Rivoli Theatre
1620 Broadway,
New York,
NY
10019
1620 Broadway,
New York,
NY
10019
49 people
favorited this theater
Showing 876 - 900 of 1,005 comments
Bob,
I believe that was a cove promenade above the entire auditorium at the Paramount, up above the ceiling over the balcony and below. I believe the Roxy had a similar one, used as a spotlight location, and perhaps not open to the public like the Paramount’s.
Didn’t the Paramount on Times Square have a similar feature? I seem to remember reading that it was closed quite early in the theaters history because of noise drifting down to the audience.
I love it that I managed to perk up a few memories of that oval. I found the picture in a book of post cards of Times Square.
If the oval was over the rear orchestra seats, how did they design it so that any noise in that area didn’t filter down into the theater itself? They must’ve know this could occur but did something to limit it.
Box Office Bill: Apparently the Hagstrom map you refer to is a full scale version of the one that I have — I think mine must be an “excerpt” from this larger one. It is included in a terrific little picture guidebook to New York City, published by Hagstrom in the very early 1960s. The guidebook is about 5 inches wide, 9 inches long and bound with wires (kind of like a spiral notebook).
It also includes some nice photos of the Times Sq. area at night, including one of a crowd scene outside the Loew’s State (which looks like the premiere of Ben-Hur); one of Times Sq. looking south, which shows the marquee of the Astor Theater (Glenn Ford, Van Heflin, Felicia Farr in “3rd(?) to Yuma” — the Criterion marquee is off in the distance); and one that includes the vertical Loew’s State sign up the side of the adjacent skyscraper.
This version of the map only goes from the north side of 41st St. to the south side of 51st (so, disappointingly, no Warner Hollywood/Mark Hellinger) and goes from a little west of Eighth Ave. to a little west of Sixth Ave.
I didn’t notice the Loew’s State goof until after I submitted my post, and had never been in the De Mille, so wasn’t sure how accurate that one was.
However, there are a number of cutouts that are so “improbable” that I’m assuming that they must be “real” — would cartographers go out of their way to make such weird mistakes? For instance, I’m assuming that the Victoria cut-out is pretty accurate. The main body of the theater was indeed located on 46th St. (a great photo of it is included in the Mary Henderson book on Broadway Theaters), and it did have a tunnel lobby to Broadway. The only weird thing about the cut-out is that it shows that parts of the Astor Theater (to the south) and the Victoria Theater (to the north) seem to be interleafed. This is such a “weird” mistake, I’m thinking there must be something to it — it’s so much easier to just draw a straight line!
Another example is the cutout for the Lyceum, which seems to show a tunnel loading dock (instead of the usual tunnel lobby) that goes from the stage, located in the middle of the block, all the way to 46th St.
Also enjoy the fact that they show various hotel nightclubs, restaurants (Jack Dempsy’s, Toffenetti’s, Brass Rail), retail stores (Bond’s, Woolworth’s) and garages (some of which were the location of demolished theaters). I wonder if the nightclubs are accurately placed within the hotels? I think the Green Room in the Edison is. (I believe it later became an off-Broadway theater that housed the long-running “Oh, Calcutta.”)
I’m surprised that you’re surprised that Florsheim locations are shown. I thought it was an upscale shoe chain that would belong with the other kinds of stores shown on the map: Weber & Heilbroner, I. Miller.
What’s particularly great about the fact that they show all this is that it very often shows, at least by the process of elimination, the actual footprint of a theater “camouflaged” by adjacent office buildings, etc.
Re: rear wall of Rivoli
What I find interesting about the Seventh Ave. wall of the Rivoli is how plain and “ugly” it was (although the giant billboard helped a great deal) compared to the wonderfully elaborate Broadway facade of the building. This “schizophrenia” is not uncommon among builders (at least in New York), and I understand the economic reasons behind it — but I do find it “funny” and interesting when it happens nevertheless. It’s kind of like wearing clothes that are beautiful and spotlessly clean in the front, but ugly, worn and dirty when seen from the back!
Some of the 42nd St. theaters do the same thing (e.g., the New Amsterdam), while others go all out with their secondary facade (the Lyric).
Both the Roxy and Radio City Music Hall have rear facades that are consistent with their main facade — although the Roxy did have an extra lot line wall that they left “undesigned.”
Damn you Brian! I just wasted half the morning reading through that Widescreen Museum site. So I guess I really mean thank you, Brian.
At my age, perhaps martinis and some supper at the Brass Rail, or maybe a nightcap there, would complete the fantasy. It would sure beat the dietary austerity we submit to.
BOB the way you describe it- breakfast, Rita Hayworth, a trip to the Roxy-this is what I imagine my heaven would be.
Vincent— thanks for confirming my hunch that the mezzanine cutout ,was eliminated (along with other fine features in that theater) in ‘55. Speaking as one who nearly killed himself at an early age by falling through the Rivoli’s oval, I find that reassuring. And yes, the terrific billboard on 7 Avenue was magnificent, even though it was not studded with blinking lights as were those of the Astor, Victoria, and Mayfair. The sign for “Cleopatra” did create such a controversy( the things we New Yorkers got heated up about in '63!), , but the sign I remember most was for “Salome” a decade earlier. Disney’s “Peter Pan” was playing at the Roxy in Feb '53, and I stood on line with parents and a bunch of kids for the 10 am show on Lincoln’s Birthday. Workers were putting up the sign for “Salome”, and I watched them closely as bit by bit a ravishing Rita Hayworth came to life. Next to the Brass Rail Restauraant obetween 49-50 Streets stood one of a chain of restaurants that specialized in omlettes named after American states (The Floridian?). From the second-floor overflow section of that restaurant, you had a dead-on view of theRivili’s billboard. Hayworth’s legs and specialty eggs!
I remember the mezzanine lobby from the 70s and at this point there was no oval cutout. Also if one stood by the exit doors in the orchestra which were set back in an alcove and one looked out on the orchestra to the exit doors on the opposite side one had a sense of how vast the orchestra was originally before being reduced for the roadshow era.This was the same for the Warner Cinerama.
I also remember them cutting into the back of the theater to use any backstage space that there was for a camera store on 7th Av. Tearing down the lower billboard panel one could see the advertising for The Trip and Hello Dolly(Boxoffice open Sunday 12 to 8 PM.) They also at this time reduced the size of the upper billboard which had been one of my favorite Times Sqare sights. I would love to see pictures of all the adverts of the films that played there during the 50’s and 60s. The one that seems to show up occasionally is the one for Cleopatra simply bacause of the controversy of Harrison being excluded and then being painted in.
CC I am as obsessed as you. It was one of New York’s great buildings.
Benjamin— Yes, Hagstrom’s old Theater District map is fun to look at. Besides the peculiar rendition of the Paramount (whose stage wall abutted W 44 Street), there’s another of Loew’s State (whose stage wall abutted W 46 Street, and whose ticket lobby occupied only a small space on B'way). The Victoria and the City Center likewise get improbable cut-outs. And the Mayfair (aka DeMille or Embassy 2,3,4 on this site) had only a small lobby on 7 Avenue. The Blackfriars' gets a box within the Hearst building, necessarily because that theater was constructed inside the building (as do nightclubs within hotel buildings: who’d want to forget the Plantation Room at the Hotel Dixie?). Some (but not all)Fifth Avenue stores are marked: de Pinna; Scribner’s; Black, Star, & Gorham. Oddly, Florsheim Shoes gets included in that august company.
From the description, this lounge area sounds similar to the setup in the Chicago Riviera
yes— that’s the correct term — thanks, Warren
Ian Judge is correct. A mezzanie floor (not a seating area in the auditorium, but “mezzanine” in the technical sense of a low story between two other stories of greater height) was nestled above the Rivoli’s lobby inside its balcony overhang. And yes, an oval cutaway opened upon a portion of the rear orchestra below. I believe the theater might have covered it up during renovations upon installing Todd-AO in 1955, likely because noise from the area above could annoy the high-ticket patrons below. At least, I don’t remember the oval from later visits to the Rivoli (the last film I saw there as “Compulsion” in ‘59). I do vividly remember it from earlier visits, notably upon seeing “Samson and Delilah” there in Dec. '49. After sitting through the film twice (entranced, especially at the expanded Cycloramic screen in its final sequence; when seeing films at first-run palaces, my parents would in any case stay on for a second showing on grounds of having paid double the neighborhood price and getting no second-feature with it), we left our seats and my elders retired to rest rooms on the mezzanine. I remained outside those facilities and hung over the oval’s railing in an effort to glimpse the start of the new performance. At the age of seven, I later wondered whether the audience below could hear me get bawled out for taking on such a stupid trick.
I have a circa 1960 Hagstom’s map of the Theatre District that shows the approximate footprints of the various theaters in the Times Sq. area. While the map is not STRICTLY to scale (the roadbeds of the street, for instance, are larger than they should be), the “land” portion of the map does seem to be pretty accurate for the most part.
(By the way, what’s particularly great about this map is that it clearly shows how theater lobbies in the area were often appendages to the main body of an auditorium. So, for instance, from the map one gets a really clear idea of how six theaters were squeezed into a very small area of one block on the north side of 42nd St. and how five theaters were squeezed into a slightly larger area on one block on the south side of 42nd St.)
In any case, the footprint of the Rivoli on this map actually appears to be a little bit LARGER than average when compared to most of the “legit” theaters in the area — but, of course, much smaller than those for two grand Times Sq. movie “palaces”: The Capitol and the Warner.
The footprint for the the other great, then existing, movie palace in the area, the Paramount, is slightly “botched,” as the map makers try to show the footprint of the Parmount within that of the footprint of the Paramount office building, and wind up making the theater much smaller than it actually was — they were getting a bit too cute with this particular rendering.
As for the Roxy, only the outlines of the footprint — with no label — are shown on the map. It almost appears as though they just erased the name of the theater, and its eastern boundary, before reprinting the map. (But you can still see where the ticket lobby occupies the ground floor of the Taft.)
I was looking at “Best Remaining Seats” which has quite a bit of info about the Rivoli. Unfortunately, as wonderful as the book is, it also very chaotically organized in my opinion, and at the moment I don’t have the patience to search through it. But, if I remember correctly, although the Rivoli had live entertainment, it was mostly orchestral music — and thus the theater probably did not have much in the way of a stage, stage house, dressing rooms, etc. I believe, in fact, that along with its earlier Rothapfel sibling, the Rialto, it was one of the first theaters in NYC to be built withOUT facilities for stage productions (without a stage house, etc.).
I believe the Hall book, whose writing can also be frustratingly too “cute,” even jokes about the musicians running up Broadway from one Rothapfel theater (e.g., the Rialto) to another (the Rivoli).
By the way, on pgs. 46 and 47 of the book, there are some great photos of interior of the Rialto Theater which, I believe was Roxy’s “baby” just before the Rivoli (and before the Capitol, before the “Roxy,” and before the Center and Radio City Music Hall). These photos seem to show a situation quite similar to — although, perhaps, just a bit different from — the one described for the Rivoli.
In the photo you can see a grand, almost enormous domed auditorium with a very large, steeply raked balcony and a small stage (with, I believe no true proscenium and stage house).
The photo of the “foyer” shows the area at the back of the orchestra level seating, with a glass screen separating the seats from the “foyer,” and a semi-oval “cutout” in the back of the balcony lounge area (apparently under the steep rake of the balcony) which allows those in the second floor lounge to look down upon and see where the “standees” (if there were “standees”) would be standing at the back of the orchestra.
This photo also shows, I believe, how theaters in those days had almost non-existant lobby/foyer space to serve as a barrier between the auditorium and the street. I believe the doors shown on the left of the photo lead almost directly to the street.
I once went to an old neighborhood theater in Washington Heights that had been made into an art/revival house in the late 1960s, and it seemed to be quite similar in certain ways to what is shown in the Rialto photo (but much less grand). It also appeared to be a theater from that era and, and it was amazing how “basic” the theater was in terms of lobby space, etc.
So it would seem to me that one reason the auditorium of the Rivoli could be so grand on such a small site is that a lot of what we associate with movie palaces was left out — and the actual auditorium probably took up a “disproportionate” amount of the footprint (“disproportionate” at least when compared to more modern theaters).
On the Hagston map, the site of the Rialto theater (a later, different, structure than that which is shown in the photo — but still presumably occupying the same footprint) is even smaller than that of the Rivoli!
Another thought: I think theater spaces appear deceptively large when they have seats in them — because each of the seats represent one person, and seated people are much closer to each other, for long periods of time, then they would be in “normal” circumstances. Take the seats out (as is done when a theater becomes a disco, etc.) and the theater space appears to be its “true” size — a lot smaller.
You are probably right. This lounge area probably existed behind the slope of the balcony (kind of “under-the-stairs”, so to speak). But considering the size of the land, this would mean that the balcony was way steep. I know someone on this site said that it was but WOW! Talk about stadium seating!
Never having been in the Rivoli, I can’t tell you exactly the area you were looking at, but many old theaters had a mezzanine lobby that overlooked the orchestra floor – the (former Loew’s) Orpheum in Boston is one that I have seen. This is a lobby under the slope of the balcony. Perhaps that is what it was at the Rivoli.
Of all the Times Square theaters on this site, The Rivoli is the one I’m getting more and more obsessed about. Thanks.
I work directly across the street from where this was (it’s now 750 7th Avenue…a completely anonymous and unremarkable black glass and steel tower). And I got a clear look at the space (or “footprint”, as the term is in real estate terms) it occupies and it’s tiny.
Then I saw in a postcard book a picture of what looks like some kind of lounge area in The Rivoli. What I could make of it showed an area with a cutout in the floor in the shape of an oval. Through this oval, you could make out some theater seats below (I assume the orchestra). Where on earth could this area have existed inside such a space?
Can anyone give a good, solid description of what it was like inside this theater or tell me a book that could? I’m astonished (and obsessed) with how such a grand space could’ve existed on such a small plot. Are there any old blueprints?
I stand corrected…it was not “Rocco and His Brothers” which followed “La Dolce Vita” at the Henry Miller. It may well have been “Les Liaisons Dangereuses”. Thanks, Gerry
As i recall, the longest US roadshow run of “Gigi” was in San Francisco
By the way does anyone know where I could get a list of what Scorscese considers the best widescreen movies? I understand he compiled one. We seem to love the same movies. He has excellent taste.
This would be an incredible film to restore and re-release for it’s 50th anniversary. Imagine it on the Music Halls screen.
The Royale has a nice wide proscenium so I think it would have been perfect for the cinemascope Gigi. What I don’t understand is why the film went to the small Sutton and not to the Astor or Capitol or Loew’s State. Anyway what I wouldn’t give to see it on a large wide screen.
The DVD of “Gigi” includes a trailer for the film featuring several shots of the exterior of the Royale during the film’s roadshow run.
Gigi opened at the Royale on May 16, 1958. OPening night was sold out. Interesting fact, Louis Botto’s Playbill book At This Theater does not mention this in the history of the Royale theater.
To veyyoung:
I am certain you are wrong about “Rocco and His Brothers” roadshowing at the Henry Miller. “Rocco” opened simultaneously at the Beekman and Pix on June 27, 1961 and not as a roadshow. The review and ads attest to that. Could you be thinking of “Les Liaisons Dangereuses?”