Jackson Heights Cinema

40-31 82nd Street,
Jackson Heights, NY 11373

Unfavorite 10 people favorited this theater

Showing 51 - 75 of 121 comments

Ed Solero
Ed Solero on September 26, 2006 at 4:45 am

That’s always been a debated issue amongst movie entusiasts – subtitles vs. dubbing. Do we want the distraction of having to read the translation and keep the integrity of each actor’s performance whole, or will we suffer through even a hack dub-job so that are eyes need not be distracted from the images on screen? We might all agree that in certain cases (most Godzilla films and kung-fu epics) the hilarious dubbing might actually enhance the experience, but I personally find that subtitles work best in more seriously dramatic films, but it often depends on the film or director. I can’t imagine watching, say, an Ingmar Bergman film like “Wild Strawberries” dubbed over with American actors and missing half of Victor Sjostrom’s wonderful performance; he conveys so much with the tone of his voice in that film that one almost need not read the dialog. On the other hand, Fellini always shot silent and post-synched all of the dialog in his films – often having the actors recite the alphabet on set because the dialog was not yet written! Even then, at least the original Fellini dubs were performed by the same actors who appear on screen. It is rare that a film gets as expert and well directed a dubbing job as, say, “Das Boot.”

Bway
Bway on September 26, 2006 at 2:03 am

Luis, no I don’t watch foreign films, just because I can’t handle the subtitles, or the dubbing either for that matter. I could probably take the dubbing easier than subtitles, I just can’t come to the movies to read instead of listen.

Ed Solero
Ed Solero on September 25, 2006 at 5:48 pm

LuisV makes an excellent point, Bway, that the Spanish subtitles are primarily what keeps this theater afloat. I’m sure without benefit of those subtitles, the Plaza Theater in Corona wouldn’t even have lasted as long as it did. In the end, even that wasn’t enough. I have no problem with a business attempting to cater to the overwhelming population in its marketplace.

LuisV
LuisV on September 25, 2006 at 4:56 pm

The market in Jackson heights is there for Spanish subtitling or they wouldn’t do it….If there were a movie theater in Chinatown, I would feel the same about Chinese subtitling.

For me (and I am just speaking just for me) subtitles are no big deal. If a theater goer finds it so annoying then yes, they should go to another theater. It’s not like they are dubbing the dialogue; they are just subtitling.

Note to Bway: Please don’t misunderstand. I am not trying to be mean, but do you see any foreign films? Do you see them only if they’re dubbed? If you do see them and they are subtitled, what’s the difference?

One more thing….Let’s say the theater stopped subtitling and a big part of their audience stopped going to the theater. The theater stands a real chance of closing. Then, everyone has to go to another theater or the DVD. I’m just saying that the management has determined that this helps their business and it is, after all, their business.

Bway
Bway on September 25, 2006 at 4:14 pm

Quote:
The same situation applies to all of the Spanish speaking immigrants in Jackson Heights.

And what about all the non-Spanish speaking immigrants or residents in Jackson Heights having to have that annoyance flashing under the screen?

Quote:
* If it bothers you, then you should go to another theater.*

When another theater is not close or convenient?

Bway
Bway on September 25, 2006 at 4:12 pm

[i]The same situation applies to all of the Spanish speaking immigrants in Jackson Heights.[\i]

And what about all the non-Spanish speaking immigrants or residents in Jackson Heights having to have that annoyance flashing under the screen?

[i] If it bothers you, then you should go to another theater.
[/i]

When another theater is not close or convenient?

LuisV
LuisV on September 24, 2006 at 11:37 am

I hate to rehash an old topic discussed above, but here goes…..I was born and raised in the US and speak perfect English. I also speak Spanish fluently. When I see the latest Almodovar film or other Spanish film I insist that the film be subtitled in English. Why? English is my first language and while I speak and understand Spanish quite well, there are some things I have trouble with: sometimes accents, sometimes very rapid speech, sometimes words I am not familiar with. So, even though I understand Spanish, having subtitles adds to my enjoyment of a film so that if I missed something that was spoken I can read it in English. Since I go to a movie to be entertained I think this is a great feature. The same situation applies to all of the Spanish speaking immigrants in Jackson Heights. They may and probably do know some English, but they go to the movies to be entertained. Having the Spanish subtitles enables them to enjoy the film and learn English at the same time.

I also insist on subtitles when I go to the Opera, even when the Opera is in English since I don’t always understand the singers words.

There is obviously a market in this neighborhood for sub-titled movies. If it bothers you, then you should go to another theater.

Bway
Bway on June 9, 2006 at 12:46 am

Well hopefully they do the same thing at the Ridgewood Theater, as I think it’s the same owners. I don’t think they need a building permit to just renovate their auditoriums. Apparently they keep the Jackson in about as good a shape as they keep the Ridgewood. Any repair is better than nothing.

Warren, interesting find about the JH Airdome.

imoutopoul
imoutopoul on June 1, 2006 at 4:53 pm

Hey Guys,
I was at the Jackson the other night catching X-Men. I noticed that the main theater was closed and the windows blacked out. Depending who I spoke to I was told that the projector needed repair to the ceiling being fixed to a major overhaul of the main theater. I didn’t see any building permits or construction containers around the theater. Everybody I did speak to said that it would reopen within a month. Does anybody have any further info?
Jimmy M

Bway
Bway on March 21, 2006 at 5:50 am

Oh, and Warren, I forgot to comment on your comment about the movies on the Jackson’s marquee in the current photos…..it appears perhaps all three are fitting for the theater’s present state!! Irony is not even the word!

Bway
Bway on March 21, 2006 at 5:48 am

Thank you Warren, what an elegant interior it had! And the beautiful marquee! Compared to what is there today! Thanks for the photos.
From what I gather, the front part fo the Jackson is still intact, meaning the procenium arch, and all the plasterwork, because the multiplexing took place in the back of the theater?

Bway
Bway on March 21, 2006 at 4:29 am

As for the condition, it appears the owners of the Jackson (which also own the Ridgewood Theater) don’t seem to take much better care of the place than the Ridgewood Theater. In fact, on the exterior, the Ridgewood seems to be in better shape (and that’s saying a lot).

Bway
Bway on March 21, 2006 at 4:28 am

Thanks very much Warren, those are the first I have seen of it. did the Jackson have a balcony? It seems sort of too low, unless that’s just an illusion of just the lobby being low.

Bway
Bway on March 21, 2006 at 1:28 am

I don’t have any of the interior, but if you are looking for a theater highly intact inside (and out), check out the RKO Kieth’s Richmond Hill. While the seats have been removed, most of the interior of that theater is completely intact. And it was never multiplexed, so even more intact.
Here’s a link:
/theaters/3972/

As for the Jackson, I too would be interested in seeing photos of the inside. I don’t know how much of the original ornamentation survived the multiplexing.

jurayj
jurayj on March 20, 2006 at 6:36 pm

could someone please post current photos of the jacksons exterior facade including entrance details, and any current interior shots
to show its condition, I am looking for highly intact new york movie houses to present to the landmarks commission

JHGuy
JHGuy on January 2, 2006 at 6:08 am

I went to see a movie there last night. Most of the theater’s original details appear to be intact under several coats of paint. The main auditorium is one of the largest movie houses I’ve been in since I was a kid, although it has a faint odor of stale fake butter flavor.

And the movie had subtitles in Spanish. Did this bother me? No, as I’ve been to theaters all over the world that play Hollywood movies with subtitles in many different languages at once. It is rather entertaining that several of you are getting all hot and bothered over subtitles as some sort of vandalism of the movie. The Jackson Triplex shows Hollywood blockbusters—not art. There are several other movie theaters in the area accessible by subway and car. So it’s not like the Jackson Triplex is the only theater around showing Hollywood movies. (You don’t’ complain about the Eagle that shows Bollywood musicals 8 blocks away.) However, the Jackson is the only theater accessible on foot from Jackson Heights that shows Hollywood movies.

dellwebb
dellwebb on December 25, 2005 at 7:53 am

Grew up in the neighborhood. Was there many times, before and after it became a triplex. For some reason remember seeing, “The Incredible Shrinking Woman” there with Lily Tomlin over everything else. My fondest memory of it was pre-triplex was when I went to a Saturday afternoon event in the mid-70’s, “Go Ape for a Day”, all 5 films starting with of course “Planet of the….”

maramadus
maramadus on October 30, 2005 at 6:31 pm

I purchased and removed an old (early 1950s) sound system from the Jackson Triplex in the summer of 2004. Does anyone have any information or history on when the Jackson first went to stereo sound? I would venture that this system would have been their first sterophonic sound system and would love to know exactly when it was installed.

br91975
br91975 on July 15, 2005 at 7:34 am

The exterior – without, of course, the original marquee – appears today much as it did in the image Warren posted earlier this afternoon.

Bway
Bway on July 11, 2005 at 8:51 am

Ah, it was cut up totally different than other cut up “multiplexes” I am thinking of.

RobertR
RobertR on July 11, 2005 at 8:42 am

The Jackson used the elevated stadium section (I am refraining from using “balcony” before I am corrected)to make theatres 2 and 3, so except for the year iot must all be there.

Bway
Bway on July 11, 2005 at 8:38 am

If you take the multiplexing of some of the other theaters, such as the Ridgewood Theater, most of the auditorium ornamentation survives, except for the fact that it has walls cutting up thing, like the huge ceiling circle, etc.

br91975
br91975 on July 11, 2005 at 8:26 am

The foyer retains most of that appearance to this day; I imagine much of the same, save for the alterations brought forth by the triplexing, can be said for the auditorium itself.

RobertR
RobertR on July 11, 2005 at 7:20 am

I never knew the jackson was such a beautiful house. It’s shocking they have not carved up that main floor. Has anyone seen it recently, does it look the same?

br91975
br91975 on June 20, 2005 at 9:54 am

Had a chance to peek inside the Jackson Triplex when I was in the area a couple of weeks ago and have to say I was very impressed with how well-preserved it is, save for some graffiti on the upper facade and a somewhat modernized (with stucco walls) vestibule area between the main entrance and secondary set of doors. It’s clear the owners recognize the value of the property; they’re also, from what I could tell, doing a solid business.