Showing 3,351 - 3,375 of 3,585 comments found
The 1982 picture is most likely of different College Theater.
And thank you, TE, for pointing out the errors that I and others have advertently made from time to time. I think now that the Odeon, Odeon Hyland, Odeon Danforth, and Odeon Lakeshore are now properly entered.
A picture of the theater from 1983:
The English version page on the same site says that it is the Cartier Theater. Generally, the French do not refer to a building that exclusively shows motion pictures as a theater, prefering to use the term cinema.
A picture of the Odeon Hyland:
They have since corrected that as well.
Apparently this was once considered as a posssible theater for showing Cinerama, as plans were drawn up though not executed.
Picture of the Ezella asa church from 1985:
A picture of the Vine Theater from 1955:
1982 picture of the Gladmer after it closed:
Two pictures of the Shaw-Hayden:
Tim, I am going to request that the moderators change the entry for this page to “Odeon Theater” and create a new page entry for the Odeon Lakeshore (aka Biltmore New Toronto) and that they move move Chuck 1231’s picture link to the new page.
Based on the picture posted by Chuck1231, it is evident that the theater was twinned prior to its closure. Screens should be 2.
According to this website, the architects for the New Orleans and St. Louis Martin Cinerama theaters were Cinerama Inc., and Finch Alexander Barnes Rothschild and Paschal: View link
This should (also) be posted to the Rotunda’s page.
This Diversey Theater is not the one that became the Century Shopping Center; that theater (which began its life as the Diversey and was later named the Century) is currently listed on CT as Landmark’s Century Center Cinema, and is located at 2828 North Clark. This entry above refers to a much older theater that was actually located on Diversey.
Yes, Music Box Films is owned by the same company that operates Chicago’s Music Box Theater. Further information here:
This theater is being targeted for demolition by the City of Garfield Heights. Details here:
It was called Eitel’s Palace when the first Cinerama film was shown there. Although Cinerama premiered in New York in 1952, Chicago’s first showing was in July of 1953.
That is a nice picture, one I had not seen before.
However the accompanying text is incorrect as regards the Cinerama projection booths at the Palace, As noted above, they were suspended from the balcony overhang, in front of the loge boxes, not attached to the auditorium floor.
The accompanying diagram (which appeared in a number of Cinerama programs and in other places) also suggests that most Cinerama installations had the booths at the top of a balcony. Except for a few purpose-built installations (such as the Martin and Cooper Cinerama theaters – where the booths were archtecturally blended into the side walls),the booths were on the main floor in order to to achieve the necessary straight-ahead projection of the images and alignment of the panels.
I wish though there was more clarity about the claim that these “digital IMAX screens will be 25% larger than average screens.” Some of AMC’s existing screens are very small, so I wonder what what the current “average screen” currently is.
If it means 25% larger than average existing IMAX screens worldwide, then I might be impressed (though I still think Cinerama and the original Todd-AO were more immersive processes; to me, though I like IMAX, it’s a case of bigger not being better).
Yes, I am sorry if you misunderstood. I meant that neither the IMDb nor Wikipedia cites the source for this claim, and neither source is error free.
Linda: I just discovered that the museum on the campus of Michigan State University also has a project focusing on stained glass. Although it focuses on stained glass in Michigan, the related web pages reveal that staff there know a great deal about artisans and manufacturers from around the country. Information here:
I agree LMB; for so many us so fortunate to have seen “This Is Cinerama” in the 1950s in one of its original presentations, it was an indelible, etched-in-the brain and memory experiences. I have seen many attempts to recreate that thrill, (at world’s fairs, IMAX, Omnimax
3-D, CircleVision 360, etc.) but really, no matter how good (and many are very good) still nothing else really compares.
I went to see a film at Chestnut Station once though I can’t remember the film. My recollection was that the building was very intriguing, but the screening rooms themselves unremarkable.
Personally, (and I will admit up front that I am no fan of the film) the claim that the original release prints of “Scarface” were identical to the version that DePalma submitted to the MPAA I think could well be an urban legend. The trivia item cited above is virtually identical to the wording on this matter as found in the “Scarface” entries for the film on Wikipedia and on the IMDb and no sources are cited there.
Further, I find it unlikely that if twenty people were involved in rating this film that none of them, given how controversial the film was at the time of its release, would not have gone to see it in a theater and noticed that the released version was not the one given the “R”, especially since records of the ratings process are kept by the MPAA. I remember seeing the film during its original release, and at the time, many papers were reporting that the chainsaw scene especially was cut.