Good question; here’s another ad for the same film which, according to the Imdb was indeed a 1920 release. The Rivest listing for the East Cleveland Euclid indicates it may have opened in that year. If what dave-bronx says in the note above is accurate, then the East Cleveland Euclid may have been at one time a Loew’s operation, perhaps at or soon after its opening. Prior to the mid-1960’s, although Loew’s is most generally connected with its operation of the Ohio, Stillman, and State theaters downtown, the Park at 105th and Euclid, and the Granada on the west side, it may have operated a few other theaters in Cleveland at one time or another; it did operate the Allen for awhile early in that theater’s history.
The thing that so many in Hollywood still don’t understand about 3-D (just as they did not really understand about Cinerama and the best of 70mm photography) is that the technique needs to enhance the immersive or participative quality of the film, otherwise it becomes just a promotional or exhibition gimmick. The right story and director are essential.
For example, consider the original “House of Wax:” the 3-D effects (which admittedly did include some scenes of things thrown at the audience) was principally used to involve the audience in the peculiar world of the film, especially the ambience of the two museums in the film, foggy streets, etc. Similarly, think about “How the West Was Won” – the segments, directed by Henry Hathaway, who understood both the possibilities and limits of Cinerama, outshine the part directed by John Ford, who despite his accomplishments in so many other films, did not like or understand how to use the Cinerama cameras to involve the audience. Or consider “Lawrence of Arabia” and “2001” where Lean in the former used 70mm to immerse the viewer in the immensity and heat of the desert, and Kubrick in the latter, to place us in the vastness of space and the universe.
If spatial dimensionality is really not critical to the story being told, I’d say don’t bother with 3-D. If 3-D films become a repetitive variations on the clunker “Comin' at Ya” then 3-D will fade away again.
I suppose it is because I am “getting on” as they say, but I did not like “Blair” at all, and as soon I saw the previews for “Cloverfield” I knew I did not want see it; I really dislike that amateurish-looking, jerky camera work. I also think that the original posting’s relationship the purpose of this website is a little tenuous.
Both the World East (in Richmond Heights) and the World West were rather small theaters, both located in what we now tend to call strip malls; I doubt if either had more than 500 seats. They were very shoebox in design with with simple Soundfold drapery over painted cement block walls. The lobbies were tiny.
If memory serves, they were opened simultaneously by a small chain called Rappaport Theaters, which probably saw the opportunity to open small art theaters in the greater Cleveland area, especially after the Heights Art (later Madstone Centrum) and Westwood Art (originally the Hilliard Square) theaters turned to porn.
The Ohio did not show any Cinerama films, but was in the late 1950s and 60s a 70mm roadshow house especially for films in Todd-AO. I remember seeing “South Pacific” there. Cinerama was housed first at the Palace, then at the Great Northern, and finally at the State.
The Vue Cinema at the O2 Arena in London has no box office; one either uses kiosks or buys tickets at refreshment counters. It would not surprise me (it may have already happened or is in the works in other places) if print-your-tickets-at-home becomes widely available eventually for movies as well as is already the case for events such as Broadway shows and other events through agencies as such as Ticketmaster, though the service fees are substantial.
It is puzzling; were it not for the fact that the building to the right of the theatre appears to remain the same (right down the connection for utility wires on the building’s extreme left), one might think that one of the archival pictures is mislabled. I think it is possible that the building in the 1919 picture may have completely replaced for some reason. (Perhaps too it was only the building through which one entered the auditorium section). Comparing the 1945 and 1917 pictures, it would appear that the building to the left of the theatre was replaced, as it is not as high as the theatre building whereas in the 1919 picture the building to the left theatre was just about as high as the theatre’s facade.
I saw a clip from “Public Enemies” last night; there’s a scene shot in the interior of the Aurora Paramount which may be standing in for the interior of the Biograph.
I am not sure that this theatre was the Capitol, based on information from other sources.
Thunder Bay in Ontario was formed by a merger of the cities of Fort William and Port Arthur sometime around 1969-1970. Prior to the merger, Odeon operated theatres in both cities; both theatres were operated under the Odeon name and apparently opened within a day of each other in 1950 or 1951. After the creation of Thunder Bay, probably to avoid confusion, Odeon renamed its theatre in the former Port Arthur section of the city the Court (it was located on the corner of Court and Park Streets) and its theater in the Fort William section, the Victoria, no doubt in view of the fact that it was on Victoria street. (In a similar way, Odeon renamed its original Odeon Toronto the Odeon Carlton to avoid confusion with an older Pdeon Theatre in Toronto which was never owned by the Odeon Corporation).
The Capitol (which was owned by Famous Players) appears to have remained the Capito1, until its closure sometime around 1999-2000. This article indicates that medieval theatre production moved into the former Capitol theatre space in 2001: View link
Ad for stage and screen show at the RKO Palace in 1950:
View link
Cinerama ad in 1956:
View link
Actually, the answer was available here on CT all along – The Doan Theater in Cleveland was formerly Loew’s Euclid.
Good question; here’s another ad for the same film which, according to the Imdb was indeed a 1920 release. The Rivest listing for the East Cleveland Euclid indicates it may have opened in that year. If what dave-bronx says in the note above is accurate, then the East Cleveland Euclid may have been at one time a Loew’s operation, perhaps at or soon after its opening. Prior to the mid-1960’s, although Loew’s is most generally connected with its operation of the Ohio, Stillman, and State theaters downtown, the Park at 105th and Euclid, and the Granada on the west side, it may have operated a few other theaters in Cleveland at one time or another; it did operate the Allen for awhile early in that theater’s history.
The thing that so many in Hollywood still don’t understand about 3-D (just as they did not really understand about Cinerama and the best of 70mm photography) is that the technique needs to enhance the immersive or participative quality of the film, otherwise it becomes just a promotional or exhibition gimmick. The right story and director are essential.
For example, consider the original “House of Wax:” the 3-D effects (which admittedly did include some scenes of things thrown at the audience) was principally used to involve the audience in the peculiar world of the film, especially the ambience of the two museums in the film, foggy streets, etc. Similarly, think about “How the West Was Won” – the segments, directed by Henry Hathaway, who understood both the possibilities and limits of Cinerama, outshine the part directed by John Ford, who despite his accomplishments in so many other films, did not like or understand how to use the Cinerama cameras to involve the audience. Or consider “Lawrence of Arabia” and “2001” where Lean in the former used 70mm to immerse the viewer in the immensity and heat of the desert, and Kubrick in the latter, to place us in the vastness of space and the universe.
If spatial dimensionality is really not critical to the story being told, I’d say don’t bother with 3-D. If 3-D films become a repetitive variations on the clunker “Comin' at Ya” then 3-D will fade away again.
I suppose it is because I am “getting on” as they say, but I did not like “Blair” at all, and as soon I saw the previews for “Cloverfield” I knew I did not want see it; I really dislike that amateurish-looking, jerky camera work. I also think that the original posting’s relationship the purpose of this website is a little tenuous.
In fact, it was at the top of the list:
View link
Both the World East (in Richmond Heights) and the World West were rather small theaters, both located in what we now tend to call strip malls; I doubt if either had more than 500 seats. They were very shoebox in design with with simple Soundfold drapery over painted cement block walls. The lobbies were tiny.
If memory serves, they were opened simultaneously by a small chain called Rappaport Theaters, which probably saw the opportunity to open small art theaters in the greater Cleveland area, especially after the Heights Art (later Madstone Centrum) and Westwood Art (originally the Hilliard Square) theaters turned to porn.
The Ohio did not show any Cinerama films, but was in the late 1950s and 60s a 70mm roadshow house especially for films in Todd-AO. I remember seeing “South Pacific” there. Cinerama was housed first at the Palace, then at the Great Northern, and finally at the State.
The Vue Cinema at the O2 Arena in London has no box office; one either uses kiosks or buys tickets at refreshment counters. It would not surprise me (it may have already happened or is in the works in other places) if print-your-tickets-at-home becomes widely available eventually for movies as well as is already the case for events such as Broadway shows and other events through agencies as such as Ticketmaster, though the service fees are substantial.
It was actually in Lyndhurst; it’s listed here: /theaters/7393/
Two pictures of the theatre as it was in 1947 from the Ontario archives:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011951.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011952.jpg
It is puzzling; were it not for the fact that the building to the right of the theatre appears to remain the same (right down the connection for utility wires on the building’s extreme left), one might think that one of the archival pictures is mislabled. I think it is possible that the building in the 1919 picture may have completely replaced for some reason. (Perhaps too it was only the building through which one entered the auditorium section). Comparing the 1945 and 1917 pictures, it would appear that the building to the left of the theatre was replaced, as it is not as high as the theatre building whereas in the 1919 picture the building to the left theatre was just about as high as the theatre’s facade.
I saw a clip from “Public Enemies” last night; there’s a scene shot in the interior of the Aurora Paramount which may be standing in for the interior of the Biograph.
Two pictures of the theatre as it was in 1947 from the Ontario Archives:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011946.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011947.jpg
Here two pictures from the Ontario Archives of the theatre in 1944:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011953.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011954.jpg
Apprantly the dinner theatre is defunct. According to this document, the owner is willing to donate it for use a performing arts centre:
www.thunderbay.ca/docs/FWNeighbourhood/5096.doc
Here is a recent picture of the Classic Theatre in Cobalt:
http://www.panoramio.com/photo/17403559
I am not sure that this theatre was the Capitol, based on information from other sources.
Thunder Bay in Ontario was formed by a merger of the cities of Fort William and Port Arthur sometime around 1969-1970. Prior to the merger, Odeon operated theatres in both cities; both theatres were operated under the Odeon name and apparently opened within a day of each other in 1950 or 1951. After the creation of Thunder Bay, probably to avoid confusion, Odeon renamed its theatre in the former Port Arthur section of the city the Court (it was located on the corner of Court and Park Streets) and its theater in the Fort William section, the Victoria, no doubt in view of the fact that it was on Victoria street. (In a similar way, Odeon renamed its original Odeon Toronto the Odeon Carlton to avoid confusion with an older Pdeon Theatre in Toronto which was never owned by the Odeon Corporation).
The Capitol (which was owned by Famous Players) appears to have remained the Capito1, until its closure sometime around 1999-2000. This article indicates that medieval theatre production moved into the former Capitol theatre space in 2001:
View link
And here’s an updated link to the theatre as the Madison in 1919:
View link
Here are updated links to what the theatre looked like in 1947 as originally posted by Chad I on October 19, 2004:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011965.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011966.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011967.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011968.jpg
Here’s an updated link to the 1944 pictures of the Strand in the Ontario Archives:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011912.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011913.jpg
Here are updated links to the pictures of the theatre as it was in 1948 as originally posted by Chuck1231 on September 27, 2005:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012542.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012543.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012544.jpg
These are updated links to the pictures of the theatre as it was in 1930 originally posted by KenRoe on September 2, 2007:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012551.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012552.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012553.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012554.jpg
Here are updated links to the pictures originally posted by Chad I on October 19, 2004 of the theatre as it was in 1944:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011975.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011976.jpg
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0011977.jpg
A 1947 picture from the Ontario Archives:
http://ao.minisisinc.com/Webimages/I0012555.jpg