Q: Sequential (and nested) parenthetical sentences and phrases According to MLA and APA, sequential parenthetical citations should be separated by a semi-colon, so: "John Avery and George Marshall both say that capitalism has existed in America since the Revolutionary War (18; 365)."
But I cannot find what do with with sequential parenthetical phrases and sentences outside of that context. Which of the following examples is correct?
(1) The film ...Et mourir de plaisir (Le sang et la rose) (English:...To die with pleasure [The blood and the rose]) (1960) is a French classic adapted from JS Le Fanu's Carmilla.
(2) The film ...Et mourir de plaisir (Le sang et la rose; English:...To die with pleasure [The blood and the rose]; 1960) is a French classic adapted from JS Le Fanu's Carmilla.
PS: Am I properly nesting parentheses above?

A: In this instance, the name of the film contains words in brackets: it's ...Et mourir de plaisir (Le sang et la rose). Even the ellipsis is part of the title.
Those parenthetical words shouldn't be subsumed into the reference, because they are part of the title and belong with the first four words. Thus your second example is wrong.
However, it would certainly be possible to put the 1960 in the reference, with a semicolon. I would prefer to set the title in italics to make absolutely clear what is the title and what is the translation. There are too many similar brackets otherwise.

The film ...Et mourir de plaisir (Le sang et la rose) (English: ...To die with pleasure (The blood and the rose); 1960) is a French classic ...

Note that the usual English title for this film is Blood and Roses, which solves a number of problems.

A: The second option seems best. The parentheses are still where they would be if the part in brackets weren't there.
