The metal halide lights I mentioned above were used quite successfully in the former STANLEY in Jersey City, NJ when it was converted to an Assembly Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The blue sky was painted over in white to best reflect white halide up-lights hidden behind the building facades along the horizon line, but when they give tours, dozens of such lights in BLUE are turned on as the white ones are turned off, and with the stars, the effect is quite convincing. Pity the VALENCIA could not have been treated in much the same way. We must acknowledge the efforts of the Witnesses in preserving so much of that and other theatres which they have converted. And at the STANLEY and at many of their other such conversions, they give free tours —and with free refreshments!
Indeed the atmosphere was ruined by the “gaudy”! chandelier hung from the stars and clouds (‘atmospheric’) ceiling, but we must not be harsh in condemning this attempt to get more light to those trying to read their humnals or count their donations in the seats below. True, I recommended in a previous post that at least they could have painted an angel upon the ceiling with his arm outstretched as though holding up the chandelier, but we must be thankful that “Rev. Ike” did not also have the midnight blue ceiling painted white to reflect the meager light from the chandelier. Really, if light is what he wanted, he would have been better off to insert black-liner, recessed metal halide lamps into the dark ceiling; these down-lights would have projected far more lumens to those needing them, without doing much damage to the vista of the ‘sky’. Still, should the church decide to leave the place, it could be returned to theatre use without too much money, if the churches changes have been as meager as claimed. Let us hope.
ERD is perfectly right; castigating the current occupants of what has not been a theatre building for around 40 years, serves no purpose. The attempts to recall the original signage at least reminds the younger ones that this was once other than another mere office building. Perhaps some of them will investigate and learn of this and other grand movie palaces of their parents' or grandparents' times and of what we have lost and failed to pass down as their heritage.
At the least, the owner should spring for a sizeable plaque to be mounted where the passerbys can see it, and yet not where metal scavangers can steal it (a common practice by drug addicts who sell such plaques to metal salvage yards who are none too scrupulous about where pricy non-ferrous metals come from!); perhaps inside a vestibule seen through outer locked glass doors? If no one else will volunteer, I will gladly write the historic text for such a plaque, if the owners will but contact me by clicking on my name in blue below, and that will take them to my profile page where there is the CONTACT link. (I do not give it here because of robots that scan the web for E-mails to which to send more spam).
Knatcal is right that the Chinese is really famous for its history and longevity —along with the footprints, etc., in the forecort. It is certainly not the foremost movie palace architecturally in the Los Angeles area, and its fame is therefore not of that origin, contrary to that impression given in the VHS tape “Movie Palaces” put out by a cable TV network a fews years ago and reviewed and offered at www.Amazon.com With the LOS ANGELES, the ORPHEUM, and a host of others, the CHINESE is really more of a phenomenon than the epitome of a movie palace, and, in fact, its unique balcony arrangement really puts it more in a class by itself within the palaces.
Hello, Porter; it’s been a long time since we have heard from you, and I thought you might like to know that until they enlarge the forthcoming images, anyone using Internet Explorer 6 or later can turn on the Magnifier feature and it will open a window about two inches wide above the main window in which one can view the main screen portion that the cursor is over in several different magnifications according to the setting one adopts (3x is usually the best). If you put the cursor over the photos, they will be much more easy to see. This works for most anything on the screen, so enjoy!
This is wonderful news, not just for our ‘cousins’ across the Atlantic, but also for all lovers of theatre architecture around the world who cannot hope to get to England to see these images. I, for one, can only hope that someday such a comprehensive Image Database can be created here in the USA, though the task may be a bit more expensive with an estimated 30,000 movie palaces and an additional 50,000 other forms of theatres to catalog —though many of them were never photographed, sad to say. Sites such as both CTs as well as several societies and universities and the Library of Congress have made goodly starts, but I am not sure if they will ever find the funds to be as complete as this British effort seems to be. We can only hope that in time, other nations will follow the British lead. I’m sure that everyone looks forward to the announcement of the URL of the site.
It says that it is “inside” the theatre, but does that mean that the theatre is gone that surrounded the site, or that the somehow the theatre still exists (operating?!) around the home?? Would have been nice if the poster could have included at least a floor plan sketch if not photos of this oddity.
Is this David Naylor’s GREAT AMERICAN MOVIE PALACES, the National Trust For Historic Preservation soft cover published in 1987? Since the cover price was $16.95, and IF it is in good condition, your asking price is fair. See my review of that title under its name at www.amazon.com
I also send my best wishes, but you must realize that it will be an uphill battle, unless you happen to have Great Natural Perseverence, millions of dollars available to complete Purchase of the theatre, Renovations of the property, Securing films that your neighbors want to pay to see, and enough funds to carry you over for Years until the place MAY make a small profit. By all means, read over the FAQs and the posts of the FORUMS on the site for cinema operators: www.bigscreenbiz.com where the pros have answered many of the questions you post, and many you have yet to encounter!
The “guide books” ‘angus’ refers to are quite wrong in saying that the PORTLAND PARAMOUNT is “identical” to Milwaukee’s former WARNER. While the two do have some grillework in common, the grilles are of different designs and most of the rest of the auditoriums and lobbies are also quite different. Closer to the Milwaukee WARNER is the WARNER in Erie, PA., though that theatre’s fabulous 1920s marquee with stained glass corners and light bulb chasers still survives and operates as a civic performing arts center!
As to Marcus Entertainment Corp. wanting a place downtown, that may be true if it were a new multiplex, but I believe that their statement is more —as the government always puts it— ‘for public consumption’ and I think that the real story is that the city fathers leaned heavily on Marcus to make the then-proposed Pabst City Development look more positive to the taxpayers (who through their aldermen subsequently denied the eagerly wanted loan from the city of a mere $41,000,000 to help all the businesses concerned get a guaranteed return on their very speculative proposed investment of converting the long vacant former Pabst brewery buildings into a claimed boon to the city). Always watch out when investors want someone else’s money to take the risk! If a business plan has a reasonable chance of success in the long haul, any buisness with the capitol will ante up for the profits they expect. If they don’t really expect long term success, they try to get others to take the risk, while they content themselves with the short term profits, and then abandon the property. This is one of the reasons that the WARNER/GRAND has been vacant for so long: no one can figure out how to make a sure long term profit when the city has said that it will NOT come to the financial rescue of the property.
Vincent, don’t hold your breath waiting for anyone to “fight to keep them from being torn down.” While most people can empathize with a movie palace whose decor they appreciated, very few non-theatres buffs appreciate the much more uninspired ‘decors’ of the multiplexes, and regard them as merely the outgrowths of a shopping mall, with rare exceptions. And like you, I believe it is only a matter of time before the conglomerates pull their money out of the cinemas and put it into the pay-per-view, direct-feed-to-the-viewer services. As soon as they can eliminate all but a few showcase cinemas, they will get more money by eliminating the middle man, the cinemas the do not own.
If I recall correctly, “Man O'War” was the name of a famous winning race horse in Kentucky, and if so it would bring up positive connotations to the locals, as well as being aggressivge and sassy to those with a taste for such as in today’s youth culture. I’m a Yankee, so I cannot comment on this in point of fact; we’ll have to wait for a local to come forward. Their web site provides no clue, the lazy oafs. Normally I don’t like someone adding my name to the response lists for minor theatres such as this, but this one was fun.
Angus, I contacted Larry Widen, author of the 1986 book “Milwaukee Movie Palaces” and he recalls the Mirisch name in regard to these theatres, though he does not recall just where he found it back then. So, as he sayes, you are not imagining it. I am an architecture specialist, so I defer to his memory.
The decay of films described in earlier posts is certainly true, and it has been accelerating ever since the major studos were bought by the conglomerates in the 1970s. And while the studio system did whitewash the often scadalous behaviour of the ‘stars’, it did not originate for that purpose. It originated as a way for the man who found it to make the greatest profit while still making a name for himself as a producer of quality entertainment. The long and the short of it is that there were ‘some’ morals back before the Vietnam war, but after that there were absolutely none, save the overriding greed of the conglomerates to make MONEY and more MONEY, and did I forget to mention MONEY? To them, nothing else at all matters; that is what a conglomerate is for. They wouldn’t know or care what ‘art’ was if it came up and bit them! Since they are the product of a society with no morals (and how can one have true morals without an ACCURATE knowledge of God?!!) and the people who watch the films have, for the most part, no real morals, why should we expect quality films? Each conglomerate has a committee of financial and marketing types who meet to consider each new film idea and then pass or fail it solely on its potential to make MONEY, their god.
Irv’s list of films from 1970 appears better only in comparison to the dreck of 2004, and if compared to most any list from, say, the 1940s, those of 1970 would appear amoral at best, though far more glitzy. We have mostly dug ourselves into this pit, and there is no real way to dig ourselves out unless we were to (gasp!) renounce MONEY as the real god of our society. I suggest that we do NOT hold our collective breath until that happens! If the JERSEY or any other theatre is to survive, it cannot be on the silver screen offal that the conglomerates shovel at us via disrobed actors spouting inane “relevancies” as they engage in sex, soot-em-ups, sex, car chases, sex, and special effects mayhem. For those with morals, cling to them, for the Hollywood conglomerates are intent upon stripping you of them (along with the cash in your wallet).
In today’s NewsFlash by the Theatre Historical Society, former president Joe DuciBella announced that negotiations are well underway to demolish this Rapp & Rapp atmospheric to build more condos in a city with one of the highest percentages of condos in the nation. The famous duo did few atmospherics, and therefore this charming design will be all the greater loss.
If you can’t track the owners or successors of a chain, then you are best advised to contact the largest repository of theatre photos in the world: The Theatre Historical Soc. of America at: www.historictheatres.org Click on their Archive link to find out details. Best Wishes.
In case no one comes forward with a direct answer, I suggest you consider going to the Cleveland building permits office or wherever they store their files of building drawings. They are often on microfilm and if you can view those for the theatre, they will show just what was under the theatre and where any doors/exits were. If there are no drawings preserved, the permits will detail how many floors and the classifications of the floors as to commercial use and that will tell you if there was a bowling alley. Likewise, the city’s Tax Assessor’s records will indicate the building classifications and what was charged and paid and those will be clues as to the use of any lower story. You might also check the local Clerks of Court since litigation with theatres is not unknown, and any case involving the theatre (usually under the legal owners' names) could tell much about the building.
By far the largest repository of images of theatres is the Archive of the Theatre Historical Society of America, though I am not sure that they will have a category of ‘marquees with porno titles’ even though they do have hundreds of shots of marquees. It would be best to go there if you can, to their HQ, 15 miles west of Chicago in Elmhurst, a pleasant college town. Driving directions and access via their interurban ‘Path’ train are detailed there. If you cannot get there, you could inquire of their Ex. Dir., Rich Sklenar, who will eventually get back to you with some results. See the Archive link on their site. Here is their site: www.historictheatres.org
Getting artifacts from a demolished theatre is problematic; usually the owner no longer cares about his former ‘investment’ since it is no longer making money for him. Once demolition begins, the place is usually the legal property of the demolition contractor, and they will usually not take the time to sell items unless one is prepared to ‘bribe’ someone on site to get the items desired. Even if they are willing, there can be legal problems to ‘harvesting’ anything from the building until it is off site in a landfill, but then they are technically the property of the landfill operator, and everyone is worried about legal libality if unauthorized people are on their sites!
Possibly you could find pieces on E-Bay by doing a search by the name of the theatre, but if someone found something and did not know where it came from, they might list it only under such as ‘Theatre items.’ In a place as small as Hawaii, there can’t be that many landfills to ‘take a look into,’ unless they have taken to dumping such into the ocean. You might approach a demolition chief or such for a landfill that you will agree to split any money you would make on resale with them; that might get the dollar signs in their eyes to light up and grant you entry. Best Wishes.
In his MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES of 1986, author/photographer Larry Widen has photos of the notorious PRINCESS which served porn from about 1964 to its razing in 1984. He has such a photo that you are looking for, as well as a feature article about this unusual 1909 theatre in MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Society. Larry can be reached through his web site: www.widenonline.com
In his MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES of 1986, author/photographer Larry Widen has photos of the notorious PRINCESS which served porn from about 1964 to its razing in 1984. He has such a photo that you are looking for, as well as a feature article about this unusual 1909 theatre in MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Society. Larry can be reached through his web site: www.widenonline.com
An excellent article conveys the history of the ORPHEUM as the cover story of the 1st Quarter issue of MARQUEE magazine of 2005 of the Theatre Historical Soc. and can be ordered as a back issue via their web site’s page at: www.historictheatres.org The nine pages devoted to the theatre contain 17 b&w photos, and the following article discusses the chain that founded the ORPHEUM: Rickards & Nace, hence the dual initial monogram on the seat standards.
The captions for the cover as well as that for the photo of the proscenium on page nine are wrong in describing the mouldings on the proscenium as “rope [moulds]” since these are actually Torus moulds here heavily enriched as described by my caption given in the photo of them in color on the web site I list in my previous comment.
Bobs, since you are so in love with the Chicago PARADISE —and it is a wonderful theatre to be in love with— let me tell you of how I better experience the interiors of theatres via photos: get as large a photo as you can and then, using a large magnifier, go as close in as you can and then back away slowly, and you will get the impression that you are inside the space. This is a technique used on many documentary TV shows when they have only photos to work from. Short of building a miniature of it (which you might be able to do via blueprints on file), this is as close to being inside that you can get, though I’m told that large commercial photo studios can adapt standard photos to projectable stereo photos that you could project upon a large wall, and sitting close to that could also put you ‘inside.’ Of course, you probably know that there are places such as Great Big Pictures that can enlarge any photo to almost any size, perhaps as large as a wall in your home. The Theatre Historical Soc. will sell 8x10 prints of the photos in the Annual you have and may well have others. Inquire of them via their web site: www.historictheatres.org and under ARCHIVE you will find their fees. Inquire of their Ex. Dir., Richard Sklenar, and he will send you an inventory of available photos (you might want to pay for photocopies of those not in the Annual in order to make your selection). Best Wishes.
I got my authority for the description of the organ from Larry Widen’s listing of the MILWAUKEE in his 1986 book (out of print) MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES. He there lists the organ as a “Wurli-Bart”. I don’t know his source for this characterization, but you might contact him through his web site: www.widenonline.com
The metal halide lights I mentioned above were used quite successfully in the former STANLEY in Jersey City, NJ when it was converted to an Assembly Hall of Jehovah’s Witnesses. The blue sky was painted over in white to best reflect white halide up-lights hidden behind the building facades along the horizon line, but when they give tours, dozens of such lights in BLUE are turned on as the white ones are turned off, and with the stars, the effect is quite convincing. Pity the VALENCIA could not have been treated in much the same way. We must acknowledge the efforts of the Witnesses in preserving so much of that and other theatres which they have converted. And at the STANLEY and at many of their other such conversions, they give free tours —and with free refreshments!
Opps: “humnals” above, are, of course, ‘hymnals.’
Indeed the atmosphere was ruined by the “gaudy”! chandelier hung from the stars and clouds (‘atmospheric’) ceiling, but we must not be harsh in condemning this attempt to get more light to those trying to read their humnals or count their donations in the seats below. True, I recommended in a previous post that at least they could have painted an angel upon the ceiling with his arm outstretched as though holding up the chandelier, but we must be thankful that “Rev. Ike” did not also have the midnight blue ceiling painted white to reflect the meager light from the chandelier. Really, if light is what he wanted, he would have been better off to insert black-liner, recessed metal halide lamps into the dark ceiling; these down-lights would have projected far more lumens to those needing them, without doing much damage to the vista of the ‘sky’. Still, should the church decide to leave the place, it could be returned to theatre use without too much money, if the churches changes have been as meager as claimed. Let us hope.
ERD is perfectly right; castigating the current occupants of what has not been a theatre building for around 40 years, serves no purpose. The attempts to recall the original signage at least reminds the younger ones that this was once other than another mere office building. Perhaps some of them will investigate and learn of this and other grand movie palaces of their parents' or grandparents' times and of what we have lost and failed to pass down as their heritage.
At the least, the owner should spring for a sizeable plaque to be mounted where the passerbys can see it, and yet not where metal scavangers can steal it (a common practice by drug addicts who sell such plaques to metal salvage yards who are none too scrupulous about where pricy non-ferrous metals come from!); perhaps inside a vestibule seen through outer locked glass doors? If no one else will volunteer, I will gladly write the historic text for such a plaque, if the owners will but contact me by clicking on my name in blue below, and that will take them to my profile page where there is the CONTACT link. (I do not give it here because of robots that scan the web for E-mails to which to send more spam).
Knatcal is right that the Chinese is really famous for its history and longevity —along with the footprints, etc., in the forecort. It is certainly not the foremost movie palace architecturally in the Los Angeles area, and its fame is therefore not of that origin, contrary to that impression given in the VHS tape “Movie Palaces” put out by a cable TV network a fews years ago and reviewed and offered at www.Amazon.com With the LOS ANGELES, the ORPHEUM, and a host of others, the CHINESE is really more of a phenomenon than the epitome of a movie palace, and, in fact, its unique balcony arrangement really puts it more in a class by itself within the palaces.
Hello, Porter; it’s been a long time since we have heard from you, and I thought you might like to know that until they enlarge the forthcoming images, anyone using Internet Explorer 6 or later can turn on the Magnifier feature and it will open a window about two inches wide above the main window in which one can view the main screen portion that the cursor is over in several different magnifications according to the setting one adopts (3x is usually the best). If you put the cursor over the photos, they will be much more easy to see. This works for most anything on the screen, so enjoy!
This is wonderful news, not just for our ‘cousins’ across the Atlantic, but also for all lovers of theatre architecture around the world who cannot hope to get to England to see these images. I, for one, can only hope that someday such a comprehensive Image Database can be created here in the USA, though the task may be a bit more expensive with an estimated 30,000 movie palaces and an additional 50,000 other forms of theatres to catalog —though many of them were never photographed, sad to say. Sites such as both CTs as well as several societies and universities and the Library of Congress have made goodly starts, but I am not sure if they will ever find the funds to be as complete as this British effort seems to be. We can only hope that in time, other nations will follow the British lead. I’m sure that everyone looks forward to the announcement of the URL of the site.
It says that it is “inside” the theatre, but does that mean that the theatre is gone that surrounded the site, or that the somehow the theatre still exists (operating?!) around the home?? Would have been nice if the poster could have included at least a floor plan sketch if not photos of this oddity.
Is this David Naylor’s GREAT AMERICAN MOVIE PALACES, the National Trust For Historic Preservation soft cover published in 1987? Since the cover price was $16.95, and IF it is in good condition, your asking price is fair. See my review of that title under its name at www.amazon.com
See my article by clicking on this link:
http://www.cinematour.com/article.php?id=3
I also send my best wishes, but you must realize that it will be an uphill battle, unless you happen to have Great Natural Perseverence, millions of dollars available to complete Purchase of the theatre, Renovations of the property, Securing films that your neighbors want to pay to see, and enough funds to carry you over for Years until the place MAY make a small profit. By all means, read over the FAQs and the posts of the FORUMS on the site for cinema operators: www.bigscreenbiz.com where the pros have answered many of the questions you post, and many you have yet to encounter!
The “guide books” ‘angus’ refers to are quite wrong in saying that the PORTLAND PARAMOUNT is “identical” to Milwaukee’s former WARNER. While the two do have some grillework in common, the grilles are of different designs and most of the rest of the auditoriums and lobbies are also quite different. Closer to the Milwaukee WARNER is the WARNER in Erie, PA., though that theatre’s fabulous 1920s marquee with stained glass corners and light bulb chasers still survives and operates as a civic performing arts center!
As to Marcus Entertainment Corp. wanting a place downtown, that may be true if it were a new multiplex, but I believe that their statement is more —as the government always puts it— ‘for public consumption’ and I think that the real story is that the city fathers leaned heavily on Marcus to make the then-proposed Pabst City Development look more positive to the taxpayers (who through their aldermen subsequently denied the eagerly wanted loan from the city of a mere $41,000,000 to help all the businesses concerned get a guaranteed return on their very speculative proposed investment of converting the long vacant former Pabst brewery buildings into a claimed boon to the city). Always watch out when investors want someone else’s money to take the risk! If a business plan has a reasonable chance of success in the long haul, any buisness with the capitol will ante up for the profits they expect. If they don’t really expect long term success, they try to get others to take the risk, while they content themselves with the short term profits, and then abandon the property. This is one of the reasons that the WARNER/GRAND has been vacant for so long: no one can figure out how to make a sure long term profit when the city has said that it will NOT come to the financial rescue of the property.
Vincent, don’t hold your breath waiting for anyone to “fight to keep them from being torn down.” While most people can empathize with a movie palace whose decor they appreciated, very few non-theatres buffs appreciate the much more uninspired ‘decors’ of the multiplexes, and regard them as merely the outgrowths of a shopping mall, with rare exceptions. And like you, I believe it is only a matter of time before the conglomerates pull their money out of the cinemas and put it into the pay-per-view, direct-feed-to-the-viewer services. As soon as they can eliminate all but a few showcase cinemas, they will get more money by eliminating the middle man, the cinemas the do not own.
If I recall correctly, “Man O'War” was the name of a famous winning race horse in Kentucky, and if so it would bring up positive connotations to the locals, as well as being aggressivge and sassy to those with a taste for such as in today’s youth culture. I’m a Yankee, so I cannot comment on this in point of fact; we’ll have to wait for a local to come forward. Their web site provides no clue, the lazy oafs. Normally I don’t like someone adding my name to the response lists for minor theatres such as this, but this one was fun.
Angus, I contacted Larry Widen, author of the 1986 book “Milwaukee Movie Palaces” and he recalls the Mirisch name in regard to these theatres, though he does not recall just where he found it back then. So, as he sayes, you are not imagining it. I am an architecture specialist, so I defer to his memory.
The decay of films described in earlier posts is certainly true, and it has been accelerating ever since the major studos were bought by the conglomerates in the 1970s. And while the studio system did whitewash the often scadalous behaviour of the ‘stars’, it did not originate for that purpose. It originated as a way for the man who found it to make the greatest profit while still making a name for himself as a producer of quality entertainment. The long and the short of it is that there were ‘some’ morals back before the Vietnam war, but after that there were absolutely none, save the overriding greed of the conglomerates to make MONEY and more MONEY, and did I forget to mention MONEY? To them, nothing else at all matters; that is what a conglomerate is for. They wouldn’t know or care what ‘art’ was if it came up and bit them! Since they are the product of a society with no morals (and how can one have true morals without an ACCURATE knowledge of God?!!) and the people who watch the films have, for the most part, no real morals, why should we expect quality films? Each conglomerate has a committee of financial and marketing types who meet to consider each new film idea and then pass or fail it solely on its potential to make MONEY, their god.
Irv’s list of films from 1970 appears better only in comparison to the dreck of 2004, and if compared to most any list from, say, the 1940s, those of 1970 would appear amoral at best, though far more glitzy. We have mostly dug ourselves into this pit, and there is no real way to dig ourselves out unless we were to (gasp!) renounce MONEY as the real god of our society. I suggest that we do NOT hold our collective breath until that happens! If the JERSEY or any other theatre is to survive, it cannot be on the silver screen offal that the conglomerates shovel at us via disrobed actors spouting inane “relevancies” as they engage in sex, soot-em-ups, sex, car chases, sex, and special effects mayhem. For those with morals, cling to them, for the Hollywood conglomerates are intent upon stripping you of them (along with the cash in your wallet).
In today’s NewsFlash by the Theatre Historical Society, former president Joe DuciBella announced that negotiations are well underway to demolish this Rapp & Rapp atmospheric to build more condos in a city with one of the highest percentages of condos in the nation. The famous duo did few atmospherics, and therefore this charming design will be all the greater loss.
If you can’t track the owners or successors of a chain, then you are best advised to contact the largest repository of theatre photos in the world: The Theatre Historical Soc. of America at: www.historictheatres.org Click on their Archive link to find out details. Best Wishes.
In case no one comes forward with a direct answer, I suggest you consider going to the Cleveland building permits office or wherever they store their files of building drawings. They are often on microfilm and if you can view those for the theatre, they will show just what was under the theatre and where any doors/exits were. If there are no drawings preserved, the permits will detail how many floors and the classifications of the floors as to commercial use and that will tell you if there was a bowling alley. Likewise, the city’s Tax Assessor’s records will indicate the building classifications and what was charged and paid and those will be clues as to the use of any lower story. You might also check the local Clerks of Court since litigation with theatres is not unknown, and any case involving the theatre (usually under the legal owners' names) could tell much about the building.
By far the largest repository of images of theatres is the Archive of the Theatre Historical Society of America, though I am not sure that they will have a category of ‘marquees with porno titles’ even though they do have hundreds of shots of marquees. It would be best to go there if you can, to their HQ, 15 miles west of Chicago in Elmhurst, a pleasant college town. Driving directions and access via their interurban ‘Path’ train are detailed there. If you cannot get there, you could inquire of their Ex. Dir., Rich Sklenar, who will eventually get back to you with some results. See the Archive link on their site. Here is their site: www.historictheatres.org
Getting artifacts from a demolished theatre is problematic; usually the owner no longer cares about his former ‘investment’ since it is no longer making money for him. Once demolition begins, the place is usually the legal property of the demolition contractor, and they will usually not take the time to sell items unless one is prepared to ‘bribe’ someone on site to get the items desired. Even if they are willing, there can be legal problems to ‘harvesting’ anything from the building until it is off site in a landfill, but then they are technically the property of the landfill operator, and everyone is worried about legal libality if unauthorized people are on their sites!
Possibly you could find pieces on E-Bay by doing a search by the name of the theatre, but if someone found something and did not know where it came from, they might list it only under such as ‘Theatre items.’ In a place as small as Hawaii, there can’t be that many landfills to ‘take a look into,’ unless they have taken to dumping such into the ocean. You might approach a demolition chief or such for a landfill that you will agree to split any money you would make on resale with them; that might get the dollar signs in their eyes to light up and grant you entry. Best Wishes.
In his MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES of 1986, author/photographer Larry Widen has photos of the notorious PRINCESS which served porn from about 1964 to its razing in 1984. He has such a photo that you are looking for, as well as a feature article about this unusual 1909 theatre in MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Society. Larry can be reached through his web site: www.widenonline.com
In his MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES of 1986, author/photographer Larry Widen has photos of the notorious PRINCESS which served porn from about 1964 to its razing in 1984. He has such a photo that you are looking for, as well as a feature article about this unusual 1909 theatre in MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Society. Larry can be reached through his web site: www.widenonline.com
An excellent article conveys the history of the ORPHEUM as the cover story of the 1st Quarter issue of MARQUEE magazine of 2005 of the Theatre Historical Soc. and can be ordered as a back issue via their web site’s page at: www.historictheatres.org The nine pages devoted to the theatre contain 17 b&w photos, and the following article discusses the chain that founded the ORPHEUM: Rickards & Nace, hence the dual initial monogram on the seat standards.
The captions for the cover as well as that for the photo of the proscenium on page nine are wrong in describing the mouldings on the proscenium as “rope [moulds]” since these are actually Torus moulds here heavily enriched as described by my caption given in the photo of them in color on the web site I list in my previous comment.
Bobs, since you are so in love with the Chicago PARADISE —and it is a wonderful theatre to be in love with— let me tell you of how I better experience the interiors of theatres via photos: get as large a photo as you can and then, using a large magnifier, go as close in as you can and then back away slowly, and you will get the impression that you are inside the space. This is a technique used on many documentary TV shows when they have only photos to work from. Short of building a miniature of it (which you might be able to do via blueprints on file), this is as close to being inside that you can get, though I’m told that large commercial photo studios can adapt standard photos to projectable stereo photos that you could project upon a large wall, and sitting close to that could also put you ‘inside.’ Of course, you probably know that there are places such as Great Big Pictures that can enlarge any photo to almost any size, perhaps as large as a wall in your home. The Theatre Historical Soc. will sell 8x10 prints of the photos in the Annual you have and may well have others. Inquire of them via their web site: www.historictheatres.org and under ARCHIVE you will find their fees. Inquire of their Ex. Dir., Richard Sklenar, and he will send you an inventory of available photos (you might want to pay for photocopies of those not in the Annual in order to make your selection). Best Wishes.
I got my authority for the description of the organ from Larry Widen’s listing of the MILWAUKEE in his 1986 book (out of print) MILWAUKEE MOVIE PALACES. He there lists the organ as a “Wurli-Bart”. I don’t know his source for this characterization, but you might contact him through his web site: www.widenonline.com