Radio City Music Hall

1260 6th Avenue,
New York, NY 10020

Unfavorite 116 people favorited this theater

Showing 2,851 - 2,875 of 3,322 comments

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 17, 2005 at 11:25 am

Warren, maybe this will help. Back then the woman in Blossoms was a heroine. Today in the movies it is Vera Drake(yeah right she was performing abortions because she was a deeply sympathetic and concerned woman and it didn’t have anything to do with money. Is this a true story or was it made up by one of today’s idiot screenwriters?)
This was a way the screenwriter in ‘41 could broach such a sensitive subject and make his heroine a staunch foe of it. Today the movie would be picketed by the women’s movement.(I’m pro choice by the way but I do think it’s a great line.)

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 17, 2005 at 11:11 am

But if you think about it it does. A woman working to give dignity to young mothers without husbands would never say “Good girls don’t have babies."
Speaking about Garson(who was also radiant in black and white-Random Harvest, Pride and Prejudice you name it) I obtained a Music Hall program for Blossoms and there is an article included which discusses her Titian Hair in technicolor.
She was actually crowned at the Music Hall in a ceremony celebrating the success of her films there. I suppose the tiara is gathering dust in Texas somewhere.

RobertR
RobertR on January 17, 2005 at 10:38 am

This reminds me of the classic Summer Place when Sandra Dee asks Troy Donahue if he’s ever been “bad” with girls. Kinder, simpler times.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 17, 2005 at 10:18 am

I think “bad” is correct(not sure because I read the article 35 years ago and as I’ve said I’ve never seen the film.)Think about it in the context of a woman trying to eliminate the stigma of illegitimate children and unwed mothers. Then it makes perfect sense and would cause a strong reaction from people. It would today as well, though not all of it positive unlike those 6000 people(well the adults anyway) sitting in the Hall in ‘41.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 17, 2005 at 8:33 am

In 1970 Look magazine had a one page article where one of its writers talked about his experiences of going to the Music Hall starting with Swing Time. He recalls that one of the biggest audience responses to a film were the cheers that followed when in Blossoms in the Dust Greer Garson says “Bad girls don’t have babies."
I had no idea what that meant and why people would cheer. I still haven’t seen the film but of course now understand the line. I wonder though today how people would respond to such a declaration.

JimRankin
JimRankin on January 17, 2005 at 7:25 am

It is sad if today’s remodeling of the soffit of the marquee is not being done to the standards with which it was built, but one can understand the replacement of the incandescents with fluorescent lamps, even though they are ‘colder’ in appearance than the “fire-like' bulbs. Fluorescents are much cheaper in the long run, and that is how the accountants of the management are responsible to look at it. The Hall is not owned by a charity, but by businessmen who intend to make a profit, else they will abandon the whole thing, and then once again, the Hall will be in danger of demolition! The odd light bulb sockets Benjamin does see now, may well be the remains of the 1950s trend of adding Goose Neck lamp holders to project on occasional banners under the marquee or even one sheets or standees. These did the spotlight job cheaply, but they also rusted out over the years and now many a marquee bears scars of where they once were, often with eye screws poking out of the metal with remnants of the hanging wire that once went down to the PAR-type bulb that was in the gooseneck lamp holder to keep it in the curved position. Just a little speculation on my part, but I have a hunch that it is true.

Benjamin
Benjamin on January 16, 2005 at 6:51 pm

I went by the Music Hall a few weeks ago to take a closer look at the underside of the marquee to figure out what it was that bothered me about the changes made to it during the most recent renvation.

Now that I’ve looked at it more closely, I’m wondering if I remembered correctly when I thought it originally had those “silver bowl” lightbulbs that Jim Rankin so kindly looked into in his December 17 posts. There seems to be mixed evidence about what the underside of the marquee was like:

On the one hand almost all of the recesses (coffers?) in the grid currently have plain reflector tiles (which appear to be metal pans coated with enamel) which give no indication that original light sockets had been filled in. Did the renovators actually reproduce all those pans, but this time without light sockets, for the renovation?

On the other hand, there seem to be about three or four very rusty light bulbs sockets scattered amongst the hundreds of plain coffers in the grid, which would seem to indicate that “silver bowl” lamps were indeed part of the original lighting scheme and that the renovators did indeed replace the old reflector pans.

But then again, at least one of these light sockets was plainly off-center — so maybe these three or four light sockets were just ad hoc additions to the original reflector pans?

The interior ticket lobby has a ceiling scheme that is similiar to — but actually different than — that of the “silver bowl” scheme I thought the marquee had. Maybe I confused the ticket lobby’s scheme with that found at the Whitney Museum?

I think either the “Godfather I” or “Godfather II” has a scene with Al Pacino and Diane Keaton that was done on location beneath the unrenovated marquee of the Music Hall. I wondered if one can tell from this scene what the underside of the marquee was like?


Whatever the case, one of the strong negatives about the renovation is that the reflector pans now reflect ugly, cold bluish florescent light — instead of the warm, fire-like incandescent light which I’m pretty sure was there pre-renovation.

Two other changes that lessen the original effect:

1) There are now obtrusive (but, sadly, necessary) security cameras hung from the underside of the marquee.

2) There are also lots of electric heaters hung from the grid. While these are certainly welcome, perhaps they could have been hung slightly differently to work better with the aesthetics of the grid, rather than to damage its original handsome effect.

While I realize all of this is not major, I think the cumulative effect of all these kinds of little changes (like the addition of those ugly pedestrian barriers on Sixth Ave. and the addition of blaring outdoor speakers) really distorts the original beauty and dignity of the theater.

Dorothy
Dorothy on January 15, 2005 at 7:08 am

Just came across some old wooden hangers with names:

Radio City Music Hall Taylor Shop
Roxy Clothes Stores in Principal Clothes

can anyone shed some light on these?

(father-in-law was violinist in orchestra pit during opening followed by many years at RCMH)

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 11, 2005 at 6:26 am

I’m sure that even if it had occured to anybody at Cablevision or Disney(not that it would) the powers that be would not have seen any point to it. When I worked at SONY years ago they didn’t see any reason to release the soundtrack to My Fair Lady because they already had the Broadway cast album out. It took them years to put it on CD(of course all that time it was available in Europe.)
Ah, to make a lot of money sucking up to the right people and making bad decisions.

chconnol
chconnol on January 11, 2005 at 5:32 am

Vincent wrote:
“The restored [Mary Poppings] film should have been shown with an abreviated Christmas show in November to launch the DVD. That way people would have been able to see the film as it was mean’t to be seen(they would have been stunned.) and there would have been enormous publicity for the Hall and the DVD.”

THAT is a great, grand idea. But the folks who run Disney and the Music Hall aren’t creative types interested in booking unique things. They want their $$$ and run with it.

We bought the Mary Poppins DVD for our children and they could not sit through the entire thing at home. I anticipated this because people don’t remember that the movie is a surprising two-hours and fifteen minutes long. When I saw this in the theaters (at Green Acres in Valley Stream) at the age of 8, I was in a captive audience meaning that I couldn’t just get up and walk out. So you’re kind of forced to sit through it and either get into it or not. And yep, I got into it BIG TIME. That’s the problem with DVD viewing at home, especially with young children. If and when they bored, they can simply get up and walk out and move onto something else.

Having seen this years Christmas show (read my comments above concerning this dismal thing..) it would’ve been truly awesome for my daughter to have seen “Mary Poppins” there. She, like I, would’ve been captive and would’ve LOVED it.

And if they had re-issued it at RCMH, I would’ve made it a point to take her to see it there. It’s one of the best musical films ever made.

PeterApruzzese
PeterApruzzese on January 10, 2005 at 10:05 am

Vincent –

It’s sad, but Disney does not currently offer Mary Poppins for regular theatrical bookings. I tried to get it last November for my Big Screen Classics series and it’s out of circulation. Disney should have had an East Coast re-premiere of the film (they did so at, I think, the El Capitan in LA), but it’s not the RCMH’s fault if they didn’t show it.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 10, 2005 at 9:10 am

The restored film should have been shown with an abreviated Christmas show in November to launch the DVD. That way people would have been able to see the film as it was mean’t to be seen(they would have been stunned.) and there would have been enormous publicity for the Hall and the DVD.
Why are the powers that be so obtuse? Can somebody please tell me?

ErikH
ErikH on January 10, 2005 at 8:50 am

Speaking of coming attractions at RCMH, the 40th anniversary DVD of “Mary Poppins” includes a trailer announcing the film’s return to RCMH to launch the film’s reissue in the early 1970s.

RobertR
RobertR on January 10, 2005 at 7:59 am

I think by the 70’s the Music hall had no choice but to run regular coming attractions. One of the main reasons was that some of the family films they booked were so obscure people would have no idea what they were.

Mike (saps)
Mike (saps) on January 10, 2005 at 7:45 am

Good movie with wonderful Sandy Dennis, but maybe wrong for the Music Hall.

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 10, 2005 at 7:42 am

bad movie, poor stage show, just days before strike.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 10, 2005 at 7:11 am

BOB Why do you say “on that dark day?” Is it a bad movie or was this during the strike?

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 7, 2005 at 7:19 pm

That’s right too—Even though I was a thirty-year-old presumptive adult at the time, I marvelled that Hollywood could advertise a yet unfinished and certainly unedited movie six months in advance of its scheduled opening—a marketing marvel. That, by the way, was the first time I’d seen coming attractions at RCMH. In the ‘40s and '50s, as Simon L has so eloquently described, the announcement of the next attraction unreeled as a b&w film strip, home-movie-style, in minuscules running bottom to top against a cross-hatched mesh background, while the grand organ played a pertinent melody (minor key for drama, major for comedy), always at the end of the newsreel and before the orchestral overture. In '72, I was shocked that RCMH was showing coming attractions, just as the local dives did. Before “Butterflies,” the previous picture I had seen there was “Up the Down Staircase” in '67, and even on that dark day there were no coming attractions. Sometime in-between, something had happened.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 7, 2005 at 2:48 pm

By the way I remember that during this run of Butterflies in July there was what seemed like a 20 minute trailer for the Christmas attraction 1776.(Interesting because Blythe Danner created the Goldie Hawn role but was in 1776 instead.) And I remember seeing Cool Cool Considerate Men. But when I saw the film at Christmas the number didn’t exist at all!

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 6, 2005 at 8:33 pm

Right—the setting was Hawaiian, and the routine concluded on the runway. I should’ve stayed through repeat performances ‘till I caught a shoe.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 6, 2005 at 12:22 pm

But BOB did they do that in this stage show? I seem to remember them doing an Hawaiian number in grass skirts. Maybe I’m just dreaming it.

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 6, 2005 at 10:00 am

Warren—As a kid in the ‘50s, I heard people refer to this theater as “the RCMH,” much as one would refer to its rival as “the Roxy.” On his “Toast of the Town” TV review, for example, the stolid Ed Sullivan would introduce celebrity guests as “starrrs of a fffine fffilm nnnow playing at the RCMH.” The particle nonetheless struck me as funny, since none of my family used it in that way—we always omitted it in deference, perhaps, to the theater’s exceptionality: “We went to RCMH” (often just “Radio City,” without “Music Hall,” but sometimes “the Music Hall” [particled!] without “Radio City”—gotta assign a linguist to this case). I remember a neighborhood kid who wrought a splendid inversion: “Radio Music City Hall.” (Fatefully, she is now married to a world-class musician and is herself a great political activist.)

Vincent—Through a quirk, I too had seen “Butterflies Are Free” at RCMH, and I vividly remember the Rockettes' routine: the thirty-six of them (still thirty-six in ‘72) opened their act on center-stage, then filed out onto the narrow (what-do-you-call-it?) runway that rimmed the orchestra pit to perform their high kicks. I was sitting in the third row, and could only hope that one of them might dropkick a shoe into my lap—just as in '40s Hollywood musicals would happen to a perplexed old geezer in the front stalls.

VincentParisi
VincentParisi on January 6, 2005 at 6:52 am

That book for me was a great disappointment. The photos of the stage productions look like they were taken by a tourist with an instamatic(they probably were) and there are so many factual eras that it was truly a wasted opportunity. A coffee table book in conjunction with the Hall is needed.
I saw Butterflies at the Hall(on a weekday morning I couldn’t get a seat in the orchestra!) One of the best programs of the ‘70s with the last appearance of the Undersea Ballet.
'72 was probably the last year the Music Hall showed films of any quality.

Myron
Myron on January 6, 2005 at 5:48 am

Yes, I remember the “Ave Maria” at the beginning of the Easter pageant.It was amazing! Performers, each holding a lit candle would appear all around the audience with the organ music playing. It was awesome! We saw “The Singing Nun” with Debbie Reynolds. Anyone remember that each seat had an individual light, so the program could be read? The lights were later turned-off; I guess people complained it was annoying! On a different note, I think my deceased mother saw “Butterflies Are Free” with Goldie Hawn at the Music Hall, but I’m unsure.Is there a complete list anywhere of ALL films shown at the Music Hall?

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 4, 2005 at 8:11 pm

Right, SimonL, as you well should know, since last 15 July, 1 September, and various times in-between you wrote vividly about your ushering at the Roxy in ‘56-'57. (Anyone skiming this post who hasn’t read those contributions should scroll back to them immediately.) I’ll meanwhile continue my current comments about the Roxy on that theater’s site page.