New Metro Twin

2626 Broadway,
New York, NY 10025

Unfavorite 16 people favorited this theater

Showing 51 - 75 of 150 comments

efriedmann
efriedmann on June 29, 2007 at 3:00 am

My wife and I stumbled upon this theater back in 1999 (she was just my girlfriend at the time) and decided to go in and see THE WHOLE NINE YARDS. That was the only time I went to this theater.

PeterApruzzese
PeterApruzzese on March 15, 2007 at 12:43 am

That’s quite a bit more that it was getting as a theatre – it was asking around $15,000-$20,000 a month plus taxes, IIRC, which was still way too much for it to survive.

Warren G. Harris
Warren G. Harris on March 15, 2007 at 12:36 am

The property is currently being marketed as a “Unique Marqueed Retail Location,” divided into five stores. The largest will rent for $105,000 per month, and apparently gives the tenant the right to display its logo in the large circle on the frontage. With all five stores rented at the prices asked, the owner would earn $236,875 per month. Here’s a newspaper ad from 3/14/07:
www.i8.photobucket.com/albums/a18/Warrengwhiz/metrostores.jpg

faberfranz
faberfranz on February 11, 2007 at 5:04 pm

When I passed by Saturday afternoon, the entrance was still obscured by the gate and black plastic, but the retail space adjacent was gaping open and this was where workmen were emerging carrying metal debris, apparently from demolishing the lobby and/or the “upstairs” theater. A front-loader or some such machine was where the last row of seats on the ground floor would have been. The lobby was dark, but beyond the machine and what appeared to be part of the supports for the upper theater I could see the ornate interior, with its own lights lighted (in contrast to the forehead lanterns and work-lights barely lighting the debris in the foreground). I tried to get a photo, but exposure was tricky with my “no frills” camera. Don’t know how well pics came out. As I stood there, a guy came up to my elbow and asked “can I help you?” I said, “no.”

Somebody with a better camera and skills might want to get one last photo of what’s left of the interior while it’s still there.

RobertEndres
RobertEndres on January 24, 2007 at 4:15 am

There is an ad in today’s Business section of the New York Times that would appear to be for this property. It has a picture of the marquee with an art deco “Retail” sign on top where the word “Metro” is now. It lists the availability of store front properties as well as two levels of space inside.

pazzah
pazzah on January 19, 2007 at 4:26 am

What puzzles me is why this cinema kept opening and closing again the last few years. Did they have trouble getting butts on seats? Were they doing something wrong? Why couldn’t they make a success of it?

faberfranz
faberfranz on December 23, 2006 at 11:19 am

I’ve tried to peek around the edges of the black sheet, but can’t see beyond it. I suspect it’s there to hide the gutting of the interior. If that’s what they’re doing, they’re sneaking the rubble out through the adjacent construction site; gate over theater entrance stays closed.

vandeman
vandeman on December 23, 2006 at 3:22 am

The Metro was closed when Extel Corp began building its two ugly glass midtown office building condos next door and across the street. While it was saved from demolition during construction as part of the deal that allowed Extel to build these buildings twice as high as any other building in the neighborhood, it is now for lease, and will no doubt become a Home Depot or Wal-Mart. So glad we “saved” it!

br91975
br91975 on November 16, 2006 at 6:26 am

I walked by last night and the marquee was illuminated… not to tout new movies or a grand re-opening as of yet (at least for now), but to broadcast to interested passersby the availability of 15,000 square feet for lease, being offered by Robert K. Futterman. The exterior one-sheet display cases, as they have been for months, were also lit up, while the entrance doors were covered from the inside by a black tarp. Let’s hope, as shaky a proposition as it currently is, that someone swoops in, realizes its possibilities, and reopens it as a cinema.

RobertR
RobertR on September 21, 2006 at 8:13 am

Anything going on here yet?

Ed Solero
Ed Solero on August 28, 2006 at 7:10 am

Some ads from the Midtown XXX years –
Sylvia – Daily News 1/25/78
Sweet Paradise – NY Post 12/11/80
Neighborhood Guide – NY Post 3/9/82 (near the end of its porn days)

Talbot/New York Cinemas –
Neighborhood Guide – NY Post 1/29/86
True Stories – NY Times 10/27/86
Block Ad – NY Times 10/27/86

Looks like Talbot may have started to program first run here towards the end of ‘86. At least for the “True Stories” and “Blue Velvet” engagements in October. Also interesting that I found only one of the screens advertised in the movie clock and Neighborhood Guide earlier in the year when the Metro was in revival mode.

Also occurs to me that the theater was listed and advertised as “Midtown 99th St” in its porn days, so perhaps this should be an AKA listed above.

PaulLD1
PaulLD1 on July 7, 2006 at 9:36 pm

To Jodar: Yes.

RobertR
RobertR on April 23, 2006 at 10:56 pm

I wish this would become a Sundance house.

PeterApruzzese
PeterApruzzese on March 15, 2006 at 1:46 am

From what I’ve heard, the Metro will most likely not reopen as a theatre.

RobertR
RobertR on March 15, 2006 at 12:08 am

Any news on whats happening here?

JodarMovieFan
JodarMovieFan on January 24, 2006 at 2:07 pm

This movie theater’s exterior reminds me of the opening scenes of Janet Jackon “Lets Wait Awhile” video, did they shoot those here?

Ed Solero
Ed Solero on January 24, 2006 at 9:11 am

That’s right. The Marx Bros. flick was “Duck Soup” and the scene Woody is watching is the musical number the entire cast sings about going to war… “Oh Freedonia, Oh don’t you cry for me…”

I love Woody’s films… I just wish he would get more involved in the efforts to preserve the neighborhood theaters and revival houses that have lent their character to his movies over the years.

RobertR
RobertR on January 24, 2006 at 8:22 am

This is a damn shame that the theatre business can’t support a place like this in Manhattan.

jbels
jbels on January 24, 2006 at 7:06 am

Tilly, Woody Allen goes into the Metro in Hannah and Her Sisters to watch the Marx Brothers (though he is so despondent at that point he states “I didn’t even know what was playing”)

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on January 23, 2006 at 10:36 am

Mr. Elson is to be commended for his valiant attempt, his redecoration and reopening of the Metro, even though it didn’t succeed.

He may not have been able to obtain more popular arthouse films, due to competition from other venues, or may have believed that if he had those films, the other venues would have drawn off many of the moviegoers. So, he tried arthouse films that would be more unique, but, as we know, didn’t have enough drawing power. It may be not enough moviegoers from other places in New York wanted to attend movies in the neighborhood that the Metro was in.

I love old theaters, Art Deco, and theaters that use the curtain, so I was eager to visit, and snapped my photo. The film choices weren’t to my liking, so I wasn’t able to revisit.

Did the prior chain operators program mainstream fare? but not enough people attending?

It is tragic that so many single screens (and divided up theaters)have closed!

If the Metro doesn’t reopen as a moviehouse, let’s hope the Art Deco plasterwork and decorations can be kept.

And, we should all patronize those remaining survivors! Classic film series soon at the Ziegfeld! Great arthouse movies at the Paris! And, the others.

cineaste
cineaste on January 23, 2006 at 5:09 am

All this talk about terrible business at the Metro resulting in inevitable closing… It’s no wonder, as many films were so obscure as to draw in virtually no one— not even me (with a couple of exceptions over the last year), a huge fan of “art house” flics. Put in the kind of films programmed at Sunshine or Lincoln Plaza, and they’ll have a solid clientelle again. Here’s wishing so.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on January 23, 2006 at 5:05 am

I’ve added my May 2005 interior & exterior photos here, adjoining this photo:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/howardbhaas/90266879/

It would be terrible to lose the Art Deco plaster and other beautiful touches. A restaurant or retail store could be enhanced by those details.

Warren G. Harris
Warren G. Harris on January 23, 2006 at 4:36 am

I somehow doubt that the Landmarks Preservation Commission “authorized” Bialek to demolish the interior, since it only has jurisdiction over the landmarked exterior. At most, the LPC might have said that it would not oppose his efforts. Bialek’s statement makes it seem like the LPC approved of the demoliton.

Ed Solero
Ed Solero on January 23, 2006 at 4:22 am

There was a sad article in the City section of this Sunday’s NY Times. Here’s a link to the online version – not sure how long it will be valid and you might have to sign up (it’s free) to take a look at this: View link

The building’s owner, Albert Bialek, declares the place “obsolete” as neighborhood theater, in the article. He has obtained permission from the City to gut the interior and doesn’t know what the future holds for the space. Here’s a key passage from the article:

“Mr. Bialek has been authorized by the Landmarks Preservation Commission to demolish the interior of the Metro, whose exterior was declared a landmark in 1989. He said he is considering leasing the space to a dinner theater, a restaurant or a store, or perhaps reopening it as a multiplex.”

Perhaps a some arrangement can be made whereby minimal interior alterations would be required. It seems the community simple did not support the theater – but whether that is a function of its “obsolescence” or, rather, poor programming choices is a matter for debate.

Jowilliams
Jowilliams on January 19, 2006 at 6:04 pm

Hello! Can someone please confirm, or deny, whether The Metro has been used in a Woody Allen film and if so what film? I seem to have a memory of him walking into it. Thanks!