from the perspective of the working dramatist – my background being as a writer for theatre, radio and television. -
Moma More Cruel and Unusual Comedy Social Commentary in The
MoMA Presents: More Cruel and Unusual Comedy: Social Commentary in the American Slapstick Film Part 2 October 6-14, 2010 Silent-era slapstick highlighted social, cultural, and aesthetic themes that continue to be central concerns around the world today; issues of race, gender, propriety, and economics have traditionally been among the most vital sources for rude comedy. Drawing on the Museum’s holdings of silent comedy, acquired largely in the 1970s and 1980s by former curator Eileen Bowser, Cruel and Unusual Comedy presents an otherwise little-seen body of work to contemporary audiences from an engaging perspective. The series, which first appeared in May 2009, continues with films that take aim at issues of sexual identity, substance abuse, health care, homelessness and economic disparity, and Surrealism. On October 8 at 8PM, Ms Bowser will address the connection between silent comedy and the international film archive movement, when she introduces a program of shorts that take physical comedy to extremes of dream-like invention and destruction. Audiences today will find the vulgar zest and anarchic spirit of silent slapstick has much in common with contemporary entertainment such as Cartoon Network's Adult Swim, MTV's Jackass and the current Jackass 3-D feature. A majority of the films in the series are archival rarities, often the only known surviving version, and feature lesser- remembered performers on the order of Al St. John, Lloyd Hamilton, Fay Tincher, Hank Mann, Lupino Lane, and even one, Diana Serra Cary (a.k.a. Baby Peggy), who, at 91, is the oldest living silent film star still active. -
Inheritability of the Right of Publicity Upon the Death of the Famous
CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Vanderbilt University Law School: Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 33 Issue 5 Issue 5 - October 1980 Article 5 10-1980 Inheritability of the Right of Publicity Upon the Death of the Famous Ben C. Adams Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the Privacy Law Commons Recommended Citation Ben C. Adams, Inheritability of the Right of Publicity Upon the Death of the Famous, 33 Vanderbilt Law Review 1251 (1980) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol33/iss5/5 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. RECENT DEVELOPMENT INHERITABILITY OF THE RIGHT OF PUBLICITY UPON THE DEATH OF THE FAMOUS I. INTRODUCTION The exploitation of famous names and likenesses in the mar- keting of consumer products involves huge sums of money.1 Courts have recognized, albeit haphazardly, the tremendous pecuniary value of celebrity endorsements and have afforded individuals the right to exclusive control over their names and likenesses. 2 Al- though courts have applied various labels to this guarantee, s the term most commonly used is "right of publicity."'4 Given the large amount of money at stake, clear delineation of the scope of this right is imperative. Recently, however, state and federal courts5 have reached divergent results concerning the inheritability of the right of publicity upon the death of the famous.