Los Angeles Theatre

615 S. Broadway,
Los Angeles, CA 90014

Unfavorite 68 people favorited this theater

Showing 76 - 100 of 295 comments

LuisV
LuisV on January 25, 2009 at 2:03 pm

I know this is stating the obvious, but “how much more beautiful is the original marquee that the current one?!” This is almost always the case. The two that jump out at me right away are the Loews Jersey and the Loews Kings, but it is probably fair to say that very few of the new marquees erected over the years to “modernize” the theater and bring it up to date were actually an improvement over the original. It certainly wasn’t in this case.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on December 31, 2008 at 7:04 pm

I think it was half past six since about 1955.

vokoban
vokoban on December 31, 2008 at 7:02 pm

I think its interesting. Maybe someone was fooling around with the clock to see if it can be restored.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on December 31, 2008 at 6:08 pm

You don’t get this kind of detailed analysis on Cinematour.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on December 31, 2008 at 5:41 pm

Someone changed the time on the clock.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on December 2, 2008 at 8:08 pm

Here is a photo of one wing taken yesterday. The other wing has been brutalized.
http://tinyurl.com/56n5p7

Life's Too Short
Life's Too Short on November 22, 2008 at 5:12 pm

You make an interesting point LM. I don’t think that would happen today, although it is a big world out there. Ditto for returning the veterans money.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on November 22, 2008 at 2:55 pm

This is part of a story from the LA Times, dated 9/8/43;

GENTLEMEN BANDITS GET $2100 IN THEATER HOLD-UP

Two gentlemanly bandits, who shook hands with their victim after robbing him of $2100, last night held up the Los Angeles Theater, 615 S. Broadway.

Two holdup men accosted manager Edward Clark as he was entering his office and while one simulated a gun in his pocket followed Clark into the room. There they forced him to open the safe and withdraw a cash box, from which they scooped $600 in silver and $1500 in bills.

Another envelope containing $1200 earmarked for returning war veterans was taken by the bandits and then returned. They shook hands with Clark, and left.

Yves Marchand
Yves Marchand on September 25, 2008 at 7:16 pm

You’re right Ken, she’s Johnny Depp’s girlfriend.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on September 25, 2008 at 7:13 pm

Isn’t she Johnny Depp’s girlfriend?

Yves Marchand
Yves Marchand on September 25, 2008 at 7:11 pm

French singer Vanessa Paradis' last video clip “L'incendie” was filmed inside the LA theater :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=psHGKVVcHa8

juliagreen
juliagreen on May 20, 2008 at 6:05 pm

There are a nice bunch of pictures on Google Earth, including one of the theatre’s rear marquee.

BhillH20
BhillH20 on March 24, 2008 at 1:30 am

I have that article from the 1970s Westways mentioned earlier. Will
have to look it up sometime.

vokoban
vokoban on March 21, 2008 at 1:28 pm

This is an interesting editorial from the opening of the Los Angeles:

(Feb. 2, 1931) LA Times

PREVIEW PANDEMONIUM
It is a moot question whether some better regulations will not have to be adopted to meet the occasions when premiere pictures are programmed and popular movie stars are on parade. In the case of the first showing of the Charlie Chaplin picture at the opening of the Los Angeles Theater the whole traffic on the chief downtown thoroughfares for a mile on either side of the theater was at a complete standstill for more than two hours, store windows were broken, clothes were torn, windshields in cars were smashed and many women fainted in the milling multitudes gathered to make a movie holiday.

Los Angeles is too large a city and the freedom of the streets is too vital for such conditions to be countenanced as recurrent accompaniments of every new high-powered picture production. In the capital of filmdom such scenes are bound to occur when the kings and queens of the screen are advertised to be on parade, unless the police authorities take the same precautions for handling the crowds as is done in other large cities in similar circumstances. Apparently a the opening of the Los Angeles Theater the authorities left everything to chance.

There is no reason why a premiere parade should be allowed to degenerate into a preview pandemonium. The people who assemble for a glimpse of their favorite actors and actresses are in the main a cheerful, good-natured, happy-go-lucky, if somewhat boisterous, crowd of sightseers. It would be a pity if such demonstrations had to be discontinued for lack of preparedness on the part of the officials hired to attend to these civic duties. Premiere parades are a distinctive feature of Los Angeles life and under proper control a good advertisement of thhe city no less than for the motion-picture industry.

At the opening of the Los Angeles Theater they were not under proper control. Police, motion-picture people and citizens in general cannot afford to permit a repetition of these bear-garden festivities.

The occasion for the super-excitement on Broadway was, of course, an unusual one. The Los Angeles Theater is the very last word in what constitutes a modern playhouse, in appointments, conveniences and equipments. The Chaplin picture was in a way epochal and its inception had drawn the attention of the whole film world. That the people of Los Angeles should assemble in extraordinary numbers to show their pride and delight at this double event was a thing to be expected.

vokoban
vokoban on March 21, 2008 at 10:37 am

LOL….nothing else required.

vokoban
vokoban on March 21, 2008 at 8:57 am

It would be nice if you’d spend more time posting interesting things that relate to theaters instead of this incessant complaining, kvetching, moaning and groaning from the Citizens Auxiliary Police. I wish you would take Ken on Judge Judy so I could see her scream at you. YOU HAVE NO DAMAGES! Let the people who took the precious photos go after the vile thieves. I think I’ll start referring to you as Jay Santos.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on March 20, 2008 at 11:16 pm

Oh well. I’ve tried to steer clear of this topic as this site is not the place for lectures on fair use and copyright law. Essentially, fair use relies on a four part test, but the primary focus is on the nature of the use (non-profit v. commercial), the ratio of the excerpted work as opposed to the work as a whole, and the potential impact of the use upon the commercial value of the work. This is a very brief and condensed view of a complex topic.

If I was to be sued, which is a laughable assertion, the owner of the work would have the burden of proof to show that the use of the work caused some dimunition in commercial value. This is a difficult burden and the reason why there is such a variance in the case law regarding fair use.

With all due respect to Mr. Memory, the person who complains the most should not be the person who knows the least. That’s why I haven’t responded to the prompts for sources and so on. I do this strictly for fun. If it’s going to be burdensome, I will go back to online poker. I work about a hundred hours a week and this is a good way to relax between assignments. Since this is all off topic, I am tabling any further discussion on my part. Mr. Memory is free to “report me” or to pursue whatever he considers his legal remedies. I know a little bit about the law and I think I will survive whatever legal assaults that may be headed in my direction. I apoogize to the site owners for taking up space with this tangential discussion.

Ken McIntyre

vokoban
vokoban on March 20, 2008 at 10:26 am

Are you planning to report him to someone? Maybe you should contact Photobucket. While you’re at it you can contact the LA Times every time I quote from an article from the past. It’s nothing personally against you, but ken mc posting photos or having them in his Photobucket account seems highly innocuous when there is a deluge of internet media theft occurring right now that actually hurts people and destroys businesses. In my opinion, its similar to giving the jaywalker a ticket as an army of drunk drivers pass by freely.

vokoban
vokoban on March 20, 2008 at 7:48 am

Lost Memory…..if it IS a copyrighted photo ken might be comfortable with taking the very low chance that he will get sued. If anyone other than you cared about posting one photo from a book where no one is making a profit (for educational and illustrative one time use), they would most likely just ask him to remove the link…cease and desist. Yes, he could just state the source and say that if you go buy this book and look on page so and so you can see a photo of the ceiling of the theater, if the book is still even in print, but ultimately its the individual’s choice. It’s not your choice…..unless you’re some type of Copyright Keystone Cop. I deal with photo copyright all day long at work and this issue is small potatoes.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on March 20, 2008 at 12:51 am

Here is some detail from the lobby ceiling, circa mid 1970s. Sorry about the white spots, but most of the detail is visible regardless:
http://tinyurl.com/2epn4b

rfwebber
rfwebber on March 10, 2008 at 10:04 pm

When I was very young (the 1930’s and ‘40’s) I remember that spittoons were commonly found in banks and other public places. They were also very close to the ground. Apparently persons who chewed tobacco at that time were not only much more numerous and accepted in polite society than they are today but were also quite accurate in their aim! I would bet that the mysterious cannisters were in fact spittoons.

CHICTH74
CHICTH74 on March 10, 2008 at 9:48 pm

Does any one know if the Los Angeles Theatre has a historical record keeper? Maybe then we will know what the cylinders were used for.

Also if you compare the shot of the urinals from the link above(the black and white picture) to the shot of the urinals ( the one on the offical page) here`s the kicker, thay are not their thay were removed . Thank you for you time :)