To be sure, it is true that a number of business people have looked over the WARNER/GRAND, but none of them aside from the Symphony were willing to take on even more modest restoration. They all discerned that it was not, as Mr. Faulkner puts it: “… a cash cow in waiting.” How much of a fortune would it cost to restore the WARNER? Well, I guess it depends upon just how realistic one’s plans are to reuse the space. If it needs extensive interior restoration, then it will have to be closed and thus non-profitable for that length of time, and if the stage and utilities need work, it will take that much longer. Some people may come to the unrestored theatre, but even if one gets an occupancy permit from the city, he quickly looses the public attitude of newness and curiosity that he seeks to get media attention as the new owner with a newly opened theatre. If cameras come, they will see the old dilapidated interior in need of work and the images in the media will not serve to draw the average patron until they see the COMPLETED work as evidence of what now warrants their interest. Thus, doing rehab in stages is not always economically wise, and if something is not economically wise, it will fail.
No, they don’t have to spend “$50 million” necessarily; that was to include, for the Symphony, a completely new building shell to encase the auditorium to better isolate it from greater street noise that one expects today, as opposed to 1931 when it opened. To hold off on the parking structure for later would be foolish, since there is very little street parking, the city will not help as described in my previous comment, and the Grand Avenue Mall’s parking structure amounts to a city block walk to the theatre, with no weather protection, and the owner of the mall want’s the new theatre owner to subsidize any use their mall by the theatre at night (parking there is not available during the daytime). No, they need not spend $5 million on the drapery, but if they are to restore just the stage drapery (Grand Drape and House Curtain) to 1931 original standard, it will cost upwards of a million for that, and the auditorium had at least ten other lavish drapery sets originally; they were an integral part of the lavish and successful decor of the WARNER, maybe the acoustics too. Mr. Faulkner is perfectly right: “These valuable assets to our community have to be saved urgently but also responsibly.” Perhaps from the vantage of his London, England, such things are easier to do, but in the USA that is not often the case; the few examples that could be cited reveal both political connections and/or an ‘angel’ of LARGE pocketbook to help such ventures take place. Notice the case of the UNITED ARTISTS theatre in Detroit ( /theaters/1934/ ) where the owner has declined to restore this wonderful —and last remaining of trio of such Gothic-themed spectacles— because of urban decay and costs, yet he did spend a fortune restoring their FOX Theatre. Are we to blame him for not seeing a return on his dollar from the UNITED ARTISTS, and possibly too small a return from the FOX? He was a good-hearted businessman with integrity who did a fine, responsible job on the FOX ( /theaters/51/ ), but evidently is best intentions are not enough to save another worthy, and smaller, theatre. Who will come forward for the WARNER? Again, Mr. Faulkner is right when he says: “Too often restoration goes too far and the theatre cannot sustain the ideal inflicted on it.” Yes, the WARNER is one in that class of opulence, but like the sterling restoration of the NEW AMSTERDAM ( /theaters/30/ ) it could cost so much that the available market may not be able to support it for long, just as we hope that spectacles that draw millions of ticket buyers will long continue for that theatre. Milwaukee has 2 other larger and newer theatres (not on this site) that now accommodate large Broadway shows or the like, so that is not a viable option for the WARNER. Would you like to come here and lend the WARNER your expertise, Mr. Faulkner? I hold the same invitation out to you that I extended to Bruce.
I don’t know in what area you live Bruce, but your optimism is encouraging, yet I am not sure just how realistic in this city. Milwaukee has always been one of the most conservative (meaning stingy on a public scale) known, especially since its transformation by the Socialists after 1910, and the old German burghers' sentiment that one takes care of his family and relatives first, business second, the church third, taxes fourth, and if anything is left, it goes to local charity, not the city. Milw. is changing, what with over half of the city proper now being non-white who may have historically different sentiments, but the sad fact is that even if they do, they are almost all of the lower economic strata and thus unable to invest in the city’s improvement. Even before the Second World War, most of the city’s moneyed elite moved out to the suburbs and the city has survived largely on the blue collar workers left behind, while the wealthy still come into the city for its wide variety of sports and entertainment. They feel that if they pay for season tickets, they are doing all that should be expected of them, especially since they are traditionally much more generous to philanthropic charities of social causes, which does NOT include theatres. The Milw. Symphony failed in its attempt to raise the money necessary to convert the theatre, and with the ever increasing white flight from the inner city, there is no tax base for the city to use to help the owner, whoever that may come to be. I wrote extensively to the city and others to garner interest, and was politely told that the city cannot and will not help. Marcus evidently will do nothing, and they have blocked two attempts to designate it a local landmark in preparation for National Register of Historic Places listing which it will not get without local backing of the owner. No, this is not ‘hick town’ but neither is it Portland, Jersey City, or even Cleveland. If something makes a go of it here, it is entirely on its own, hence the old marketers' saying: “If it sells in Milw., it will sell anywhere!” A pretty city to live in with many blessings, but willingness to even help a worthy structure in stages, is not one of them. Not listed on this site because it was never primarily a cinema, is the WARD MEMORIAL THEATRE on the edge of the city; a federal enclave where the structure is from 1870 and of genuine Civil War theme and history, complete with a 40-ft-square stained glass equestrian mural of Ulysses S. Grant, among other features, but no one outside of the late Walter Liberace, who grew up across the street from it, came forward to offer to stave off its demolition due to decay, but his effort failed upon his death; it is still threatened with razing. If you are a man with moxie and money, Bruce, you are quite welcome to come here to assist, and I will even act as escort and guide, health permitting. Thank you for your good thoughts. PS: the former WARNER is not now in so good a shape, as I will tell you in detail if you send me your E-mail. Respectfully, Jim Rankin
I have to comment on Mr. Parks' remark likening the activities of ‘taggers’ to that of a dog urinating upon a tree: it may be natural for dogs, but no society of law would tolerate a man doing the same thing! We are not by any stretch of the imagination “animals” since God created us for far more lofty purposes since man was created in His image, but given the free will that animals do not have to decide to do wrong as well as right. Regardless of the degree of artistic achievement a graffito might evidence, it is something that any human can consciously decided NOT to do, unlike an animal (actually an elaborate ‘robot’ of sorts) which cannot decide to do right or wrong since it has no such concepts, it merely acts according to programming, elaborate programming to be sure, but still only within the limits that its Creator decreed. Perhaps we should put up signs on homes stating that it is OK for people to urinate upon them, provided it is done artistically, perhaps in the form of Mayan symbols.
The absurdity of passing off such conduct by saying it is “artistic” can easily be illustrated by carrying it to its logical extremes: is a bank robber excused if he is so courteous as to not injure any of the bank’s inhabitants? Is a guerilla warrior excused of slaughtering his victims provided he does so neatly, even ‘artistically’ if little blood is spilled (what a boon such an attitude would be to the current groups in Iraq)? Is a rapist to be excused because he didn’t tear the girl’s clothes and could therefore be labeled by some sympathizer as “artistic”? Yes, some graffiti does show the miscreant creating it to have artistic talent, but to describe it this way only serves to justify it in today’s amoral society. Should we wonder that such “artists” often progress to larger crimes from there? Permissiveness never gets you anything but a slap in the face from the perpetrator. How sad to mark the demise of the UA theatre partially due to society’s permissiveness = a failure to stand up for right versus wrong, regardless of how ‘artistic’ it may be in the eyes of some. If the present or future owner were ever inclined to restore it, might the presence of extensive graffiti cause him to reconsider the additional costs associated with removing them, and dissuade him from the project? We all pay for graffiti in many ways.
Patrick’s kind words may be to defend the ‘artistry’ of those who seek vandalism as their outlet, but I can’t help but wonder how generous would be his words about ‘art’ were he to wake up and find his windows and building and maybe his car ‘enhanced’ by the artistry of taggers who may not even have the courage to sign their ‘works’? Would he feel such largeness of heart after spending hours trying to remove their ‘artwork’? Perhaps he feels that all such ‘tagged’ property should be required to go about that way to advertise the ‘talents’ of the poor, misunderstood ‘artists.’ He is entitled to his opinion, and the ramifications of it.
No two ways about it: GRAFFITI =IS= VANDALISM, pure and simple. True, Detroit and most cities now face such monumental problems that the costly fight against vandalism may often be beyond their means. They are right in supposing that the permitted proliferation of ‘tagging’ or similar use of graffiti to deface structures will only cheapen them and the city they are in, and thus encourage a fall in property values and the subsequent flight of responsible citizens to areas less frequented by such criminal acts. To the weak kneed, and those low in morality, let the argument that graffiti (which were originally wartime political expressions removed after the war) is an art form by denounced for the deceit it is. An art form is paid for either by the artist or some patron, not involuntarily by the property owners whose properties become the UN-authorized “canvases” of the victim owners. Do not owners have property rights? Of course they do! Such ownership and the right to say what becomes of their property, is one of the bedrock principles of our society, and most other civilizations. Vandals no more have the right to deface someone else’s property than would they have to deface a person by assaulting then on the street and marking the victim’s face and clothing with any colors or designs they wished. The fact that such victims could then in theory go and wash themselves and buy new clothes, does not in any way argue in favor of the rank disregard for law and public safety that the weak ‘liberals’ (actually, Libertines) might argue when saying that the ‘poor, underserved miscreants are merely expressing their frustrations in not having suitable public 'canvases’ supplied as an outlet for their ‘genius’ If such attitudes were not so tragic, they would be laughable.
There is blame to be shared beyond the desecrating ‘taggers’ since owners who do not do all that is reasonably possible to secure a property (beyond merely locking the doors, which obviously is of no real help these days) are themselves tacitly encouraging criminals, vandals, and vagrants to befoul their buildings and endanger the neighborhood. Responsible owners employ security guards —at least itinerant and randomly scheduled ones— to make sure that the buildings are not “occupied” at night or any other unauthorized time. Silent burglar alarms that would bring armed responses are the only real way to prevent criminal use of some building. Must the city wait until something far worse than a tagger inhabits a derelict structure, such as a young child being victimized there for rape or ransom? When will the money grubbing owners be held legally responsible for tacitly allowing such activities in their properties that such as arsonists can gain entry and start a conflagration that will then spread to other buildings and perhaps threaten other lives such as those of firemen? Don’t hold your breath for any quick changes in Detroit or anywhere else, dear lovers of nice buildings and safe cities; the cowardly and ever-greedy politicians will forever team with their benefactors, the idle rich property owners to prevent any meaningful statute by which the elite rich would be penalized from profiting from social decay by letting the taxes paid by the ‘little man’ support their property speculations at the cost of society as a whole. Realize that only God can end these machinations, and He soon and suddenly will. (Rev. 11:18: “…I will bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”)
I can understand how you feel the way you do, Dave, since I was at one time also a ‘prisoner’ of the false doctrines and money-grubbing tactics of the apostate churches of Christendom. No, one does not need a church to pray to God, and no, there is no requirement in the Bible upon Christians to pay any money to a church. Their love of money betrays them as being like their real ‘father’ the Devil, and nothing like our loving Father in the heavens, Jehovah God. He inspired the Bible to be written for our good and salvation, and it is not a fault to Him that Satan has inspired thousands of false prophets to pervert His word so that it is difficult for honest people like you to understand it, but it IS possible to learn the truth, if one searches hard. Since this forum is not for religious discussion, I will end the topic with this caution: your theatre ‘ghost’ may seem benevolent at the moment, but deceit is always the objective and a deceiver will use any means to entrap the unwary to their detriment. Contrary to the old saying, ‘What you don’t know, CAN hurt you!’
(There is a long comment above about ‘ghosts’ with which to have contact, and equal space should be given to the dangers of doing so.)
Some may believe that there is a degree of cache as to having ghosts in a theatre and be able to charge for “Haunted Tours”, but you should be aware that such hauntings may very well be real, as some surmise, yet not at all what you think them to be. They are, in fact, VERY DANGEROUS! You see, you are not dealing with any supposed spirit of the dead former owner or any other human, since the belief that people have immortal souls that exist as spirits after their deaths is not true, and therefore not from God, since it is nowhere found in His Word, the Bible. Where does such a belief come from, then? From God’s arch enemy, Satan the Devil who is a powerful spirit creature, who was once an Angel, but rebelled from God and since 1914 has been confined to the vicinity of this earth along with his billions of fellow wicked spirit creatures who go about trying to influence people into believing that they are the “departed” ones. This deceit is deliberate in trying to get people to disbelieve God, since the demons, as these wicked spirits are properly known, are well aware that one cannot gain God’s blessing unless one carefully follows the Truth of God in the Bible, and here is where our paradox lies: One cannot come to know about the wicked spirits unless he first comes to know the truth about God.
Why would such wicked spirits inhabit any theatre and what is their aim? Firstly, it really has nothing to do with what you or anyone else goes there; it is a matter of caprice as to what a demon chooses to haunt. Since these are spirit creatures in the same form as Angels and God, they can move through any solid matter (or no matter) as they wish, and do not need to sleep, eat, or even defecate as we do. Since God through His Son, Jesus Christ, banished such evil ones from the heavens to the vicinity of the earth, these wicked ones have no more duties in heaven to occupy their time, so one might think it to be a matter of their boredom, but it is far, far more sinister than that! They want our death in some indirect way, since they are barred from killing us directly, as explained in the book of Job. Why a theatre? Well, it offers the chance to contact numerous people, and the chance to fulfill their wicked lusts, as when that person in the projection room felt groped. The Bible makes clear that when in millennia past, they were permitted to take the fleshly form of men, they immediately sought out illicit sexual contact with humans, and for this they were later forbidden to take fleshly form again (that power was removed from them by God). So now they seek to disturb or even torment humans if they can, and that involves the implicit participation of a human. God allows them to approach any person, but He only permits them to continue their evil with a person if that one is willing. Anyone who prays to God to remove the “ghost” will be heard and God will remove such spirits from a person, provided that the person is sincere and honest in his will to be free of them. One cannot mock God and secretly like the attentions of the demons, and still expect God to act. There are many thousands of records of demonic attack upon people and their belongings, even to the extent of people seeing their Bibles thrown about a room, in places where the demons had long had a presence and the new occupants were not wanting their presence. In such situations, God watches the doings of the people to see if they are really sincere in wanting to be rid of the demons (‘ghosts’) and if so, He will eventually expel them.
It is critical to note here that NO human of any persuasion has any power at all over the Devil and his demons! There is no such thing as an Exorcist nor Exorcising, contrary to what the fiction of Hollywood or the behavior of the apostate churchmen would like us to believe. Neither are there any legitimate ways to scientifically discern the nature or presence of ‘ghosts.’ The demons are not susceptible to any device of mankind, and they will therefore respond or not as they wish to any such “investigations.” Indeed, any who continue in such investigations will jeopardize their health and safety far more than they realize. There are many accounts of people being disfigured, stripped naked, blasted with sound that only they could hear, and other horrors enough to warn us that they seek to trap us and make us their ‘play things’ unto induced death, as when some have thrown themselves from rooftops to stop the attentions of those demons with whom they consorted. When someone feels unnaturally cold and wisely decides to leave the area, he is doing all that he can short of calling on God out loud to help him flee the demons. While it is possible for the demons to simply go elsewhere, it is not likely when people show interest or curiosity in them. That is regarded as an invitation, and with time they will seek to do more than cause light or sound apparitions. They may decide to act as “poltergeists” and throw objects, which can and have caused injury to people, not to mention damage to their structures and belongings. The only way to avoid such happenings is to show no curiosity in the ‘ghosts’ and to repeatedly pray to God to remove these evil beings from your vicinity. Note that there is no such thing as a ‘good demon’ and thus no attempt on your part to communicate with them will do anything more than bring you more firmly into their grip and manipulations and lies, for they are the followers of Satan, whom the Bible describes as the “Father of the Lie.”
So, you see, that it is not just a matter of frivolous notoriety that you might attain at a theatre in the pursuit of profits, but definite jeopardy to any and all who are at the theatre until such time as you beseech God long enough to convince Him that you are sincere in your wish to be rid of wicked spirits. For more information on this threat, go to: View link
where you will find a complete discussion of the subject in condensed form (note the Page Back, and Page Forward arrows at bottom). After all, it is your lives and those of others that are at stake, both for now and eternity. I pray that God’s blessing in this matter be with you, and that you take this warning seriously before something tragic happens in such “hauntings”. No amount of profits from ‘Haunted Tours’ or other ‘experiences’ is worth anyone’s injury or death. As the old saying goes: “If one plays with fire, he is liable to be burned!”
Apparently, some people have been confusing the HIPPODROME’s phone number with that given for the Theatre Historical Soc. in an earlier comment; Please do not call the Society for any current information for an operating theatre. The HIPP can be reached via this number:
France-Merrick Performing Arts Center, 12 Eutaw St., Baltimore, MD 21201, phone (410) 837-7400. See their web site link in blue, in the main description at top.
Do not try to reach a theatre through the Theatre Historical Society’s web site or their own phone number in Elmhurst, Illinois, which is at the web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org They have a great deal of historic information regarding theatres, but usually not current operating schedules, and the like. This message is placed at the request of the Society.
According to an article in the defunct electrical contractors' trade magazine, “CEENews” ( View link ), of Nov. ‘98, the architects were: “Hodgetts & Fung”, the building contractor: “Turner Construction” and the main electrical contractor: “Amelco Electric.” While the article naturally deals with mostly the electrical changes, it is honest enough in some of its description, as with this: “The term 'restoration’ is used loosely to describe what is taking place.” Obviously, a contractor is not concerned with the aesthetics of the new or original design; its just a technical problem to them. The article does contain one 1946 photo of the street front in black&white, but nothing else.
Having said that most of us are disappointed with this lesser “restoration” it must be acknowledged that it would have been impossible for the new owner to use the original structure if it were simply restored to 1922 appearance. Not only were earthquake retrofits needed and demanded, but the building was not to become a museum, but a modern, working cinemas. Given this fact, we can extend them more slack, however disappointing the modernistic adaptations to the original are. Yes, the sun disk grille on the ceiling should have been back-lit again, and likely they could have reproduced the original massive doors, but modern day costs are often prohibitive of bringing back all we were able to build when labor was a mere 25 cents per hour in the early ‘Twenties. I don’t like the modern adaptations either, but at least enough of the original is still standing that one can view photos and see just how what they could have existed in that building, and needless to say, had this not been done, the building likely would be only rubble today. They could at least post large photos of the original inside the lobby, but this might prove more of an embarrassment than a compliment, though still a fine service to the public. The Theatre Historical Soc. has many fine, vintage photos. ( www.HistoricTheatres.org )
As to bringing an “urban environment” into the EGYPTIAN, one must remember the strident sounds of such movements as “Relevance” and “Urbanism” into the social fabric of our “Diversity” day and age. To be merely artistic is not enough these days, with White people being made to feel ever greater guilt for their supposed errors in not promoting the ascendance of the minorities in what is often poorly described as a “melting pot” society. Much of the $21 million cost was born by public funds from HUD, the Community Redevelopment Agency, and others, so there was heavy pressure on the owner to make the place acceptable to the ‘man on the street’ whose tax dollars were going to this elite project in an area apparently mostly inhabited by those of lesser incomes — or not incomes at all.
Another theatres site does have a small photo of the Shubert-Lafayette, but no real details about it: View link
It is not on Cinema Treasures, but it is quite possible that the Theatre Historical Soc. of America has data about it; contact them at: www.HistoricTheatres.org
You would also do well to contact sources in Detroit: Historical Soc., Libraries, etc.
Hello, Scott: You noticed that I merely quoted the Society; I didn’t say I agreed with it. You could well be right, since Warren and others agree with you that there were other palaces antedating the CAPITOL that would qualify, and it is possible that the Chicago RIVIERA would be a likely contender for the honor, but I guess it all depends upon just how ornate in a thematic fashion it was originally. Rich Sklenar, Ex. Dir. of THSA, didn’t make that entirely clear on the “History Detectives” show in the time allotted, but I believe that he was thinking of a ‘theme’ being evident in a true movie palace, as opposed to merely greater ornament than a legit theatre. True, the Adam or Neoclassical themes are sometimes so mild as to not really be thought of as true ‘themes’ but evidently he or the Society feels that it is enough in the case of the CAPITOL in NYC to combine with its multi-thousand seat size so as to qualify. I guess you would have to ask him about it at his E-mail on the front page of their web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org Jim. P.S. I also note that while you do not give any contact information on your Members page, you do list the exotic CORONADO among your favorite theatres, as do I on my page. It is a ost wonderful melange of styles and delights, even down to the little niches in the walls under the balcony filled with illuminated glass flowers. I treasure such attention to detail and the extremes of scale in decor, don’t you?
Chris, if you are serious about restoring old theatres/cinemas, more power to you, but I am afraid that there are many THOUSANDS of venues that are available, but not necessarily good investments. Something tells me that you are really only interested in suburban or small town multiplexes built after about 1970, but if perchance you are also interested in closed movie palaces, there are a number that you could try, depending upon how much you are realistically willing to invest in repairs and rehabilitation. The best place to find a list of available (as in “closed”) places, is the CINEMAS link at the site: www.CinemaTour.com . When you click on that link there, you will be asked what country in the world you want, and then what state. In Wisconsin where I live, there are over 450 theatres listed, most of them closed. They also give the street addresses, but that is often not helpful since rarely is there anyone at a closed site to receive any mail, and such is often no longer delivered there. If a place looks interesting (depending upon size, age, etc.) you might contact the local chamber of commerce or the city clerk’s office (address/phones available from you local library) and ask for the current owner’s name and address which is also always kept with the local property tax assessor’s office and should be a matter of public record —so they should give it to you on request. Some municipalities have such property tax files on-line, so do a Google search for the city in question. Once you have identified a site as of interest, look it up here on Cinema Treasures for more insight which may tell you why it closed, when, and in what condition it now stands.
I know that here in the Milwaukee area there are at least two former movie palaces that are for sale, one of them, the AVALON, a designated local landmark, with no parking nearby, its hopes for the future are dim, with the current owner threatening to turn it into offices. The other, the former WARNER/GRAND, should be a landmark by any stretch of the imagination, but its owner, Marcus Theatres, has twice vetoed that, and closed it in ‘95 and is just letting it sit there until their lease on the land runs out in 18 years. They are paying about $30,000 yearly in taxes on it, so should be happy to get rid of it and the 12-story surrounding office/commercial building. It is a glorious decor, but anyone buying it for films will have to create parking on its downtown site, by buying the lot next door and building a parking structure on it, else Milwaukeeans will go to the free parking of the suburban multiplexes, as do people in every city. If you are serious about purchasing either of them, E-mail me by clicking on my name below, and I will give you names/addresses of the owners. To be sure, there are other open or closed theatres hereabouts, but I feel that only these two are really available and have a potential for the right guy — if you can beat the parking problem (which is a major reason that most inner city movie palaces failed); Americans are not accustomed to public transport, nor to walking more than ten yards to the theatre’s door! Best Wishes and keep us posted on your acquisitions, please.
Simon is right that the Theatre Historical Soc. is the quintessential resource on most any theatre, especially the ROXY, since all photos shown in the late Ben Hall’s “The Best Remaining Seats …” as well as both of the issues of their MARQUEE magazine devoted to the ROXY, are retained at their Archive, and all materials are available for reference or duplication. The URL which Simon lists for them is correct, but they have been using an Internet convention called an “alias” for some years now, which makes their URL, or Internet address, easier to remember and type: www.HistoricTheatres.org
BoxOfficeBill: You don’t provide any E-mail address in your Contact information on your Member page (/users/3642), so to answer your question as to editing your submissions here, the answer is ‘no’, you cannot edit them once you submit them, though you can hit “Preview” and see how it will look, and if you find a mistake, you can hit your BACK button and return to editing the Comment, and then hit either “Preview” again, or “Submit” if you find no more problems. Once you hit “Submit” there is no more chance to edit it.
The way I get around the awkward little text box on each Comments page, is to first type the comment in my word processor, edit it there (automatic spell check will eliminate many errors for you), and then click on Edit > Select-All, then Edit again, then Copy, then go back to the Comments page and click in the Comments Box, then again click on Edit > Paste, and the entire message you created in your word processor (virtually all operating systems have one built in these days) will appear there, even if you used more space than the box appears to hold. They told me, however, that there is a 300-word limit on comment length, so you could ask your processor to count the words for you in advance by clicking on Tools > Word-Count (if you are using Microsoft Word) and a panel will pop up telling you the totals. You will then see if there is a need to shorten the message. When you have pasted the Comment into the box, just hit “Submit” (since you have already previewed it in your processor) and it will appear just as you intended.
Note that if you are going to submit a URL, as I did above for your Member Page, it must have a space immediately before and immediately after the whole URL to enable their program to understand that it is a URL and highlight it accordingly. Do not use special characters not found on your keyboard; they will not reproduce on the site reliably. In many cases this means that your quote marks (‘) or (“) should be set to the default (standard, NOT "Smart Quotes”) ones, and you should set your 'dash’ character (–) to be two hyphens as shown here, since the true ‘dash’ character, which is available from your Characters/Symbols page, is not found on a standard keyboard and will not reproduce in most on-line systems reliably. Hope this helps. Best Wishes.
EdwinM remarks that: “Recently attended an Andres Rieu concert and the Boston Pops and the curtain just sat there in the upward position and didn’t move once.” This should not be faulted to the Music Hall, for it is customary at concerts to NOT use moving drapery, since the tradition is to emulate a standard concert hall which does not usually have a true stage or proscenium, and therefore no real drapery. The other uses of a true stage (legit theatre, opera, ballet, etc.) DO make use of moving/changing draperies to signal the opening, middle parts, and closing of a production, but not so for concerts. Still, I lament with you that the use of the wonderful House Curtain in RCMH (the vast Contour-type of curtain) is evidently so rarely used or moved these days. Who knows? Maybe the stage hands' union now requires a special person just to operate the Contour House Curtain, and that would be another expense for the management, which now exists for profit, NOT showmanship. It is sad, for as was said earlier, the raising and use of the vast golden curtain was part of the magic that made the Hall above and beyond the other theatres. We can but hope that a wiser and less money-focused administration will take over there in future.
Seth and others ask ‘Why’ things are as they are at RCMH as well as the few large theatres still operating around the country, and the answer to that is well displayed in the documentary “The Monster That Ate Hollywood” shown on PBS a couple years back. It is because of conglomerates, the same business type that is devouring the rest our commercial culture and destroying our society. Likely the owners of RCMH are also ultimately a conglomerate and answer only to the ‘bottom line.’ As is always the case, when the ‘bean counters’ take over, artistry goes out the window.
It is interesting to note that the Internet Movie Data Base (www.IMDB.com) also lists the 1952 movie “With A Song In My Heart” as being a filming location for the ROXY, though neither in this case nor that of the title “The Naked City” does it say ‘what’ is shown.
I believe that the only way you can post an image of the programmes is by using a virtual photo such as a ‘jpeg’ or ‘gif’ scan or digital photo, but you will notice that the ADD PHOTO feature is “off line” or not in operation at this time. You would have to contact the site owners to get any advice as to how to go about it now. Of course, one could simply copy the text of a programme and type it in here, but that would not give the flavor of the original document as I am sure that you wish to do. In any case, I am not sure that they will allow images in the comments section, but perhaps a link to your images that are elsewhere.
Your comment is right on the money, ‘scenicroute’; they didn’t care about anything but money, and used the EGYPTIAN’S fame as an excuse during fundraising. They may have had to adapt it, but they cared nothing at all about even a little ‘restoration.’ It was all a scam to grab publicity, and, sad to say, it worked.
The sad fact is that the drapery treatment (which happened in various forms to many movie palaces) was due to the advent of wide screen projection. The new super wide screens could usually not be contained behind the proscenium, so they usually hacked away the sides of the proscenium arch and sometimes the organ screens too, and then draped over the damage since they were too cheap to redesign the plaster ornament to accommodate the new ‘look.’ Usually, the draperies added nothing to the acoustics or the decor. At least in the CAPITOL they used more expensive and decorative contour draperies for both the screen and to divide the balcony when they were not expecting a full house — something rare after TV and the arrival of shopping center cinemas. Note how the drapery was not extended all the way across the ceiling else it would have blocked the projector’s throw from the booth ports seen in the back wall. The fourth comment from the top describes the situation for the CAPITOL. Who would have thought that after all that expense for the screens/cinerama/escalator/new draperies (which were no doubt motorized and quite costly!), that in only six years they would toss it all when the place was demolished?!
I am very sorry to hear from the previous comments that the wonderful and ‘signature’ CONTOUR CURTAIN no longer works as some seem to remember it. I wonder if some people are not confusing it with the AUSTRIAN FOLD curtain, where, unlike the Contour, there are continuous horizontal swag folds from one side of a vertical panel to the other, from top to bottom even when the curtain is fully descended. This Austrian Fold type can be rigged to either rise entirely as does a typical ‘drop curtain’, or it can also be rigged to gather up from the bottom as does a Contour type. A true Contour Curtain, on the other hand, looks very like a standard drop (‘guillotine’) curtain when at full descent, but when opening it gathers up from the bottom to form swaged folds similar to the Austrian, but only for a ways up from the bottom, the distance depending upon how far it is raised to fully ascended position. It is also quite possible that the controls for the Contour in RCMH are now starting to malfunction with age, and the owners are reluctant to put the money into repairing them. For those interested in this singular Contour Curtain rigging method, there is a very rare photo of the control panel for it showing the 13 lines of peg switches completing the X-Y coordinates to achieve the desired pattern and height once raised, on page 23 of MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Soc. of 3rd Qtr. 1999, along with a great deal of other technical info about RCMH by Lyman C. Brenneman. Let’s hope that at least this signature feature of the opulent opening days can be retained in at least this one theatre where it is so much a part of the unique experience.
PHOTOS AVAILABLE:
To obtain any available Back Issue of either “Marquee” or of its ANNUALS, simply go to the web site of the THEATRE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA at: www.HistoricTheatres.org and notice on their first page the link “PUBLICATIONS: Back Issues List” and click on that and you will be taken to their listing where they also give ordering details. The “Marquee” magazine is 8-1/2x11 inches tall (‘portrait’) format, and the ANNUALS are also soft cover in the same size, but in the long (‘landscape’) format, and are anywhere from 26 to 40 pages. Should they indicate that a publication is Out Of Print, then it may still be possible to view it via Inter-Library Loan where you go to the librarian at any public or school library and ask them to locate which library has the item by using the Union List of Serials, and your library can then ask the other library to lend it to them for you to read or photocopy. [Photocopies of most THSA publications are available from University Microforms International (UMI), but their prices are exorbitant.]
Note: Most any photo in any of their publications may be had in large size by purchase; see their ARCHIVE link. You should realize that there was no color still photography in the 1920s, so few theatres were seen in color at that time except by means of hand tinted renderings or post cards, thus all the antique photos from the Society will be in black and white, but it is quite possible that the Society has later color images available; it is best to inquire of them.
Should you not be able to contact them via their web site, you may also contact their Executive Director via E-mail at:
Or you may reach them via phone or snail mail at:
Theatre Historical Soc. of America
152 N. York, 2nd Floor York Theatre Bldg.
Elmhurst, ILL. 60126-2806 (they are about 15 miles west of Chicago)
Phone: 630-782-1800 or via FAX at: 630-782-1802 (Monday through Friday, 9AM—4PM, CT)
The late Ben M. Hall quotes these lyrics in his landmark book: “The Best Remaining Seats: The Story of the Golden Age of the Movie Palace” wherein he has many photos and much information about the ROXY. One thinks that Cole Porter was grasping for rhymes (or ‘near’ rhymes) for “Russia” in the previous line, but then their uniforms were indeed well tailored, and Mr. Porter’s well known predeliction for young men may have had a part in the wording. I guess that it is a strange way for the ROXY to be ‘immortalized’, but one takes what one can get.
To be sure, it is true that a number of business people have looked over the WARNER/GRAND, but none of them aside from the Symphony were willing to take on even more modest restoration. They all discerned that it was not, as Mr. Faulkner puts it: “… a cash cow in waiting.” How much of a fortune would it cost to restore the WARNER? Well, I guess it depends upon just how realistic one’s plans are to reuse the space. If it needs extensive interior restoration, then it will have to be closed and thus non-profitable for that length of time, and if the stage and utilities need work, it will take that much longer. Some people may come to the unrestored theatre, but even if one gets an occupancy permit from the city, he quickly looses the public attitude of newness and curiosity that he seeks to get media attention as the new owner with a newly opened theatre. If cameras come, they will see the old dilapidated interior in need of work and the images in the media will not serve to draw the average patron until they see the COMPLETED work as evidence of what now warrants their interest. Thus, doing rehab in stages is not always economically wise, and if something is not economically wise, it will fail.
No, they don’t have to spend “$50 million” necessarily; that was to include, for the Symphony, a completely new building shell to encase the auditorium to better isolate it from greater street noise that one expects today, as opposed to 1931 when it opened. To hold off on the parking structure for later would be foolish, since there is very little street parking, the city will not help as described in my previous comment, and the Grand Avenue Mall’s parking structure amounts to a city block walk to the theatre, with no weather protection, and the owner of the mall want’s the new theatre owner to subsidize any use their mall by the theatre at night (parking there is not available during the daytime). No, they need not spend $5 million on the drapery, but if they are to restore just the stage drapery (Grand Drape and House Curtain) to 1931 original standard, it will cost upwards of a million for that, and the auditorium had at least ten other lavish drapery sets originally; they were an integral part of the lavish and successful decor of the WARNER, maybe the acoustics too. Mr. Faulkner is perfectly right: “These valuable assets to our community have to be saved urgently but also responsibly.” Perhaps from the vantage of his London, England, such things are easier to do, but in the USA that is not often the case; the few examples that could be cited reveal both political connections and/or an ‘angel’ of LARGE pocketbook to help such ventures take place. Notice the case of the UNITED ARTISTS theatre in Detroit ( /theaters/1934/ ) where the owner has declined to restore this wonderful —and last remaining of trio of such Gothic-themed spectacles— because of urban decay and costs, yet he did spend a fortune restoring their FOX Theatre. Are we to blame him for not seeing a return on his dollar from the UNITED ARTISTS, and possibly too small a return from the FOX? He was a good-hearted businessman with integrity who did a fine, responsible job on the FOX ( /theaters/51/ ), but evidently is best intentions are not enough to save another worthy, and smaller, theatre. Who will come forward for the WARNER? Again, Mr. Faulkner is right when he says: “Too often restoration goes too far and the theatre cannot sustain the ideal inflicted on it.” Yes, the WARNER is one in that class of opulence, but like the sterling restoration of the NEW AMSTERDAM ( /theaters/30/ ) it could cost so much that the available market may not be able to support it for long, just as we hope that spectacles that draw millions of ticket buyers will long continue for that theatre. Milwaukee has 2 other larger and newer theatres (not on this site) that now accommodate large Broadway shows or the like, so that is not a viable option for the WARNER. Would you like to come here and lend the WARNER your expertise, Mr. Faulkner? I hold the same invitation out to you that I extended to Bruce.
I don’t know in what area you live Bruce, but your optimism is encouraging, yet I am not sure just how realistic in this city. Milwaukee has always been one of the most conservative (meaning stingy on a public scale) known, especially since its transformation by the Socialists after 1910, and the old German burghers' sentiment that one takes care of his family and relatives first, business second, the church third, taxes fourth, and if anything is left, it goes to local charity, not the city. Milw. is changing, what with over half of the city proper now being non-white who may have historically different sentiments, but the sad fact is that even if they do, they are almost all of the lower economic strata and thus unable to invest in the city’s improvement. Even before the Second World War, most of the city’s moneyed elite moved out to the suburbs and the city has survived largely on the blue collar workers left behind, while the wealthy still come into the city for its wide variety of sports and entertainment. They feel that if they pay for season tickets, they are doing all that should be expected of them, especially since they are traditionally much more generous to philanthropic charities of social causes, which does NOT include theatres. The Milw. Symphony failed in its attempt to raise the money necessary to convert the theatre, and with the ever increasing white flight from the inner city, there is no tax base for the city to use to help the owner, whoever that may come to be. I wrote extensively to the city and others to garner interest, and was politely told that the city cannot and will not help. Marcus evidently will do nothing, and they have blocked two attempts to designate it a local landmark in preparation for National Register of Historic Places listing which it will not get without local backing of the owner. No, this is not ‘hick town’ but neither is it Portland, Jersey City, or even Cleveland. If something makes a go of it here, it is entirely on its own, hence the old marketers' saying: “If it sells in Milw., it will sell anywhere!” A pretty city to live in with many blessings, but willingness to even help a worthy structure in stages, is not one of them. Not listed on this site because it was never primarily a cinema, is the WARD MEMORIAL THEATRE on the edge of the city; a federal enclave where the structure is from 1870 and of genuine Civil War theme and history, complete with a 40-ft-square stained glass equestrian mural of Ulysses S. Grant, among other features, but no one outside of the late Walter Liberace, who grew up across the street from it, came forward to offer to stave off its demolition due to decay, but his effort failed upon his death; it is still threatened with razing. If you are a man with moxie and money, Bruce, you are quite welcome to come here to assist, and I will even act as escort and guide, health permitting. Thank you for your good thoughts. PS: the former WARNER is not now in so good a shape, as I will tell you in detail if you send me your E-mail. Respectfully, Jim Rankin
I have to comment on Mr. Parks' remark likening the activities of ‘taggers’ to that of a dog urinating upon a tree: it may be natural for dogs, but no society of law would tolerate a man doing the same thing! We are not by any stretch of the imagination “animals” since God created us for far more lofty purposes since man was created in His image, but given the free will that animals do not have to decide to do wrong as well as right. Regardless of the degree of artistic achievement a graffito might evidence, it is something that any human can consciously decided NOT to do, unlike an animal (actually an elaborate ‘robot’ of sorts) which cannot decide to do right or wrong since it has no such concepts, it merely acts according to programming, elaborate programming to be sure, but still only within the limits that its Creator decreed. Perhaps we should put up signs on homes stating that it is OK for people to urinate upon them, provided it is done artistically, perhaps in the form of Mayan symbols.
The absurdity of passing off such conduct by saying it is “artistic” can easily be illustrated by carrying it to its logical extremes: is a bank robber excused if he is so courteous as to not injure any of the bank’s inhabitants? Is a guerilla warrior excused of slaughtering his victims provided he does so neatly, even ‘artistically’ if little blood is spilled (what a boon such an attitude would be to the current groups in Iraq)? Is a rapist to be excused because he didn’t tear the girl’s clothes and could therefore be labeled by some sympathizer as “artistic”? Yes, some graffiti does show the miscreant creating it to have artistic talent, but to describe it this way only serves to justify it in today’s amoral society. Should we wonder that such “artists” often progress to larger crimes from there? Permissiveness never gets you anything but a slap in the face from the perpetrator. How sad to mark the demise of the UA theatre partially due to society’s permissiveness = a failure to stand up for right versus wrong, regardless of how ‘artistic’ it may be in the eyes of some. If the present or future owner were ever inclined to restore it, might the presence of extensive graffiti cause him to reconsider the additional costs associated with removing them, and dissuade him from the project? We all pay for graffiti in many ways.
Patrick’s kind words may be to defend the ‘artistry’ of those who seek vandalism as their outlet, but I can’t help but wonder how generous would be his words about ‘art’ were he to wake up and find his windows and building and maybe his car ‘enhanced’ by the artistry of taggers who may not even have the courage to sign their ‘works’? Would he feel such largeness of heart after spending hours trying to remove their ‘artwork’? Perhaps he feels that all such ‘tagged’ property should be required to go about that way to advertise the ‘talents’ of the poor, misunderstood ‘artists.’ He is entitled to his opinion, and the ramifications of it.
Correction to previous: the correct URL is: http://cinematreasures.org/news/11973_0_1_0_C/
See the discussion about the graffiti situation here and elsewhere at: http://cinematreasures.org/news/X11973_0_1_0_C_21804/
No two ways about it: GRAFFITI =IS= VANDALISM, pure and simple. True, Detroit and most cities now face such monumental problems that the costly fight against vandalism may often be beyond their means. They are right in supposing that the permitted proliferation of ‘tagging’ or similar use of graffiti to deface structures will only cheapen them and the city they are in, and thus encourage a fall in property values and the subsequent flight of responsible citizens to areas less frequented by such criminal acts. To the weak kneed, and those low in morality, let the argument that graffiti (which were originally wartime political expressions removed after the war) is an art form by denounced for the deceit it is. An art form is paid for either by the artist or some patron, not involuntarily by the property owners whose properties become the UN-authorized “canvases” of the victim owners. Do not owners have property rights? Of course they do! Such ownership and the right to say what becomes of their property, is one of the bedrock principles of our society, and most other civilizations. Vandals no more have the right to deface someone else’s property than would they have to deface a person by assaulting then on the street and marking the victim’s face and clothing with any colors or designs they wished. The fact that such victims could then in theory go and wash themselves and buy new clothes, does not in any way argue in favor of the rank disregard for law and public safety that the weak ‘liberals’ (actually, Libertines) might argue when saying that the ‘poor, underserved miscreants are merely expressing their frustrations in not having suitable public 'canvases’ supplied as an outlet for their ‘genius’ If such attitudes were not so tragic, they would be laughable.
There is blame to be shared beyond the desecrating ‘taggers’ since owners who do not do all that is reasonably possible to secure a property (beyond merely locking the doors, which obviously is of no real help these days) are themselves tacitly encouraging criminals, vandals, and vagrants to befoul their buildings and endanger the neighborhood. Responsible owners employ security guards —at least itinerant and randomly scheduled ones— to make sure that the buildings are not “occupied” at night or any other unauthorized time. Silent burglar alarms that would bring armed responses are the only real way to prevent criminal use of some building. Must the city wait until something far worse than a tagger inhabits a derelict structure, such as a young child being victimized there for rape or ransom? When will the money grubbing owners be held legally responsible for tacitly allowing such activities in their properties that such as arsonists can gain entry and start a conflagration that will then spread to other buildings and perhaps threaten other lives such as those of firemen? Don’t hold your breath for any quick changes in Detroit or anywhere else, dear lovers of nice buildings and safe cities; the cowardly and ever-greedy politicians will forever team with their benefactors, the idle rich property owners to prevent any meaningful statute by which the elite rich would be penalized from profiting from social decay by letting the taxes paid by the ‘little man’ support their property speculations at the cost of society as a whole. Realize that only God can end these machinations, and He soon and suddenly will. (Rev. 11:18: “…I will bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”)
I can understand how you feel the way you do, Dave, since I was at one time also a ‘prisoner’ of the false doctrines and money-grubbing tactics of the apostate churches of Christendom. No, one does not need a church to pray to God, and no, there is no requirement in the Bible upon Christians to pay any money to a church. Their love of money betrays them as being like their real ‘father’ the Devil, and nothing like our loving Father in the heavens, Jehovah God. He inspired the Bible to be written for our good and salvation, and it is not a fault to Him that Satan has inspired thousands of false prophets to pervert His word so that it is difficult for honest people like you to understand it, but it IS possible to learn the truth, if one searches hard. Since this forum is not for religious discussion, I will end the topic with this caution: your theatre ‘ghost’ may seem benevolent at the moment, but deceit is always the objective and a deceiver will use any means to entrap the unwary to their detriment. Contrary to the old saying, ‘What you don’t know, CAN hurt you!’
Haunted theatre = endangered theatre.
(There is a long comment above about ‘ghosts’ with which to have contact, and equal space should be given to the dangers of doing so.)
Some may believe that there is a degree of cache as to having ghosts in a theatre and be able to charge for “Haunted Tours”, but you should be aware that such hauntings may very well be real, as some surmise, yet not at all what you think them to be. They are, in fact, VERY DANGEROUS! You see, you are not dealing with any supposed spirit of the dead former owner or any other human, since the belief that people have immortal souls that exist as spirits after their deaths is not true, and therefore not from God, since it is nowhere found in His Word, the Bible. Where does such a belief come from, then? From God’s arch enemy, Satan the Devil who is a powerful spirit creature, who was once an Angel, but rebelled from God and since 1914 has been confined to the vicinity of this earth along with his billions of fellow wicked spirit creatures who go about trying to influence people into believing that they are the “departed” ones. This deceit is deliberate in trying to get people to disbelieve God, since the demons, as these wicked spirits are properly known, are well aware that one cannot gain God’s blessing unless one carefully follows the Truth of God in the Bible, and here is where our paradox lies: One cannot come to know about the wicked spirits unless he first comes to know the truth about God.
Why would such wicked spirits inhabit any theatre and what is their aim? Firstly, it really has nothing to do with what you or anyone else goes there; it is a matter of caprice as to what a demon chooses to haunt. Since these are spirit creatures in the same form as Angels and God, they can move through any solid matter (or no matter) as they wish, and do not need to sleep, eat, or even defecate as we do. Since God through His Son, Jesus Christ, banished such evil ones from the heavens to the vicinity of the earth, these wicked ones have no more duties in heaven to occupy their time, so one might think it to be a matter of their boredom, but it is far, far more sinister than that! They want our death in some indirect way, since they are barred from killing us directly, as explained in the book of Job. Why a theatre? Well, it offers the chance to contact numerous people, and the chance to fulfill their wicked lusts, as when that person in the projection room felt groped. The Bible makes clear that when in millennia past, they were permitted to take the fleshly form of men, they immediately sought out illicit sexual contact with humans, and for this they were later forbidden to take fleshly form again (that power was removed from them by God). So now they seek to disturb or even torment humans if they can, and that involves the implicit participation of a human. God allows them to approach any person, but He only permits them to continue their evil with a person if that one is willing. Anyone who prays to God to remove the “ghost” will be heard and God will remove such spirits from a person, provided that the person is sincere and honest in his will to be free of them. One cannot mock God and secretly like the attentions of the demons, and still expect God to act. There are many thousands of records of demonic attack upon people and their belongings, even to the extent of people seeing their Bibles thrown about a room, in places where the demons had long had a presence and the new occupants were not wanting their presence. In such situations, God watches the doings of the people to see if they are really sincere in wanting to be rid of the demons (‘ghosts’) and if so, He will eventually expel them.
It is critical to note here that NO human of any persuasion has any power at all over the Devil and his demons! There is no such thing as an Exorcist nor Exorcising, contrary to what the fiction of Hollywood or the behavior of the apostate churchmen would like us to believe. Neither are there any legitimate ways to scientifically discern the nature or presence of ‘ghosts.’ The demons are not susceptible to any device of mankind, and they will therefore respond or not as they wish to any such “investigations.” Indeed, any who continue in such investigations will jeopardize their health and safety far more than they realize. There are many accounts of people being disfigured, stripped naked, blasted with sound that only they could hear, and other horrors enough to warn us that they seek to trap us and make us their ‘play things’ unto induced death, as when some have thrown themselves from rooftops to stop the attentions of those demons with whom they consorted. When someone feels unnaturally cold and wisely decides to leave the area, he is doing all that he can short of calling on God out loud to help him flee the demons. While it is possible for the demons to simply go elsewhere, it is not likely when people show interest or curiosity in them. That is regarded as an invitation, and with time they will seek to do more than cause light or sound apparitions. They may decide to act as “poltergeists” and throw objects, which can and have caused injury to people, not to mention damage to their structures and belongings. The only way to avoid such happenings is to show no curiosity in the ‘ghosts’ and to repeatedly pray to God to remove these evil beings from your vicinity. Note that there is no such thing as a ‘good demon’ and thus no attempt on your part to communicate with them will do anything more than bring you more firmly into their grip and manipulations and lies, for they are the followers of Satan, whom the Bible describes as the “Father of the Lie.”
So, you see, that it is not just a matter of frivolous notoriety that you might attain at a theatre in the pursuit of profits, but definite jeopardy to any and all who are at the theatre until such time as you beseech God long enough to convince Him that you are sincere in your wish to be rid of wicked spirits. For more information on this threat, go to: View link
where you will find a complete discussion of the subject in condensed form (note the Page Back, and Page Forward arrows at bottom). After all, it is your lives and those of others that are at stake, both for now and eternity. I pray that God’s blessing in this matter be with you, and that you take this warning seriously before something tragic happens in such “hauntings”. No amount of profits from ‘Haunted Tours’ or other ‘experiences’ is worth anyone’s injury or death. As the old saying goes: “If one plays with fire, he is liable to be burned!”
Apparently, some people have been confusing the HIPPODROME’s phone number with that given for the Theatre Historical Soc. in an earlier comment; Please do not call the Society for any current information for an operating theatre. The HIPP can be reached via this number:
France-Merrick Performing Arts Center, 12 Eutaw St., Baltimore, MD 21201, phone (410) 837-7400. See their web site link in blue, in the main description at top.
Do not try to reach a theatre through the Theatre Historical Society’s web site or their own phone number in Elmhurst, Illinois, which is at the web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org They have a great deal of historic information regarding theatres, but usually not current operating schedules, and the like. This message is placed at the request of the Society.
According to an article in the defunct electrical contractors' trade magazine, “CEENews” ( View link ), of Nov. ‘98, the architects were: “Hodgetts & Fung”, the building contractor: “Turner Construction” and the main electrical contractor: “Amelco Electric.” While the article naturally deals with mostly the electrical changes, it is honest enough in some of its description, as with this: “The term 'restoration’ is used loosely to describe what is taking place.” Obviously, a contractor is not concerned with the aesthetics of the new or original design; its just a technical problem to them. The article does contain one 1946 photo of the street front in black&white, but nothing else.
Having said that most of us are disappointed with this lesser “restoration” it must be acknowledged that it would have been impossible for the new owner to use the original structure if it were simply restored to 1922 appearance. Not only were earthquake retrofits needed and demanded, but the building was not to become a museum, but a modern, working cinemas. Given this fact, we can extend them more slack, however disappointing the modernistic adaptations to the original are. Yes, the sun disk grille on the ceiling should have been back-lit again, and likely they could have reproduced the original massive doors, but modern day costs are often prohibitive of bringing back all we were able to build when labor was a mere 25 cents per hour in the early ‘Twenties. I don’t like the modern adaptations either, but at least enough of the original is still standing that one can view photos and see just how what they could have existed in that building, and needless to say, had this not been done, the building likely would be only rubble today. They could at least post large photos of the original inside the lobby, but this might prove more of an embarrassment than a compliment, though still a fine service to the public. The Theatre Historical Soc. has many fine, vintage photos. ( www.HistoricTheatres.org )
As to bringing an “urban environment” into the EGYPTIAN, one must remember the strident sounds of such movements as “Relevance” and “Urbanism” into the social fabric of our “Diversity” day and age. To be merely artistic is not enough these days, with White people being made to feel ever greater guilt for their supposed errors in not promoting the ascendance of the minorities in what is often poorly described as a “melting pot” society. Much of the $21 million cost was born by public funds from HUD, the Community Redevelopment Agency, and others, so there was heavy pressure on the owner to make the place acceptable to the ‘man on the street’ whose tax dollars were going to this elite project in an area apparently mostly inhabited by those of lesser incomes — or not incomes at all.
Another theatres site does have a small photo of the Shubert-Lafayette, but no real details about it: View link
It is not on Cinema Treasures, but it is quite possible that the Theatre Historical Soc. of America has data about it; contact them at: www.HistoricTheatres.org
You would also do well to contact sources in Detroit: Historical Soc., Libraries, etc.
Hello, Scott: You noticed that I merely quoted the Society; I didn’t say I agreed with it. You could well be right, since Warren and others agree with you that there were other palaces antedating the CAPITOL that would qualify, and it is possible that the Chicago RIVIERA would be a likely contender for the honor, but I guess it all depends upon just how ornate in a thematic fashion it was originally. Rich Sklenar, Ex. Dir. of THSA, didn’t make that entirely clear on the “History Detectives” show in the time allotted, but I believe that he was thinking of a ‘theme’ being evident in a true movie palace, as opposed to merely greater ornament than a legit theatre. True, the Adam or Neoclassical themes are sometimes so mild as to not really be thought of as true ‘themes’ but evidently he or the Society feels that it is enough in the case of the CAPITOL in NYC to combine with its multi-thousand seat size so as to qualify. I guess you would have to ask him about it at his E-mail on the front page of their web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org Jim. P.S. I also note that while you do not give any contact information on your Members page, you do list the exotic CORONADO among your favorite theatres, as do I on my page. It is a ost wonderful melange of styles and delights, even down to the little niches in the walls under the balcony filled with illuminated glass flowers. I treasure such attention to detail and the extremes of scale in decor, don’t you?
Chris, if you are serious about restoring old theatres/cinemas, more power to you, but I am afraid that there are many THOUSANDS of venues that are available, but not necessarily good investments. Something tells me that you are really only interested in suburban or small town multiplexes built after about 1970, but if perchance you are also interested in closed movie palaces, there are a number that you could try, depending upon how much you are realistically willing to invest in repairs and rehabilitation. The best place to find a list of available (as in “closed”) places, is the CINEMAS link at the site: www.CinemaTour.com . When you click on that link there, you will be asked what country in the world you want, and then what state. In Wisconsin where I live, there are over 450 theatres listed, most of them closed. They also give the street addresses, but that is often not helpful since rarely is there anyone at a closed site to receive any mail, and such is often no longer delivered there. If a place looks interesting (depending upon size, age, etc.) you might contact the local chamber of commerce or the city clerk’s office (address/phones available from you local library) and ask for the current owner’s name and address which is also always kept with the local property tax assessor’s office and should be a matter of public record —so they should give it to you on request. Some municipalities have such property tax files on-line, so do a Google search for the city in question. Once you have identified a site as of interest, look it up here on Cinema Treasures for more insight which may tell you why it closed, when, and in what condition it now stands.
I know that here in the Milwaukee area there are at least two former movie palaces that are for sale, one of them, the AVALON, a designated local landmark, with no parking nearby, its hopes for the future are dim, with the current owner threatening to turn it into offices. The other, the former WARNER/GRAND, should be a landmark by any stretch of the imagination, but its owner, Marcus Theatres, has twice vetoed that, and closed it in ‘95 and is just letting it sit there until their lease on the land runs out in 18 years. They are paying about $30,000 yearly in taxes on it, so should be happy to get rid of it and the 12-story surrounding office/commercial building. It is a glorious decor, but anyone buying it for films will have to create parking on its downtown site, by buying the lot next door and building a parking structure on it, else Milwaukeeans will go to the free parking of the suburban multiplexes, as do people in every city. If you are serious about purchasing either of them, E-mail me by clicking on my name below, and I will give you names/addresses of the owners. To be sure, there are other open or closed theatres hereabouts, but I feel that only these two are really available and have a potential for the right guy — if you can beat the parking problem (which is a major reason that most inner city movie palaces failed); Americans are not accustomed to public transport, nor to walking more than ten yards to the theatre’s door! Best Wishes and keep us posted on your acquisitions, please.
Simon is right that the Theatre Historical Soc. is the quintessential resource on most any theatre, especially the ROXY, since all photos shown in the late Ben Hall’s “The Best Remaining Seats …” as well as both of the issues of their MARQUEE magazine devoted to the ROXY, are retained at their Archive, and all materials are available for reference or duplication. The URL which Simon lists for them is correct, but they have been using an Internet convention called an “alias” for some years now, which makes their URL, or Internet address, easier to remember and type: www.HistoricTheatres.org
BoxOfficeBill: You don’t provide any E-mail address in your Contact information on your Member page (/users/3642), so to answer your question as to editing your submissions here, the answer is ‘no’, you cannot edit them once you submit them, though you can hit “Preview” and see how it will look, and if you find a mistake, you can hit your BACK button and return to editing the Comment, and then hit either “Preview” again, or “Submit” if you find no more problems. Once you hit “Submit” there is no more chance to edit it.
The way I get around the awkward little text box on each Comments page, is to first type the comment in my word processor, edit it there (automatic spell check will eliminate many errors for you), and then click on Edit > Select-All, then Edit again, then Copy, then go back to the Comments page and click in the Comments Box, then again click on Edit > Paste, and the entire message you created in your word processor (virtually all operating systems have one built in these days) will appear there, even if you used more space than the box appears to hold. They told me, however, that there is a 300-word limit on comment length, so you could ask your processor to count the words for you in advance by clicking on Tools > Word-Count (if you are using Microsoft Word) and a panel will pop up telling you the totals. You will then see if there is a need to shorten the message. When you have pasted the Comment into the box, just hit “Submit” (since you have already previewed it in your processor) and it will appear just as you intended.
Note that if you are going to submit a URL, as I did above for your Member Page, it must have a space immediately before and immediately after the whole URL to enable their program to understand that it is a URL and highlight it accordingly. Do not use special characters not found on your keyboard; they will not reproduce on the site reliably. In many cases this means that your quote marks (‘) or (“) should be set to the default (standard, NOT "Smart Quotes”) ones, and you should set your 'dash’ character (–) to be two hyphens as shown here, since the true ‘dash’ character, which is available from your Characters/Symbols page, is not found on a standard keyboard and will not reproduce in most on-line systems reliably. Hope this helps. Best Wishes.
Apparently, from the news item appearing right here on CT, the Jersey is now in safe hands: http://cinematreasures.org/news/11695_0_1_0_C/
EdwinM remarks that: “Recently attended an Andres Rieu concert and the Boston Pops and the curtain just sat there in the upward position and didn’t move once.” This should not be faulted to the Music Hall, for it is customary at concerts to NOT use moving drapery, since the tradition is to emulate a standard concert hall which does not usually have a true stage or proscenium, and therefore no real drapery. The other uses of a true stage (legit theatre, opera, ballet, etc.) DO make use of moving/changing draperies to signal the opening, middle parts, and closing of a production, but not so for concerts. Still, I lament with you that the use of the wonderful House Curtain in RCMH (the vast Contour-type of curtain) is evidently so rarely used or moved these days. Who knows? Maybe the stage hands' union now requires a special person just to operate the Contour House Curtain, and that would be another expense for the management, which now exists for profit, NOT showmanship. It is sad, for as was said earlier, the raising and use of the vast golden curtain was part of the magic that made the Hall above and beyond the other theatres. We can but hope that a wiser and less money-focused administration will take over there in future.
Seth and others ask ‘Why’ things are as they are at RCMH as well as the few large theatres still operating around the country, and the answer to that is well displayed in the documentary “The Monster That Ate Hollywood” shown on PBS a couple years back. It is because of conglomerates, the same business type that is devouring the rest our commercial culture and destroying our society. Likely the owners of RCMH are also ultimately a conglomerate and answer only to the ‘bottom line.’ As is always the case, when the ‘bean counters’ take over, artistry goes out the window.
It is interesting to note that the Internet Movie Data Base (www.IMDB.com) also lists the 1952 movie “With A Song In My Heart” as being a filming location for the ROXY, though neither in this case nor that of the title “The Naked City” does it say ‘what’ is shown.
I believe that the only way you can post an image of the programmes is by using a virtual photo such as a ‘jpeg’ or ‘gif’ scan or digital photo, but you will notice that the ADD PHOTO feature is “off line” or not in operation at this time. You would have to contact the site owners to get any advice as to how to go about it now. Of course, one could simply copy the text of a programme and type it in here, but that would not give the flavor of the original document as I am sure that you wish to do. In any case, I am not sure that they will allow images in the comments section, but perhaps a link to your images that are elsewhere.
Your comment is right on the money, ‘scenicroute’; they didn’t care about anything but money, and used the EGYPTIAN’S fame as an excuse during fundraising. They may have had to adapt it, but they cared nothing at all about even a little ‘restoration.’ It was all a scam to grab publicity, and, sad to say, it worked.
The sad fact is that the drapery treatment (which happened in various forms to many movie palaces) was due to the advent of wide screen projection. The new super wide screens could usually not be contained behind the proscenium, so they usually hacked away the sides of the proscenium arch and sometimes the organ screens too, and then draped over the damage since they were too cheap to redesign the plaster ornament to accommodate the new ‘look.’ Usually, the draperies added nothing to the acoustics or the decor. At least in the CAPITOL they used more expensive and decorative contour draperies for both the screen and to divide the balcony when they were not expecting a full house — something rare after TV and the arrival of shopping center cinemas. Note how the drapery was not extended all the way across the ceiling else it would have blocked the projector’s throw from the booth ports seen in the back wall. The fourth comment from the top describes the situation for the CAPITOL. Who would have thought that after all that expense for the screens/cinerama/escalator/new draperies (which were no doubt motorized and quite costly!), that in only six years they would toss it all when the place was demolished?!
I am very sorry to hear from the previous comments that the wonderful and ‘signature’ CONTOUR CURTAIN no longer works as some seem to remember it. I wonder if some people are not confusing it with the AUSTRIAN FOLD curtain, where, unlike the Contour, there are continuous horizontal swag folds from one side of a vertical panel to the other, from top to bottom even when the curtain is fully descended. This Austrian Fold type can be rigged to either rise entirely as does a typical ‘drop curtain’, or it can also be rigged to gather up from the bottom as does a Contour type. A true Contour Curtain, on the other hand, looks very like a standard drop (‘guillotine’) curtain when at full descent, but when opening it gathers up from the bottom to form swaged folds similar to the Austrian, but only for a ways up from the bottom, the distance depending upon how far it is raised to fully ascended position. It is also quite possible that the controls for the Contour in RCMH are now starting to malfunction with age, and the owners are reluctant to put the money into repairing them. For those interested in this singular Contour Curtain rigging method, there is a very rare photo of the control panel for it showing the 13 lines of peg switches completing the X-Y coordinates to achieve the desired pattern and height once raised, on page 23 of MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Soc. of 3rd Qtr. 1999, along with a great deal of other technical info about RCMH by Lyman C. Brenneman. Let’s hope that at least this signature feature of the opulent opening days can be retained in at least this one theatre where it is so much a part of the unique experience.
PHOTOS AVAILABLE:
To obtain any available Back Issue of either “Marquee” or of its ANNUALS, simply go to the web site of the THEATRE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA at:
www.HistoricTheatres.org and notice on their first page the link “PUBLICATIONS: Back Issues List” and click on that and you will be taken to their listing where they also give ordering details. The “Marquee” magazine is 8-1/2x11 inches tall (‘portrait’) format, and the ANNUALS are also soft cover in the same size, but in the long (‘landscape’) format, and are anywhere from 26 to 40 pages. Should they indicate that a publication is Out Of Print, then it may still be possible to view it via Inter-Library Loan where you go to the librarian at any public or school library and ask them to locate which library has the item by using the Union List of Serials, and your library can then ask the other library to lend it to them for you to read or photocopy. [Photocopies of most THSA publications are available from University Microforms International (UMI), but their prices are exorbitant.]
Note: Most any photo in any of their publications may be had in large size by purchase; see their ARCHIVE link. You should realize that there was no color still photography in the 1920s, so few theatres were seen in color at that time except by means of hand tinted renderings or post cards, thus all the antique photos from the Society will be in black and white, but it is quite possible that the Society has later color images available; it is best to inquire of them.
Should you not be able to contact them via their web site, you may also contact their Executive Director via E-mail at:
Or you may reach them via phone or snail mail at:
Theatre Historical Soc. of America
152 N. York, 2nd Floor York Theatre Bldg.
Elmhurst, ILL. 60126-2806 (they are about 15 miles west of Chicago)
Phone: 630-782-1800 or via FAX at: 630-782-1802 (Monday through Friday, 9AM—4PM, CT)
The late Ben M. Hall quotes these lyrics in his landmark book: “The Best Remaining Seats: The Story of the Golden Age of the Movie Palace” wherein he has many photos and much information about the ROXY. One thinks that Cole Porter was grasping for rhymes (or ‘near’ rhymes) for “Russia” in the previous line, but then their uniforms were indeed well tailored, and Mr. Porter’s well known predeliction for young men may have had a part in the wording. I guess that it is a strange way for the ROXY to be ‘immortalized’, but one takes what one can get.