I think I’ve now figured out a possible way this scheme could be implemented, based on available plans, publically stated project goals, presumed retention of the organ and stage, the structural constraints of keeping the existing circle structure, and the assumption that the proscenium cannot be significantly raised in height:
-Removal of front splay walls at least up to approx. location of the left/right front stalls fire hoses. According to the licencing plans, this would mainly affect stairs at stalls level on the right side that may require relocation, or possibly could simply be eliminated. Removal of splay walls to a position slightly beyond the front stalls side fire exit doors would be advantageous, to gain more screen width and aesthetic integration with the existing walls, but modification of other access and service areas etc. would then be required.
-Replacement splay walls in new location to accomodate new wider screen and sightlines therefore required.
-Replacement screen between 60-65ft. wide, where 65ft. by my estimates is the limit.
-Removal of approx. last 5 rows of existing stalls seating to accomodate sightlines to top of new screen; move stalls level rear wall forward (possibly with new toilets behind.)
-Acoustic absorption with suitable covering fitted to walls and ceilings at screen end, noting that Eomac’s catalogue includes “acoustic wood” and various design options for fabric covering-based systems.
This would still leave a compromised auditorium by current standards, but would essentially keep the original form, including retention of stage and organ, and should leave sufficient space for tabs also.
By my estimates, assuming a 65ft. wide screen, such a layout would put seats in the centre part of the front 4 rows in the Royal Circle more or less within IMAX standards (where the rearmost seats should be no further than ~1 screen width from the screen) for seating distance/position in relation to screen width, albeit located a little too high. The other 2 rows of the Royal Circle would still be OK.
Having a look at the layout of a new build iSense auditorium, the rearmost seats are 1.4x screen width away from the screen. By my estimation the scheme outlined above would put all but the last 8 rows of the circle within this distance, and in this respect it could be said that a majority of seats would meet current expectations of “immersiveness“ as found in auditoria marketed as “premium large format” cinemas, albeit not comparable to a textbook IMAX or the Cineworld/Empire LSQ IMAX (nor the IMPACT/Superscreen at the Empire, for that matter)—although some may consider this to be preferable!
So, as long as you are in the “right” seats, assuming laser projection and Atmos, it seems to me there is a good chance the pending refurbishment/alterations will make for an up-to-date “immersive” cinema experience with all the trappings of a super cinema to boot.
A 2012 application specifically to confirm that this would be in keeping with Class D2 use and thus not require planning permission, resulted in a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development confirming this would not constitute a material change of use being issued by Westminster Council.
As this scheme has not been taken forward this would appear to be of largely academic (!) interest; however, the application does include existing plans. The remains of old decor on the “right hand side wall” in the photos posted by Ian I would assume to be in the “PLANT/SERVICE AREA” on the existing plans.
Amazing that alterations to these buildings result in them being chopped and changed so much, almost like “Trigger’s broom”!
Demolished. Bowling alley which occupied units in the building to the right of the cinema’s former location converted and extended to form a new Asda superstore. Part of this extension, surface level car parking and ‘click and collect’ pick-up point now occupy the former site of the cinema.
Thanks Zappomatic, nice summary—I’d just found the plans for myself but I’d missed some of the detail you’ve picked up on.
The facade is a dreadful state and I had no idea that so much had been lost of the original.
(Original facade shown on p14 of the Design & Access Statement.)
The rendering of the ‘restored’ facade looks like a massive improvement!
I haven’t been to any of the auditoria in a very long time, but from memory, they will have their work cut out to do a good selective ‘restoration’ and will also need to improve control over the acoustics.
I imagine that plans for a ‘boutique’ cinema built on top of the nearby ‘The Glades’ regional shopping mall (also known as ‘intu Bromley’ for a few years) will now not be taken forward. Meanwhile, the £90m Bromley South Central development is under construction, to include a 9 screen Vue multiplex, with completion delayed and now slated for Spring 2018.
This cinema originally opened with two THX certified auditoria, which, at that time, were very few in relative number in the UK compared to most other developed markets—and by the late 1990s not to be expected for a newly commissioned site.
Alas, at that time IIRC KCS speakers were installed—and those screens didn’t sound particularly different to the main screens in any other run-of-the-mill multiplex, i.e. medicore and not comparable to the excellent THX certified installations at the Empire Leicester Square or Warner West End in the 1990s.
(Of course, this is not a comment on the current presentation quality, with which I am not familar.)
I agree that they ought to be one of the indispensable “finishing touches” to a good cinema.
Alas, it seems curtains/tabs are seen as a dated feature with no upside and plenty of scope for reliability and maintenance issues, whilst they are now uncommon so patrons may be bemused by them? :–(
OTOH, the stated basis of the OLS refurb is to keep it as a traditional single screen “super cinema” with existing features preserved and/or sympathetic treatment otherwise, so not including curtains/tabs would be to miss the point.
Looking at the the above referenced planning application…
-In the plans, the first few rows of the rear circle are shown. Aisles are reduced from 3 to 2 with no centre aisle, and the number of seats per row slightly decreased. The rows do not appear to be re-stepped, but I assume wider replacement seats will be installed.
-In addition to renders being included in the “Design & Access Statement,” there is a separate “Renders as Proposed” document, which contains slightly higher resolution copies of the renders. It can be seen that there is a concessions (“SNACKS”) bar opposite the main entrance doors; moreover, to the left of this are doors with a “SCREEN ONE” sign on the wall above. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that the refurbished auditorium will still include stalls.
Revisiting the licensing plans for the OLS, and the classic “cross section” drawing, I have to wonder how this will work. The current rear stalls, presumably, will be unusable with the larger screen. However, if the screen is moved ahead of the existing proscenium, to get increased width within the existing auditorium footprint—and I would assume minimum 60ft. width for the new screen?—then this would probably make the front stalls also unusable.
Furthermore, ideally, to bring the cinema in line with today’s practices and expectations, the screen would also be positioned so that its vertical centre is positioned closer in line with, say, at least the middle rows of the circle—albeit this would not help the stalls either. I would also expect a flagship Dolby Cinema installation, if that is what this will be, would ideally have the projectors positioned to be aligned vertically with the screen centre.
All things considered, I can only imagine that very considerable alterations will be needed to the front of the auditorium, and possibly adjacent areas, involving reconfiguration of the ceiling, side walls, services and stairwells.
Maybe the first few rows of the circle could be removed to gain more space for reconfigured/restepped stalls? I am certain that FanaticalAboutOdeon can enlighten…
“Odeon are proposing to carry out a regeneration project which will preserve and enhance the character of the existing Art Deco Odeon, providing a much-needed upgrade to reflect the status it holds. It will accommodate the needs of the Cinema, be state-of-the-art in terms of technology to offer the best film experience. Its overall design will be brought together again to read as a whole rather than fragments of a past masterpiece. The history, heritage and the story of the building as well as the future of cinema enjoyment have all been major drivers in the development of the scheme. It will be the ultimate beacon of the ODEON brand as the best the brand can be, reinforcing the role of Odeon in its industry This is not a restoration project but where significant elements remain these will be preserved and the essence will be respected. It will still remain a ‘working cinema’, not just an icon or beacon.
“[…]
“This building whilst having special architectural, cultural and historic interest is not currently listed.
“[…]
“The cinema will offer a more open and inviting frontage with new glazing, canopy and glazed feature box, signage and advertising strategy.
“The glazed box would be an extension of the 1st floor Foyer Bar and wrap approximately 5m to the South of the existing opening. The feature element will be used as a seating area and help to present a more open and inviting space.
“[…]
“The glazed box would be constructed as a structural glass solution made from structural glass units and supported with glass beams and fins.
“[…]
“Gold coloured metal, linking outside to inside, would feature to the canopy soffit and edges, as well as featuring as a spandrel panel to mask close existing column locations. It is also proposed to have a white lit band to the edge of the canopy featuring a written historical reference – ‘Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation’. The Text will be provided by LED panels, and will be capable of change – e.g. for Premiere performances.
“[…]
“We are also proposing that the current arrangement of advertising and signage would be refined. The digital billboard sizes would remain the same but the paper billboard will be removed. […] With just one digital billboard each side of the glazed element, the building will present a more legible and balanced façade.
“[…]
“The details of the signage will be the subject of a separate Advertising Consent application.
“[…]
“At the foyer level the separation between the main auditorium and the studio screens will be connected for the first time. Internally a Lift and Escalator will be introduced to the main foyer space easing movement around the building and allowing wheelchair access to the Circle level which was previously not possible.
“[…]
“As an existing 1930s building the number of provisions such as WC numbers or Accessible WC numbers do not meet the current requirements. However with the capacity being reduced and the sanitary provisions being updated and increased, the building should better meet current standards of provision.”
Note the reference to capacity reduction and the connection between the “OLS” and “Studio” foyer areas.
EllisWilliams Architects are listed as the architect in the “Design & Access Statement.”
A new planning application is now up, 17/07604/FULL – “Installation of new cinema canopy, refurbishment of the ground floor entrances, and replacement of first floor canopy balcony with glass extension to first floor lobby bar”, dated as validated 31 August 2017.
It is pending approval; therefore, presumably the refurbishment will not commence until the application is permitted.
Alas, Westminster Council’s IDOX site has just gone down (again!), but here’s what I’ve gleaned so far:
-The design for the updated facade can be seen under “FULL ELEVATIONS-PROPOSED” and “RENDERS AS PROPOSED.”
-There is large “DOLBY” sign on the right side of a new glazed balcony area. This suggets that a full Dolby Cinema installation is planned, with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
-EllisWilliams Architects are responsible for drawings submitted with this application.
-3x large LED displays retained. All other external advertising to be tidied up and consolidated with new digital displays.
-Blue neon strips on the facade to be replaced with LED.
-The Odeon Studios sign is removed with “Screens 2-6” shown on the new canopy above the entrance to the “studio” screens.
–“Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation” (!) is shown on the canopy above the entrance to what I assume is now Screen 1.
-The “Design & Access Statement” makes considerable reference to the cinema’s heritage. It mentions that the building is not listed several times, but almost suggests that it ought to be, albeit noting that much of the original features have been lost through previous refurbishments. There appears to be considerable apprehension around this; certainly the importance of the building is fully recognised.
-No details on the auditorium works as they are not the subject of this application.
The proposed facade, in my opinion, looks very good indeed.
I note the CTA’s Casework Report (June 2017) comments on the pending refurbishment, saying that it will be kept as a single screen, and the organ retained, with a “large format screen of some genus” planned.
I don’t find “kept as a single screen” terribly reassuring if the form of that screen is unknown, albeit keeping the organ and the constraints of the building imply that certain options that one could imagine are off the table.
OTOH, one might hope that it will feature a Dolby Cinema installation with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
I guess if the premiere for “Murder on the Orient Express” is at the OLS, then the refurb won’t happen until next year?
Cjbx11: According to Maeve Contractors, the conversion cost £5m. I saw £4.6m quoted elsewhere.
I’m not convinced by the conversion in terms of gaining the extra screen, but I do think that Empire 1 couldn’t meet today’s expectations—the stalls were too flatly raked, and the circle was too far from the screen—and the “slap echo” made dialogue unintelligible—especially since movie soundtracks, these days, are mixed for acoustically damped small to medium sized rooms.
Please don’t get me wrong, I loved Empire 1, but I can see that it wasn’t perfect.
Added to the above they obtained the IMAX brand on the facade and at present they have the only IMAX with Laser installation in London with the screen size to match. One only has to look at the BFI to see how popular full scale IMAX is.
Empire Cinemas' beneficial owner, Thomas Anderson, was reported to have had problems with debt structuring over in Ireland. Cineworld admit, in their annual report, to paying a very large premium (over their own fair market valuation) to acquire those key sites from Empire Cinemas.
Regarding standards of presentation, I cannot remember the lighting and tabs at my local Odeon, the main screen of which was still OK despite subdivision. But I can say that it wasn’t until the late 1990s that Dolby Digital was installed, and even then the sound was quite poor. JBL rear speakers were installed but who knows what was behind the screen.
I have been to multiplexes on multiple occasions (35mm) where there was a failure to switch lens for the main feature (until I left the auditorium to complain!) and even more times with otherwise sloppy projection such as an out-of-focus picture.
The local Cannons and Coronets, which may well have had tabs, were absolutely dire in all respects.
OTOH, I went to a new multiplex back then and there were no tabs; before the feature, a badly aligned slide projector was used to show still adverts for local businesses. This included the local kebab shop or similar. Absolutely terrible.
Robert: Thanks for your fascinating recollections of how things were back in the day! By those standards, showmanship and presentation had already declined before I was born.
Empire 1 was my favourite cinema, too. But I always imagined that it couldn’t possibly remain in that form forever. :–(
Lionel: Interesting that the GM said that to you back then.
In the 1990s, new build multiplex development in London had trailed behind the rest of the country. In parts of London, the only “local” option was a 1930s cinema which typically had become a run down Cannon or Coronet, probably with Altec speakers behind the screen, and, in the largest auditorium, a really bad Dolby Stereo installation, with the smaller auditoria still mono. The environment was very poor with awful subdivisions and lack of upkeep.
If you wanted to see a quality presentation with 5.1 digital audio and particularly in a THX certified screen then the West End was the only game in town.
I remember Empire 1 being very busy at peak times; I knew people at that time with no particular special interest in cinema who would visit the West End for some “blockbuster” movies.
By 2000 or so a number of new multiplexes had opened in London, so this situation had changed. The standard of presentation at these tended to be sub-par, but they were new, clean and had digital sound. More have opened today with further sites in the pipeline.
Around that time the Empire building (5-6 Leicester Sq.) was acquired by London & Regional Properties (from First Leisure, operators of the nightclub that was then below the main part of the cinema.) Currently, AFAIK the building is on a 25 year lease (ending 2030) to the company which owns the casino.
I had expected the building to be demolished by now, and I dare say without the successful casino, it would have been.
I don’t see small auditoria built in “spare” space as negative—do not visit them if you don’t like them? I have not been to the Odeon Mezzanine/Studios in a long time.
I share your concerns over the loss of West End cinema “culture.” Empire Cinemas, I think, very much ran it as the Empire Leicester Sq. and not another multiplex and we shall see if this is sustained under Cineworld.
One of the benefits of an IMAX installation is the quality control including continuous montoring by IMAX, and automatic daily recalibration of picture/sound. Auditoria used for premieres should also benefit from more servicing of projection/sound than the average cinema.
All IMAX screenings are introduced by a member of staff; the Empire IMAX still has colour changing concealed lighting; no tabs but the screen is never simply left blank.
A new laser show would be a great addition. :–(
I sudder to think of watching an 8K screening whilst eating a plastic tasting steak from the awful tourist trap that is an Angus Steak House!
Thankfully, this is not the direction that cinemas are going in, however. Operators are spending a lot of money refurbishing or on new sites with nice foyer areas and “premium large format” screens featuring Dolby Atmos, sometimes laser projection, and more spacious seating. Also, the average new IMAX screen—and they are increasing in number—may be disappointing for someone familar with the “classic” ones, but IMAX Digital is a high quality system—vastly better than the days of the typical multiplex out-of-focus 35mm presentation with medicore audio!
I agree with your comments on the current medicore output of Hollywood. The picture quality, sound and special effects in some of today’s releases is incredible—but the incomprehensible plot and threadbare storytelling makes watching “blockbuster” or “tentpole” films with wall to wall action like going to a theme park. I like theme parks, actually, but it’s not how movies ought to be.
P.S. For me Leicester Square is a nice place to be on a sunny afternoon if it’s not too busy.
I paid a visit to the Vue West End yesterday to see the re-released 3D/4K transfer/restoration/conversion of “Terminator 2.”
The new foyer and associated auditorium access areas are very attractive, being bright, welcoming and fresh, yet warmly lit, in an appropriate way for a cinema. I could nit-pick, but in a nutshell they have done a fabulous job.
Brass balustrades in the escalator stairwell landings, along with marble tiles, are, I believe, retained from the original 1993 fit-out. All windows to Leicester Court were blacked out, and I had assumed that the automatic door exit from the escalators were out of use, but looking at a photo I had taken, I had most likely been confused.
Unfortunately, the screening was not such a positive experience. Only one screening was listed as scheduled, in Screen 5, and I had booked a seat in the centre of a row. Alas, after obtaining my tickets from the vending machine, on presenting my tickets, I was informed that the screening was now in Screen 6, which I gather was due to Screen 5 being used for an event. I expressed my dissatisfaction to their disinterested ears.
Once in the auditorium, I discovered that my reallocated seat was off-centre, and the centre seats in that row were later occupied by other patrons. “Non-sync” music was played before the feature, and I may be mistaken, but it sounded something like a bizarre “muzak” version of generic movie soundtrack material. Tabs were left open with only a blank screen shown.
At the scheduled programme time, a member of staff entered the auditorium and curtly announced from the rear that we would have to wait 10 minutes for the film. This seems bizarre for a digital presentation, and I can only imagine that the DCP was frantically ingested at the last minute or similar!
The film started with a “pop”, no preceding material being played, and ended similarly abruptly, with the house lights remaining dimmed even after the end credits, and patrons had to find their way out of the auditorium using the “torch” function of their mobile phones; one of them quipped, “this cinema is terminated!”
Picture quality was very good, but on the dark side with 3D glasses on, and the black level (with glasses off) a little high. Geometry was also good, but with a bit of a curve towards the screen edges at the bottom.
Sound quality was good, although I assume playback was slightly less than reference level, and the LFE seemed restrained. Still, maximum levels were easily handled, with clear and clean high frequencies at all times, albeit coloured by a little peakiness.
The better auditoria in the 1993 multiplex were built to achieve excellent acoustics, with the advantage of not being four parallel walls as today’s auditoria tend towards, and this was apparent today with a highly controlled reverberation time and overall flat room contribution, and very good front stereo imaging.
However, it must be said that Screen 6 has too small a screen size, with seating too far away, certainly by today’s standards, and pales in comparison to the new “large format” digital screens in a certain cinema only a couple of hundred feet or so away—or for that matter the Odeon Leicester Square from the front stalls. It would be adequate for a smaller scale film, but is not for a monumental affair like T2.
The auditorium was very comfortable with good seats and excellent air conditioning, albeit all black in colour.
As for the film, to my mind, it goes without saying that T2 has a vastly more coherent and structured plot, better characterisation and more depth than today’s average “summer blockbuster”. The new transfer is outstanding with no visible grain, and almost perfect colour grading to the originally intended tints. It looks almost new, albeit not quite as detailed as current digitally acquired material. The 3D conversion is generally on the conservative side.
On leaving the Vue West End, I complained to a member of staff, who was very friendly and understanding, clearly enthusiastic about cinema in general, and they apologised profusely saying that Vue were “deeply humilated” by what had happened with the T2 screening.
Based on today’s visit, having spent £6.6m to modernise the Vue West End to create a very attractive and comfortable premium flagship location, with pricing to match, Vue really need to improve the overall customer experience and presentation to a consistent standard.
I will definitely return in the belief that next time will be better…
I have taken a number of photos, uploads to follow—alas only limited shots of the auditorium as it was too dark after the film finished!
LW’s own amplifiers are used in all auditoria (MUK and EK V2 series.)
As each of the LW 6117 units contains two 21" drivers, in the iSense auditorium the LFE channel is reproduced using eight 21" drivers, equivalent in surface area to 16 18" drivers.
At least at the Odeon Orpington iSense screen, it looks like the days of the “local” cinema using conked out old Altecs, or otherwise underspecified systems, are well and truly over.
“5.1. Why do presence ratings increase with screen size?
“[…]
“Thus, a high-level account of these results might posit that larger displays are generally more impressive and therefore more engaging. Of course, it should come as no surprise that object size is an important visual measure. After all, it is not retinal images but the properties of distal stimuli that we are rightly interested in, and our perceptions of these are derived from the influences of various perceptual constancies, including size constancy.
“Evidence from fMRI (Murray, Boyaci, & Kersten, 2006) has shown that the spread of activation across the retinotopic V1 increases with an increase in perceived size, even when retinal size is constant. Exactly why this occurs is still not clear […] but it does show that the perception of physical object size, traditionally associated with high-level processes, can assert its influence at the very earliest stages of cortical visual processing, presumably through feedback.”
So, screen size is a factor, albeit in that particular study the field of view was kept constant, with the screen size altered by using two different screens, one more than twice the size of the other.
alpinedownhiller: Sure, screen size is a factor, hence I began my post by comparing an 80ft.+ wide screen with a 5" diagonal mobile phone. Obviously holding the phone right in front of your eyes isn’t the same as a large screen even if the “FOV” is the same.
Confused by your comment: “Yeah but since you can chose where to sit, screen size does make a difference”?
With regard to the discussion on IMAX screen sizes, the important factor (given, say, 80ft.+ wide screens and not a 5" mobile phone) is the geometry of the auditorium.
Essentially, the distance from the screen to the last row should not exceed one screen width, and the first row not more than 0.35x screen width.
Also, the front row should be somewhat above the bottom of the screen, and the last row positioned about half way up.
Of course, the projection system must also be adequate to cope with the closer position to the screen compared to a traditional auditorium, and stadium seating is a given.
These requirements can also be expressed in terms of horizontal and vertical viewing angles.
IOW, whether a screen is 85ft. or 95ft. wide will make little difference, especially since the viewing angles vary depending on which row you choose to sit in!
I think I’ve now figured out a possible way this scheme could be implemented, based on available plans, publically stated project goals, presumed retention of the organ and stage, the structural constraints of keeping the existing circle structure, and the assumption that the proscenium cannot be significantly raised in height:
-Removal of front splay walls at least up to approx. location of the left/right front stalls fire hoses. According to the licencing plans, this would mainly affect stairs at stalls level on the right side that may require relocation, or possibly could simply be eliminated. Removal of splay walls to a position slightly beyond the front stalls side fire exit doors would be advantageous, to gain more screen width and aesthetic integration with the existing walls, but modification of other access and service areas etc. would then be required.
-Replacement splay walls in new location to accomodate new wider screen and sightlines therefore required.
-Replacement screen between 60-65ft. wide, where 65ft. by my estimates is the limit.
-Removal of approx. last 5 rows of existing stalls seating to accomodate sightlines to top of new screen; move stalls level rear wall forward (possibly with new toilets behind.)
-Acoustic absorption with suitable covering fitted to walls and ceilings at screen end, noting that Eomac’s catalogue includes “acoustic wood” and various design options for fabric covering-based systems.
This would still leave a compromised auditorium by current standards, but would essentially keep the original form, including retention of stage and organ, and should leave sufficient space for tabs also.
By my estimates, assuming a 65ft. wide screen, such a layout would put seats in the centre part of the front 4 rows in the Royal Circle more or less within IMAX standards (where the rearmost seats should be no further than ~1 screen width from the screen) for seating distance/position in relation to screen width, albeit located a little too high. The other 2 rows of the Royal Circle would still be OK.
Having a look at the layout of a new build iSense auditorium, the rearmost seats are 1.4x screen width away from the screen. By my estimation the scheme outlined above would put all but the last 8 rows of the circle within this distance, and in this respect it could be said that a majority of seats would meet current expectations of “immersiveness“ as found in auditoria marketed as “premium large format” cinemas, albeit not comparable to a textbook IMAX or the Cineworld/Empire LSQ IMAX (nor the IMPACT/Superscreen at the Empire, for that matter)—although some may consider this to be preferable!
So, as long as you are in the “right” seats, assuming laser projection and Atmos, it seems to me there is a good chance the pending refurbishment/alterations will make for an up-to-date “immersive” cinema experience with all the trappings of a super cinema to boot.
A 2012 application specifically to confirm that this would be in keeping with Class D2 use and thus not require planning permission, resulted in a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development confirming this would not constitute a material change of use being issued by Westminster Council.
As this scheme has not been taken forward this would appear to be of largely academic (!) interest; however, the application does include existing plans. The remains of old decor on the “right hand side wall” in the photos posted by Ian I would assume to be in the “PLANT/SERVICE AREA” on the existing plans.
Amazing that alterations to these buildings result in them being chopped and changed so much, almost like “Trigger’s broom”!
Demolished. Bowling alley which occupied units in the building to the right of the cinema’s former location converted and extended to form a new Asda superstore. Part of this extension, surface level car parking and ‘click and collect’ pick-up point now occupy the former site of the cinema.
Lionel: Afraid I don’t. However, you can view the plans for the cinema within this licencing application.
A short blurb on the refurbishment to create the Picturehouse, as well as a number of photos, are on the website of Phelan Construction:
http://www.phelans.co.uk/portfolio/projects/picturehouse-central-piccadilly
The project duration was 20 weeks, including strip-out, minor structure alterations (to walls and floors, and new steel work) and fit-out.
Thanks Zappomatic, nice summary—I’d just found the plans for myself but I’d missed some of the detail you’ve picked up on.
The facade is a dreadful state and I had no idea that so much had been lost of the original.
(Original facade shown on p14 of the Design & Access Statement.)
The rendering of the ‘restored’ facade looks like a massive improvement!
I haven’t been to any of the auditoria in a very long time, but from memory, they will have their work cut out to do a good selective ‘restoration’ and will also need to improve control over the acoustics.
I imagine that plans for a ‘boutique’ cinema built on top of the nearby ‘The Glades’ regional shopping mall (also known as ‘intu Bromley’ for a few years) will now not be taken forward. Meanwhile, the £90m Bromley South Central development is under construction, to include a 9 screen Vue multiplex, with completion delayed and now slated for Spring 2018.
This cinema originally opened with two THX certified auditoria, which, at that time, were very few in relative number in the UK compared to most other developed markets—and by the late 1990s not to be expected for a newly commissioned site.
Alas, at that time IIRC KCS speakers were installed—and those screens didn’t sound particularly different to the main screens in any other run-of-the-mill multiplex, i.e. medicore and not comparable to the excellent THX certified installations at the Empire Leicester Square or Warner West End in the 1990s.
(Of course, this is not a comment on the current presentation quality, with which I am not familar.)
For whatever reason, the “Omnimaxx” brand is now known as “OmniplexMAXX.”
A quick WIPO search brings up entries for “Omnimax” being registered as a trademark by IMAX Corp. in at least the US and Canada.
The OmniplexMAXX screen in Antrim is said to be the largest in Ireland at 23m wide and 9m high.
Press release from January 2016 states that all Omniplex Maxx screens to be equipped with Dolby Atmos.
I agree that they ought to be one of the indispensable “finishing touches” to a good cinema.
Alas, it seems curtains/tabs are seen as a dated feature with no upside and plenty of scope for reliability and maintenance issues, whilst they are now uncommon so patrons may be bemused by them? :–(
OTOH, the stated basis of the OLS refurb is to keep it as a traditional single screen “super cinema” with existing features preserved and/or sympathetic treatment otherwise, so not including curtains/tabs would be to miss the point.
HowardBHaas: Hear, hear!
Revisiting past posts, I guess this post by FanaticalAboutOdeon suggests the circle cannot be shortened at all. Hmm…
Looking at the the above referenced planning application…
-In the plans, the first few rows of the rear circle are shown. Aisles are reduced from 3 to 2 with no centre aisle, and the number of seats per row slightly decreased. The rows do not appear to be re-stepped, but I assume wider replacement seats will be installed.
-In addition to renders being included in the “Design & Access Statement,” there is a separate “Renders as Proposed” document, which contains slightly higher resolution copies of the renders. It can be seen that there is a concessions (“SNACKS”) bar opposite the main entrance doors; moreover, to the left of this are doors with a “SCREEN ONE” sign on the wall above. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that the refurbished auditorium will still include stalls.
Revisiting the licensing plans for the OLS, and the classic “cross section” drawing, I have to wonder how this will work. The current rear stalls, presumably, will be unusable with the larger screen. However, if the screen is moved ahead of the existing proscenium, to get increased width within the existing auditorium footprint—and I would assume minimum 60ft. width for the new screen?—then this would probably make the front stalls also unusable.
Furthermore, ideally, to bring the cinema in line with today’s practices and expectations, the screen would also be positioned so that its vertical centre is positioned closer in line with, say, at least the middle rows of the circle—albeit this would not help the stalls either. I would also expect a flagship Dolby Cinema installation, if that is what this will be, would ideally have the projectors positioned to be aligned vertically with the screen centre.
All things considered, I can only imagine that very considerable alterations will be needed to the front of the auditorium, and possibly adjacent areas, involving reconfiguration of the ceiling, side walls, services and stairwells.
Maybe the first few rows of the circle could be removed to gain more space for reconfigured/restepped stalls? I am certain that FanaticalAboutOdeon can enlighten…
Excerpts from the “Design & Access Statement”:
“Odeon are proposing to carry out a regeneration project which will preserve and enhance the character of the existing Art Deco Odeon, providing a much-needed upgrade to reflect the status it holds. It will accommodate the needs of the Cinema, be state-of-the-art in terms of technology to offer the best film experience. Its overall design will be brought together again to read as a whole rather than fragments of a past masterpiece. The history, heritage and the story of the building as well as the future of cinema enjoyment have all been major drivers in the development of the scheme. It will be the ultimate beacon of the ODEON brand as the best the brand can be, reinforcing the role of Odeon in its industry This is not a restoration project but where significant elements remain these will be preserved and the essence will be respected. It will still remain a ‘working cinema’, not just an icon or beacon.
“[…]
“This building whilst having special architectural, cultural and historic interest is not currently listed.
“[…]
“The cinema will offer a more open and inviting frontage with new glazing, canopy and glazed feature box, signage and advertising strategy.
“The glazed box would be an extension of the 1st floor Foyer Bar and wrap approximately 5m to the South of the existing opening. The feature element will be used as a seating area and help to present a more open and inviting space.
“[…]
“The glazed box would be constructed as a structural glass solution made from structural glass units and supported with glass beams and fins.
“[…]
“Gold coloured metal, linking outside to inside, would feature to the canopy soffit and edges, as well as featuring as a spandrel panel to mask close existing column locations. It is also proposed to have a white lit band to the edge of the canopy featuring a written historical reference – ‘Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation’. The Text will be provided by LED panels, and will be capable of change – e.g. for Premiere performances.
“[…]
“We are also proposing that the current arrangement of advertising and signage would be refined. The digital billboard sizes would remain the same but the paper billboard will be removed. […] With just one digital billboard each side of the glazed element, the building will present a more legible and balanced façade.
“[…]
“The details of the signage will be the subject of a separate Advertising Consent application.
“[…]
“At the foyer level the separation between the main auditorium and the studio screens will be connected for the first time. Internally a Lift and Escalator will be introduced to the main foyer space easing movement around the building and allowing wheelchair access to the Circle level which was previously not possible.
“[…]
“As an existing 1930s building the number of provisions such as WC numbers or Accessible WC numbers do not meet the current requirements. However with the capacity being reduced and the sanitary provisions being updated and increased, the building should better meet current standards of provision.”
Note the reference to capacity reduction and the connection between the “OLS” and “Studio” foyer areas.
EllisWilliams Architects are listed as the architect in the “Design & Access Statement.”
A new planning application is now up, 17/07604/FULL – “Installation of new cinema canopy, refurbishment of the ground floor entrances, and replacement of first floor canopy balcony with glass extension to first floor lobby bar”, dated as validated 31 August 2017.
It is pending approval; therefore, presumably the refurbishment will not commence until the application is permitted.
Alas, Westminster Council’s IDOX site has just gone down (again!), but here’s what I’ve gleaned so far:
-The design for the updated facade can be seen under “FULL ELEVATIONS-PROPOSED” and “RENDERS AS PROPOSED.”
-There is large “DOLBY” sign on the right side of a new glazed balcony area. This suggets that a full Dolby Cinema installation is planned, with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
-EllisWilliams Architects are responsible for drawings submitted with this application.
-3x large LED displays retained. All other external advertising to be tidied up and consolidated with new digital displays.
-Blue neon strips on the facade to be replaced with LED.
-The Odeon Studios sign is removed with “Screens 2-6” shown on the new canopy above the entrance to the “studio” screens.
–“Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation” (!) is shown on the canopy above the entrance to what I assume is now Screen 1.
-The “Design & Access Statement” makes considerable reference to the cinema’s heritage. It mentions that the building is not listed several times, but almost suggests that it ought to be, albeit noting that much of the original features have been lost through previous refurbishments. There appears to be considerable apprehension around this; certainly the importance of the building is fully recognised.
-No details on the auditorium works as they are not the subject of this application.
The proposed facade, in my opinion, looks very good indeed.
I note the CTA’s Casework Report (June 2017) comments on the pending refurbishment, saying that it will be kept as a single screen, and the organ retained, with a “large format screen of some genus” planned.
I don’t find “kept as a single screen” terribly reassuring if the form of that screen is unknown, albeit keeping the organ and the constraints of the building imply that certain options that one could imagine are off the table.
OTOH, one might hope that it will feature a Dolby Cinema installation with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
I guess if the premiere for “Murder on the Orient Express” is at the OLS, then the refurb won’t happen until next year?
Looks like they will be also be using a temporary cinema in Embankment Gardens again.
Cjbx11: According to Maeve Contractors, the conversion cost £5m. I saw £4.6m quoted elsewhere.
I’m not convinced by the conversion in terms of gaining the extra screen, but I do think that Empire 1 couldn’t meet today’s expectations—the stalls were too flatly raked, and the circle was too far from the screen—and the “slap echo” made dialogue unintelligible—especially since movie soundtracks, these days, are mixed for acoustically damped small to medium sized rooms.
Please don’t get me wrong, I loved Empire 1, but I can see that it wasn’t perfect.
Added to the above they obtained the IMAX brand on the facade and at present they have the only IMAX with Laser installation in London with the screen size to match. One only has to look at the BFI to see how popular full scale IMAX is.
Empire Cinemas' beneficial owner, Thomas Anderson, was reported to have had problems with debt structuring over in Ireland. Cineworld admit, in their annual report, to paying a very large premium (over their own fair market valuation) to acquire those key sites from Empire Cinemas.
Regarding standards of presentation, I cannot remember the lighting and tabs at my local Odeon, the main screen of which was still OK despite subdivision. But I can say that it wasn’t until the late 1990s that Dolby Digital was installed, and even then the sound was quite poor. JBL rear speakers were installed but who knows what was behind the screen.
I have been to multiplexes on multiple occasions (35mm) where there was a failure to switch lens for the main feature (until I left the auditorium to complain!) and even more times with otherwise sloppy projection such as an out-of-focus picture.
The local Cannons and Coronets, which may well have had tabs, were absolutely dire in all respects.
OTOH, I went to a new multiplex back then and there were no tabs; before the feature, a badly aligned slide projector was used to show still adverts for local businesses. This included the local kebab shop or similar. Absolutely terrible.
Robert: Thanks for your fascinating recollections of how things were back in the day! By those standards, showmanship and presentation had already declined before I was born.
Empire 1 was my favourite cinema, too. But I always imagined that it couldn’t possibly remain in that form forever. :–(
Lionel: Interesting that the GM said that to you back then.
In the 1990s, new build multiplex development in London had trailed behind the rest of the country. In parts of London, the only “local” option was a 1930s cinema which typically had become a run down Cannon or Coronet, probably with Altec speakers behind the screen, and, in the largest auditorium, a really bad Dolby Stereo installation, with the smaller auditoria still mono. The environment was very poor with awful subdivisions and lack of upkeep.
If you wanted to see a quality presentation with 5.1 digital audio and particularly in a THX certified screen then the West End was the only game in town.
I remember Empire 1 being very busy at peak times; I knew people at that time with no particular special interest in cinema who would visit the West End for some “blockbuster” movies.
By 2000 or so a number of new multiplexes had opened in London, so this situation had changed. The standard of presentation at these tended to be sub-par, but they were new, clean and had digital sound. More have opened today with further sites in the pipeline.
Around that time the Empire building (5-6 Leicester Sq.) was acquired by London & Regional Properties (from First Leisure, operators of the nightclub that was then below the main part of the cinema.) Currently, AFAIK the building is on a 25 year lease (ending 2030) to the company which owns the casino.
I had expected the building to be demolished by now, and I dare say without the successful casino, it would have been.
I don’t see small auditoria built in “spare” space as negative—do not visit them if you don’t like them? I have not been to the Odeon Mezzanine/Studios in a long time.
I share your concerns over the loss of West End cinema “culture.” Empire Cinemas, I think, very much ran it as the Empire Leicester Sq. and not another multiplex and we shall see if this is sustained under Cineworld.
One of the benefits of an IMAX installation is the quality control including continuous montoring by IMAX, and automatic daily recalibration of picture/sound. Auditoria used for premieres should also benefit from more servicing of projection/sound than the average cinema.
All IMAX screenings are introduced by a member of staff; the Empire IMAX still has colour changing concealed lighting; no tabs but the screen is never simply left blank.
A new laser show would be a great addition. :–(
I sudder to think of watching an 8K screening whilst eating a plastic tasting steak from the awful tourist trap that is an Angus Steak House!
Thankfully, this is not the direction that cinemas are going in, however. Operators are spending a lot of money refurbishing or on new sites with nice foyer areas and “premium large format” screens featuring Dolby Atmos, sometimes laser projection, and more spacious seating. Also, the average new IMAX screen—and they are increasing in number—may be disappointing for someone familar with the “classic” ones, but IMAX Digital is a high quality system—vastly better than the days of the typical multiplex out-of-focus 35mm presentation with medicore audio!
These developments are covered in the “Next Gen Multiplex” feature in the June 2017 issue of Cinema Technology Magazine.
I agree with your comments on the current medicore output of Hollywood. The picture quality, sound and special effects in some of today’s releases is incredible—but the incomprehensible plot and threadbare storytelling makes watching “blockbuster” or “tentpole” films with wall to wall action like going to a theme park. I like theme parks, actually, but it’s not how movies ought to be.
P.S. For me Leicester Square is a nice place to be on a sunny afternoon if it’s not too busy.
A number of photos of the facade, foyer and lobby areas of the refurbished Vue West End now uploaded.
I paid a visit to the Vue West End yesterday to see the re-released 3D/4K transfer/restoration/conversion of “Terminator 2.”
The new foyer and associated auditorium access areas are very attractive, being bright, welcoming and fresh, yet warmly lit, in an appropriate way for a cinema. I could nit-pick, but in a nutshell they have done a fabulous job.
Brass balustrades in the escalator stairwell landings, along with marble tiles, are, I believe, retained from the original 1993 fit-out. All windows to Leicester Court were blacked out, and I had assumed that the automatic door exit from the escalators were out of use, but looking at a photo I had taken, I had most likely been confused.
Unfortunately, the screening was not such a positive experience. Only one screening was listed as scheduled, in Screen 5, and I had booked a seat in the centre of a row. Alas, after obtaining my tickets from the vending machine, on presenting my tickets, I was informed that the screening was now in Screen 6, which I gather was due to Screen 5 being used for an event. I expressed my dissatisfaction to their disinterested ears.
Once in the auditorium, I discovered that my reallocated seat was off-centre, and the centre seats in that row were later occupied by other patrons. “Non-sync” music was played before the feature, and I may be mistaken, but it sounded something like a bizarre “muzak” version of generic movie soundtrack material. Tabs were left open with only a blank screen shown.
At the scheduled programme time, a member of staff entered the auditorium and curtly announced from the rear that we would have to wait 10 minutes for the film. This seems bizarre for a digital presentation, and I can only imagine that the DCP was frantically ingested at the last minute or similar!
The film started with a “pop”, no preceding material being played, and ended similarly abruptly, with the house lights remaining dimmed even after the end credits, and patrons had to find their way out of the auditorium using the “torch” function of their mobile phones; one of them quipped, “this cinema is terminated!”
Picture quality was very good, but on the dark side with 3D glasses on, and the black level (with glasses off) a little high. Geometry was also good, but with a bit of a curve towards the screen edges at the bottom.
Sound quality was good, although I assume playback was slightly less than reference level, and the LFE seemed restrained. Still, maximum levels were easily handled, with clear and clean high frequencies at all times, albeit coloured by a little peakiness.
The better auditoria in the 1993 multiplex were built to achieve excellent acoustics, with the advantage of not being four parallel walls as today’s auditoria tend towards, and this was apparent today with a highly controlled reverberation time and overall flat room contribution, and very good front stereo imaging.
However, it must be said that Screen 6 has too small a screen size, with seating too far away, certainly by today’s standards, and pales in comparison to the new “large format” digital screens in a certain cinema only a couple of hundred feet or so away—or for that matter the Odeon Leicester Square from the front stalls. It would be adequate for a smaller scale film, but is not for a monumental affair like T2.
The auditorium was very comfortable with good seats and excellent air conditioning, albeit all black in colour.
As for the film, to my mind, it goes without saying that T2 has a vastly more coherent and structured plot, better characterisation and more depth than today’s average “summer blockbuster”. The new transfer is outstanding with no visible grain, and almost perfect colour grading to the originally intended tints. It looks almost new, albeit not quite as detailed as current digitally acquired material. The 3D conversion is generally on the conservative side.
On leaving the Vue West End, I complained to a member of staff, who was very friendly and understanding, clearly enthusiastic about cinema in general, and they apologised profusely saying that Vue were “deeply humilated” by what had happened with the T2 screening.
Based on today’s visit, having spent £6.6m to modernise the Vue West End to create a very attractive and comfortable premium flagship location, with pricing to match, Vue really need to improve the overall customer experience and presentation to a consistent standard.
I will definitely return in the belief that next time will be better…
I have taken a number of photos, uploads to follow—alas only limited shots of the auditorium as it was too dark after the film finished!
Details on the audio system are on LW Speakers' site.
For the iSense (Atmos) screen:
Screen speakers: 5x LW 5109-BI (4-way) 4x LW 6117 21" subwoofers
Surround speakers: 6x LW 7517 V2 subwoofers 27x LW 7017HD surrounds 19x LW 7609 ceiling speakers (coaxial)
LW’s own amplifiers are used in all auditoria (MUK and EK V2 series.)
As each of the LW 6117 units contains two 21" drivers, in the iSense auditorium the LFE channel is reproduced using eight 21" drivers, equivalent in surface area to 16 18" drivers.
At least at the Odeon Orpington iSense screen, it looks like the days of the “local” cinema using conked out old Altecs, or otherwise underspecified systems, are well and truly over.
In the interests of truth seeking, from “Perception while watching movies: Effects of physical screen size and scene type”:
“5.1. Why do presence ratings increase with screen size?
“[…]
“Thus, a high-level account of these results might posit that larger displays are generally more impressive and therefore more engaging. Of course, it should come as no surprise that object size is an important visual measure. After all, it is not retinal images but the properties of distal stimuli that we are rightly interested in, and our perceptions of these are derived from the influences of various perceptual constancies, including size constancy.
“Evidence from fMRI (Murray, Boyaci, & Kersten, 2006) has shown that the spread of activation across the retinotopic V1 increases with an increase in perceived size, even when retinal size is constant. Exactly why this occurs is still not clear […] but it does show that the perception of physical object size, traditionally associated with high-level processes, can assert its influence at the very earliest stages of cortical visual processing, presumably through feedback.”
So, screen size is a factor, albeit in that particular study the field of view was kept constant, with the screen size altered by using two different screens, one more than twice the size of the other.
alpinedownhiller: Sure, screen size is a factor, hence I began my post by comparing an 80ft.+ wide screen with a 5" diagonal mobile phone. Obviously holding the phone right in front of your eyes isn’t the same as a large screen even if the “FOV” is the same.
Confused by your comment: “Yeah but since you can chose where to sit, screen size does make a difference”?
With regard to the discussion on IMAX screen sizes, the important factor (given, say, 80ft.+ wide screens and not a 5" mobile phone) is the geometry of the auditorium.
IMAX and OMNIMAX Theatre Design goes into some detail on their requirements.
Essentially, the distance from the screen to the last row should not exceed one screen width, and the first row not more than 0.35x screen width.
Also, the front row should be somewhat above the bottom of the screen, and the last row positioned about half way up.
Of course, the projection system must also be adequate to cope with the closer position to the screen compared to a traditional auditorium, and stadium seating is a given.
These requirements can also be expressed in terms of horizontal and vertical viewing angles.
IOW, whether a screen is 85ft. or 95ft. wide will make little difference, especially since the viewing angles vary depending on which row you choose to sit in!