I second that Ian. I saw “Beowulf” in Real-D, and I started getting eyestrains after the first 30 minutes or so. I will say this though, it looks better than the old 3-D with the red/blue cardboard glasses.
Now why would a studio do a new 70mm release? To keep people in the theaters. Once 3-D and digital become commonplace, and the 3-D systems become avalible to Blu-ray, then what? What happens when there’s another box office slump that’s worse than the infamous 19 week drought of 2005? Keep in mind that 100% “pristine” digital will only make piracy easier. If that’s the case, then people who buy pirated movies can pretty much say goodbye to the old camcorded crap of the past. For $5 on the street, one could buy the lastest Michael Bay fluff, and it would have real DVD quality. Why? Because smart hackers get into hardrives the way a hungry person gets into McDonalds. What will save Hollywood the way it was saved from TV in the 50s?
If they have a teaspoon of sense, then they would go to large format film (for the few selected productions of course). In today’s world where an average summer film costs 200+ million, 65mm originated material only makes sense. Think about it, 200 million is a gamble for something that might be on the street on release date. And “Real-D” will be on Blu-ray in few months. So you’ve gotta give people what they can’t get at home; a big bright sharp image on a BIGWIDESCREEN.
IMAX had a great thing going until they whored themselves out in favor of two 2k projectors and smaller screens at AMC locations. Now they’ve become an example of corporate greed, and has created LIEMAX at the chain locations.
Another thing these big chains (cough AMC, Regal cough) need to stop doing, building 14-20 screeners all with top-down masking and seat capacities of 70-350. And instead of spending all these millions on those LIEMAX screens, they could be spending money on building screens like this: View link
Of course, that would require a corporation to you know, care about the moviegoing experience rather than just $$$$. When I eventually build theaters, you can best bet that most, of not all of them will feature a premiere auditorium with a screen size that’s 60-80ft wide.
Tell me Ian, what’s the name of the theater that’s getting 70mm? I can mark that down in my list.
I do think digital is the future, and its better than 35mm in some cases. But until there’s a digital equivalent to 70mm, complete with the 2.20: 1 aspect ratio and crystal clear photography, I still stand by the notion that we should be FIGHTING for the kind of movie that would be shot in the large format 65mm, and have select market 70mm or Super Dimension 70 prints. Of course, the rest would be 4k digital.
Ron Fricke’s upcoming sequel to “Baraka” titled “Samsara” is a start. But because of its subject matter, it may not do well even with a select market release. Now if Christopher Nolan does indeed shoot an upcoming project in 65mm, then we should put it out there that even with digital screens, we can run the movie the way it was meant to be seen.
Anyway, I won’t worry about the future right now. I’m focused on getting this theater reopened. Hopefully I’ll achieve that. But yeah, if there’s ever a digital format like 70mm, then lets welcome it with hugs. But until that time, lets fight for the underdog.
“Digital still has a way to go in its own technology”
A loooooonnnnnggggg way at that. The current digital systems projecting movies are good, but it sure as hell ain’t like the last 15 minutes of “The International”, which were shot in 65mm. Now keep in mind, I saw that projected in 35mm. Seeing those minutes made me believe in what film could do if done right. And could you imagine what it would’ve looked like if it were projected in its 65mm origination? But its all about the bottom-line dollar to these greedy/stingy studio knuckleheads. And in some small way, we play a part in what they do.
Think about it. The art of theatrical presentation is pretty much ——ed. They don’t care, because we, the people who spend money don’t care. And when we don’t like what they do in the theaters, we wait for DVD, and inadvertently shrink the window of theatrical release and home video. A decade ago, they came with 2k digital, and we bought it. They started building multiplexes with so-called main auditoriums with top-down masking for 2.35 films, and we bought that. Then comes ticket prices so expensive, one will have spent part of a gas bill after leaving. We visit these sites and talk about the good ‘ol days of cinema and about how much better it was back in the day, yet we do nothing to help bring the art of showmanship to THIS day.
As a 19 year old male with plans to own a chain of movie theaters, I like the idea of digital projection. And when it’s really perfected, I will welcome it with open arms. But the digital presentations I’ve seen pale in comparison to those last minutes of “International” or even better, the IMAX segments in “TDK”. Those are the kind of images that digital won’t be topping for years. Even with a perfect digital in the future, why should digital become the sole format for theatrical presentation? Why couldn’t digital become the new 35mm, with larger film formats used for selected films? Oh yeah, we’ve got to just “accept the fact that film and large format film is a dinosaur and move on”. Those are the words those honchos love to hear. Well, they’re not going to hear it from me. I won’t accede to that way of thinking.
As long as digital is not 100% perfect, we should be thinking of ways film could stand side-by side with digital. This means helping the independent filmmaker shoot productions in old fashioned super 16, or even better, the glorious and beautiful Panavision Anamorphic. And if we’ve got millions of dollars, rent ‘em an Arri 765, which is like the window to the world, through the lens of a camera.
We should also take the young children to see 70mm revivals. And if there’s any projectionists with children, let them feel the strip of film in their hands. Let them know what kind of magic they’re holding.
And if anybody wants a new 65mm production (or just the art of showmanship in general), its very simple, fight for it. I will be doing my part, but one person is one person. A whole group on the other hand, is something else. When “Samsara” gets a release date, hammer the studios about releasing a 70mm print in a selected theater. Find ways to promote the format to audiences. If it does well, then perhaps a filmmaker like Chris Nolan could produce another production for the format.
Although a complete digital takeover won’t happen for many many years, we have to do what we can to save independents in our respective communites. See, studios today only think about the big chains like AMC, Regal etc… They forget about the ones who can’t spend a billion dollars on systems that will most likely have to be upgraded to something else in a few years.
But until we cross that bridge, keep those 35mm prints looking pristine folks. And fight for a new 70mm production, even when people say “it’s never gonna happen”.
Here’s a listing of films that would’ve played here if I reopened it. This listing is for auditorium #1. 2 and 3 would be playing art films or similar fare like #1. Originally sat 760+ during the CO years, seating would be reduced to 680-700 for installation of leather rocker chairs.
3/31/06 â€" THANK YOU FOR SMOKING
4/28/06 â€" THE LOST CITY
5/12/06 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL (5/12 â€" 5/14)
5/19/06 â€" THE DA VINCI CODE
6/16/06 â€" AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
7/7/06 â€" PIRATES 2: DEAD MAN’S CHEST
8/18/06 â€" THE ILLUSIONIST
10/6/06 â€" THE DEPARTED
11/3/06 â€" BABEL
11/17/06 â€" CASINO ROYALE
12/8/06 â€" VOLVER
12/29/06 â€" PAN’S LABYRINTH
2/16/07 â€" THE LIVES OF OTHERS
3/9/07 â€" 300
4/13/07 â€" BLACK BOOK
5/4/07 â€" SPIDER-MAN 3
6/1/07 – ONCE
6/8/07 â€" OCEAN’S 13
6/27/07 â€" LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (DH 2 and 3 played at McClurg)
7/20/07 â€" SUNSHINE
8/3/07 â€" THE BOURNE ULTIMATIUM
9/7/07 â€" 3:10 TO YUMA
10/5/07 â€" MICHAEL CLAYTON
11/2/07 â€" BEFORE THE DEVIL KNOWS YOU’RE DEAD
11/9/07 â€" NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
12/7/07 â€" ATONEMENT
¼/08 â€" THERE WILL BE BLOOD
2/8/08 â€" IN BRUGES
2/29/08 â€" NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (returning after winning best picture oscar)
3/7/08 â€" THE BANK JOB
4/11/08 â€" STREET KINGS
4/25/08 â€" THE VISITOR
5/2/08 â€" IRON MAN
5/30/08 â€" SEX AND THE CITY
6/20/08 â€" MONGOL
7/4/08 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL 2 (7/4 â€" 7/6)
7/11/08 â€" TELL NO ONE
7/18/08 â€" THE DARK KNIGHT
9/12/08 â€" BURN AFTER READING
10/10/08 â€" RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
10/24/08 â€" CHANGELING
11/21/08 â€" SLUMDOG MILLIONARE
1/16/09 â€" CHE â€" ROADSHOW VERSION
1/30/09 â€" TAKEN
3/6/09 â€" WATCHMEN
3/20/09 â€" SUNSHINE CLEANING
4/10/09 â€" SIN NOMBRE
4/24/09 â€" OBSESSED
5/8/09 â€" STAR TREK
6/19/09 â€" MOON
7/1/09 â€" PUBLIC ENEMIES
7/17/09 â€" 500 DAYS OF SUMMER
7/31/09 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL 3 (7/31 â€" 8/2)
8/14/09 â€" DISTRICT 9
This gives you an idea of how I would run it in terms of movies. Here’s hoping it becomes a reality.
Thanks for the suggestions David. You can bet I will do my research into that field. The only thing I really know about all this is getting deals in advance. And that in some large metropolitan locations, studios will look for the best, top-flight locations for their important productions. Because it’s just River East and 600 North now, most (all) blockbusters are booked at both.
Back in the day when you had the five theaters that Tim Elliott mentioned, you could always tell that a special effects film will be at McClurg. An art house, Miramax-type production would be at Esquire or Water Tower. Some suspense thrillers would be Esquire or 900 North, and the comedies at WT. Ah, those were the days.
I dunno, the Ziegfeld in New York is still going strong dispite the AMC 25 and Regal E-Walk 13 being nearby. This may be due to it being New York, where there is always mega crowds. Chicago is slowly but surely becoming that way. More and more people will continue to move into the mag mile/streeterville neighborhoods. I assume that the screens at 600 North Michigan might be gone by this time (I may be wrong though) And if that’s the case, the seating capacity at the River East alone won’t be enough to handle the volume of people who go see movies. The art house fare believe it or not, plays to near sellouts, especially if it’s the right movie like say “Slumdog Millionare”, “Tell No One” (ran at the Landmark Century for a while), or “Moon”, which is still doing well at the Pipers Alley dispite being inferior to McClurg. Anyway, let me hurry to my next points
If River East becomes the sole theater in the area, you can best bet that those 21 screens will be for the mainstream fare. People who want to see movies with character and plot (and there’s lots of these, myself included) will be left out because RE’s got the summer blockbusters playing on 3-4 screens each. And holdover films will be shafted into the DVD-like screening rooms with 71-121 seats. Sure they’ll play some (key word) art fare during oscar time, but it’ll be scarce. What’s an alternative moviegoer to do? Well, this is where McClurg Court comes into play.
McClurg’s auditorium #1 if done right, won’t be hard to fill up. from 1987-2003 it sat about 760. If I were to get it and fix it up, the new capacity might be at about 680-700 because of my proposed leather recliner seats. The upstairs screens would be about 170-190 because of the new seats. Now it wouldn’t be just an art house, some main stream fare and a 2nd run from time-to time would be booked. A mainstream movie would usually be reserved for one screen (two if it’s The Dark Knight). Of course, RE 21’s got all the mainstream fare. This is true. But it won’t hurt them in anyway if the same movie is playing at another (my) theater. It’s like New York. You’ve got some explosion fest at the single screen, 1,125 seat Ziegfeld, and the same movie on five or six screens at the AMC 25. Both are doing great business. Or take Seattle, you’ve got a movie at the single screen Cinerama, and the same movie at one of the nearby megaplexes. The movie is doing great business at both locations. Again, those cities are larger in terms of people that here in Chicago. But we’re headed that way.
And it wouldn’t have to be 1st run/art films alone. #1 could host Chicago’s 70mm film festival similar to the one coming up in Denmark. #1 could also become an attraction to moviegoers, and tourists who stop in the area. Complete with curtain tabs, ushers, gourmet concessions, and an art gallery of sorts that explains the history of the McClurg Court theater and apartment complex. The smaller screens could hold festivals once and a while for student films. Heck, maybe some kind of performing arts could be held there too. I’m just throwing ideas around, but I and a lot of other people just don’t see a resurrected McClurg Court as being a failure. With new ownership, new ideas, an environment not geared towards teens on cellphones with a sworn oath to showmanship, you can’t go wrong.
Roosevelt Collection is a rental apartment/retail development that’s located at 150 W Roosevelt Road (Roosevelt & Clark/Wells St). The theaters will be at the end of the center. This link has renderings on how the complex will look when finished.
The Block 37 project is still on. Muvico Theatres will be on the fifth floor I believe. Since David Barton Gym moved to Roosevelt Collection, maybe the seating capacity at 37 might be increased. It will still have seven screens. Opening is set for this fall.
Has anyone walked past the Roosevelt Collection development lately? I can’t wait for the theater to open. I wrote to Dean Kerasotes himself, and he gave me a few snipets of info
The largest auditoriums will have side-masking (a reason to reduce on going to River East)
Two of those largest screens will be about 65 feet wide for ‘scope’ presentations. Both will also have 21 and older balconies with seating for about 150. By now you’ve probably heard about Jerry Kleiner opening a bar at the theater’s upper level.
It will have digital (he didn’t say if it will be all-digital) projection
You’ve heard it here first. I miss the Burnham Plaza, but the Showplace 16 is almost here.
It’s been vancant for 6 years. Looks like it will be staying that way for a while.
I wish the current owners can just give up, so I can try and pitch my art house ideas again. I really do believe if done right, it can be a winner. Granted, River East 21 is nearby and does great business, but art films are few and far in between. And 600 North Michigan almost always show RE films, and it’s very empty most of the time. In fact, if it closes soon, it won’t be a suprise. McClurg Court has the upper hand. Besides being in possession of the largest non-IMAX screen in Chicago, it is located across the street from the Streeter rental complex which will be completed soon. And it’s in walking distance from the Lake Point Towers. I wonder though, if one could buy the space next door and create screens out of that space, then take former 2-3 and return it to a balcony? I dunno, I thought I might throw some more ideas around.
I agree Chris. Here in Chicago, AMC’s River East 21 is just like this. That’s why I can’t wait for Kerasotes to show them how it’s done at the Roosevelt Collection with their planned 65ft side-masking screens.
Ahh Michael, I’m 19 (why did the great stuff happen before my time?). So I’ve only seen this on cable. A great movie, up there with “The Godfather” as one of Francis Coppola’s best. I would love to see a 70mm print of “Apocalypse” (hopefully in Chicago) someday.
Does any of the screens at the Rockaway feature side-masking? By side-masking I’m talking about the screen’s masking opening up at the sides for scope (2.35: 1) presentation as opposed to AMC’s typical top-down masking (screen shrinking at the top/bottom for scope).
AMC has top-notch lobbies, exteriors, but the way they build their screens leave little to be desired. I just hope they’ve made an exception.
When I finally run theaters, I will have both film & digital. And will hire experienced projectionists to run film (hopefully Maxivision) in the largest screen.
I second that Ian. I saw “Beowulf” in Real-D, and I started getting eyestrains after the first 30 minutes or so. I will say this though, it looks better than the old 3-D with the red/blue cardboard glasses.
Now why would a studio do a new 70mm release? To keep people in the theaters. Once 3-D and digital become commonplace, and the 3-D systems become avalible to Blu-ray, then what? What happens when there’s another box office slump that’s worse than the infamous 19 week drought of 2005? Keep in mind that 100% “pristine” digital will only make piracy easier. If that’s the case, then people who buy pirated movies can pretty much say goodbye to the old camcorded crap of the past. For $5 on the street, one could buy the lastest Michael Bay fluff, and it would have real DVD quality. Why? Because smart hackers get into hardrives the way a hungry person gets into McDonalds. What will save Hollywood the way it was saved from TV in the 50s?
If they have a teaspoon of sense, then they would go to large format film (for the few selected productions of course). In today’s world where an average summer film costs 200+ million, 65mm originated material only makes sense. Think about it, 200 million is a gamble for something that might be on the street on release date. And “Real-D” will be on Blu-ray in few months. So you’ve gotta give people what they can’t get at home; a big bright sharp image on a BIGWIDESCREEN.
IMAX had a great thing going until they whored themselves out in favor of two 2k projectors and smaller screens at AMC locations. Now they’ve become an example of corporate greed, and has created LIEMAX at the chain locations.
Another thing these big chains (cough AMC, Regal cough) need to stop doing, building 14-20 screeners all with top-down masking and seat capacities of 70-350. And instead of spending all these millions on those LIEMAX screens, they could be spending money on building screens like this:
View link
Of course, that would require a corporation to you know, care about the moviegoing experience rather than just $$$$. When I eventually build theaters, you can best bet that most, of not all of them will feature a premiere auditorium with a screen size that’s 60-80ft wide.
I’ll leave some more interesting links here:
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2007/nobody/index.htm
View link
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2008/good_as/index.htm
View link
View link
http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/wizard_fixed.htm
Tell me Ian, what’s the name of the theater that’s getting 70mm? I can mark that down in my list.
I do think digital is the future, and its better than 35mm in some cases. But until there’s a digital equivalent to 70mm, complete with the 2.20: 1 aspect ratio and crystal clear photography, I still stand by the notion that we should be FIGHTING for the kind of movie that would be shot in the large format 65mm, and have select market 70mm or Super Dimension 70 prints. Of course, the rest would be 4k digital.
Ron Fricke’s upcoming sequel to “Baraka” titled “Samsara” is a start. But because of its subject matter, it may not do well even with a select market release. Now if Christopher Nolan does indeed shoot an upcoming project in 65mm, then we should put it out there that even with digital screens, we can run the movie the way it was meant to be seen.
Anyway, I won’t worry about the future right now. I’m focused on getting this theater reopened. Hopefully I’ll achieve that. But yeah, if there’s ever a digital format like 70mm, then lets welcome it with hugs. But until that time, lets fight for the underdog.
PS: I wish there was something like this here in Chicago
http://www.in70mm.com/festival/2009/index.htm
Say, does anyone know what is the largest 35mm/digital screen operating in Little Rock today?
“Digital still has a way to go in its own technology”
A loooooonnnnnggggg way at that. The current digital systems projecting movies are good, but it sure as hell ain’t like the last 15 minutes of “The International”, which were shot in 65mm. Now keep in mind, I saw that projected in 35mm. Seeing those minutes made me believe in what film could do if done right. And could you imagine what it would’ve looked like if it were projected in its 65mm origination? But its all about the bottom-line dollar to these greedy/stingy studio knuckleheads. And in some small way, we play a part in what they do.
Think about it. The art of theatrical presentation is pretty much ——ed. They don’t care, because we, the people who spend money don’t care. And when we don’t like what they do in the theaters, we wait for DVD, and inadvertently shrink the window of theatrical release and home video. A decade ago, they came with 2k digital, and we bought it. They started building multiplexes with so-called main auditoriums with top-down masking for 2.35 films, and we bought that. Then comes ticket prices so expensive, one will have spent part of a gas bill after leaving. We visit these sites and talk about the good ‘ol days of cinema and about how much better it was back in the day, yet we do nothing to help bring the art of showmanship to THIS day.
As a 19 year old male with plans to own a chain of movie theaters, I like the idea of digital projection. And when it’s really perfected, I will welcome it with open arms. But the digital presentations I’ve seen pale in comparison to those last minutes of “International” or even better, the IMAX segments in “TDK”. Those are the kind of images that digital won’t be topping for years. Even with a perfect digital in the future, why should digital become the sole format for theatrical presentation? Why couldn’t digital become the new 35mm, with larger film formats used for selected films? Oh yeah, we’ve got to just “accept the fact that film and large format film is a dinosaur and move on”. Those are the words those honchos love to hear. Well, they’re not going to hear it from me. I won’t accede to that way of thinking.
As long as digital is not 100% perfect, we should be thinking of ways film could stand side-by side with digital. This means helping the independent filmmaker shoot productions in old fashioned super 16, or even better, the glorious and beautiful Panavision Anamorphic. And if we’ve got millions of dollars, rent ‘em an Arri 765, which is like the window to the world, through the lens of a camera.
We should also take the young children to see 70mm revivals. And if there’s any projectionists with children, let them feel the strip of film in their hands. Let them know what kind of magic they’re holding.
And if anybody wants a new 65mm production (or just the art of showmanship in general), its very simple, fight for it. I will be doing my part, but one person is one person. A whole group on the other hand, is something else. When “Samsara” gets a release date, hammer the studios about releasing a 70mm print in a selected theater. Find ways to promote the format to audiences. If it does well, then perhaps a filmmaker like Chris Nolan could produce another production for the format.
I am going to conclude my rant, and I will leave everyone with some links.
http://www.in70mm.com/workshop/index.htm
http://www.superdimension70.com/process/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxivision
Although a complete digital takeover won’t happen for many many years, we have to do what we can to save independents in our respective communites. See, studios today only think about the big chains like AMC, Regal etc… They forget about the ones who can’t spend a billion dollars on systems that will most likely have to be upgraded to something else in a few years.
But until we cross that bridge, keep those 35mm prints looking pristine folks. And fight for a new 70mm production, even when people say “it’s never gonna happen”.
I’ve heard that auditoriums #1 and #14 have really huge screens. Is this true? If so, how wide, and side masking or top-bottom?
I’ve been here before to see the remake of DOTD back in 2004, and I was in #6, which had a pretty average screen.
Can anyone tell me the screen size of the largest auditorium? And does the said auditorium still have a 35/70 projector? I’m curious.
Here’s a listing of films that would’ve played here if I reopened it. This listing is for auditorium #1. 2 and 3 would be playing art films or similar fare like #1. Originally sat 760+ during the CO years, seating would be reduced to 680-700 for installation of leather rocker chairs.
3/31/06 â€" THANK YOU FOR SMOKING
4/28/06 â€" THE LOST CITY
5/12/06 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL (5/12 â€" 5/14)
5/19/06 â€" THE DA VINCI CODE
6/16/06 â€" AN INCONVENIENT TRUTH
7/7/06 â€" PIRATES 2: DEAD MAN’S CHEST
8/18/06 â€" THE ILLUSIONIST
10/6/06 â€" THE DEPARTED
11/3/06 â€" BABEL
11/17/06 â€" CASINO ROYALE
12/8/06 â€" VOLVER
12/29/06 â€" PAN’S LABYRINTH
2/16/07 â€" THE LIVES OF OTHERS
3/9/07 â€" 300
4/13/07 â€" BLACK BOOK
5/4/07 â€" SPIDER-MAN 3
6/1/07 – ONCE
6/8/07 â€" OCEAN’S 13
6/27/07 â€" LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD (DH 2 and 3 played at McClurg)
7/20/07 â€" SUNSHINE
8/3/07 â€" THE BOURNE ULTIMATIUM
9/7/07 â€" 3:10 TO YUMA
10/5/07 â€" MICHAEL CLAYTON
11/2/07 â€" BEFORE THE DEVIL KNOWS YOU’RE DEAD
11/9/07 â€" NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN
12/7/07 â€" ATONEMENT
¼/08 â€" THERE WILL BE BLOOD
2/8/08 â€" IN BRUGES
2/29/08 â€" NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN (returning after winning best picture oscar)
3/7/08 â€" THE BANK JOB
4/11/08 â€" STREET KINGS
4/25/08 â€" THE VISITOR
5/2/08 â€" IRON MAN
5/30/08 â€" SEX AND THE CITY
6/20/08 â€" MONGOL
7/4/08 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL 2 (7/4 â€" 7/6)
7/11/08 â€" TELL NO ONE
7/18/08 â€" THE DARK KNIGHT
9/12/08 â€" BURN AFTER READING
10/10/08 â€" RACHEL GETTING MARRIED
10/24/08 â€" CHANGELING
11/21/08 â€" SLUMDOG MILLIONARE
1/16/09 â€" CHE â€" ROADSHOW VERSION
1/30/09 â€" TAKEN
3/6/09 â€" WATCHMEN
3/20/09 â€" SUNSHINE CLEANING
4/10/09 â€" SIN NOMBRE
4/24/09 â€" OBSESSED
5/8/09 â€" STAR TREK
6/19/09 â€" MOON
7/1/09 â€" PUBLIC ENEMIES
7/17/09 â€" 500 DAYS OF SUMMER
7/31/09 â€" 70MM FILM FESTIVAL 3 (7/31 â€" 8/2)
8/14/09 â€" DISTRICT 9
This gives you an idea of how I would run it in terms of movies. Here’s hoping it becomes a reality.
Thanks for the suggestions David. You can bet I will do my research into that field. The only thing I really know about all this is getting deals in advance. And that in some large metropolitan locations, studios will look for the best, top-flight locations for their important productions. Because it’s just River East and 600 North now, most (all) blockbusters are booked at both.
Back in the day when you had the five theaters that Tim Elliott mentioned, you could always tell that a special effects film will be at McClurg. An art house, Miramax-type production would be at Esquire or Water Tower. Some suspense thrillers would be Esquire or 900 North, and the comedies at WT. Ah, those were the days.
I dunno, the Ziegfeld in New York is still going strong dispite the AMC 25 and Regal E-Walk 13 being nearby. This may be due to it being New York, where there is always mega crowds. Chicago is slowly but surely becoming that way. More and more people will continue to move into the mag mile/streeterville neighborhoods. I assume that the screens at 600 North Michigan might be gone by this time (I may be wrong though) And if that’s the case, the seating capacity at the River East alone won’t be enough to handle the volume of people who go see movies. The art house fare believe it or not, plays to near sellouts, especially if it’s the right movie like say “Slumdog Millionare”, “Tell No One” (ran at the Landmark Century for a while), or “Moon”, which is still doing well at the Pipers Alley dispite being inferior to McClurg. Anyway, let me hurry to my next points
If River East becomes the sole theater in the area, you can best bet that those 21 screens will be for the mainstream fare. People who want to see movies with character and plot (and there’s lots of these, myself included) will be left out because RE’s got the summer blockbusters playing on 3-4 screens each. And holdover films will be shafted into the DVD-like screening rooms with 71-121 seats. Sure they’ll play some (key word) art fare during oscar time, but it’ll be scarce. What’s an alternative moviegoer to do? Well, this is where McClurg Court comes into play.
McClurg’s auditorium #1 if done right, won’t be hard to fill up. from 1987-2003 it sat about 760. If I were to get it and fix it up, the new capacity might be at about 680-700 because of my proposed leather recliner seats. The upstairs screens would be about 170-190 because of the new seats. Now it wouldn’t be just an art house, some main stream fare and a 2nd run from time-to time would be booked. A mainstream movie would usually be reserved for one screen (two if it’s The Dark Knight). Of course, RE 21’s got all the mainstream fare. This is true. But it won’t hurt them in anyway if the same movie is playing at another (my) theater. It’s like New York. You’ve got some explosion fest at the single screen, 1,125 seat Ziegfeld, and the same movie on five or six screens at the AMC 25. Both are doing great business. Or take Seattle, you’ve got a movie at the single screen Cinerama, and the same movie at one of the nearby megaplexes. The movie is doing great business at both locations. Again, those cities are larger in terms of people that here in Chicago. But we’re headed that way.
And it wouldn’t have to be 1st run/art films alone. #1 could host Chicago’s 70mm film festival similar to the one coming up in Denmark. #1 could also become an attraction to moviegoers, and tourists who stop in the area. Complete with curtain tabs, ushers, gourmet concessions, and an art gallery of sorts that explains the history of the McClurg Court theater and apartment complex. The smaller screens could hold festivals once and a while for student films. Heck, maybe some kind of performing arts could be held there too. I’m just throwing ideas around, but I and a lot of other people just don’t see a resurrected McClurg Court as being a failure. With new ownership, new ideas, an environment not geared towards teens on cellphones with a sworn oath to showmanship, you can’t go wrong.
Roosevelt Collection is a rental apartment/retail development that’s located at 150 W Roosevelt Road (Roosevelt & Clark/Wells St). The theaters will be at the end of the center. This link has renderings on how the complex will look when finished.
The Block 37 project is still on. Muvico Theatres will be on the fifth floor I believe. Since David Barton Gym moved to Roosevelt Collection, maybe the seating capacity at 37 might be increased. It will still have seven screens. Opening is set for this fall.
Has anyone walked past the Roosevelt Collection development lately? I can’t wait for the theater to open. I wrote to Dean Kerasotes himself, and he gave me a few snipets of info
The largest auditoriums will have side-masking (a reason to reduce on going to River East)
Two of those largest screens will be about 65 feet wide for ‘scope’ presentations. Both will also have 21 and older balconies with seating for about 150. By now you’ve probably heard about Jerry Kleiner opening a bar at the theater’s upper level.
It will have digital (he didn’t say if it will be all-digital) projection
You’ve heard it here first. I miss the Burnham Plaza, but the Showplace 16 is almost here.
It’s been vancant for 6 years. Looks like it will be staying that way for a while.
I wish the current owners can just give up, so I can try and pitch my art house ideas again. I really do believe if done right, it can be a winner. Granted, River East 21 is nearby and does great business, but art films are few and far in between. And 600 North Michigan almost always show RE films, and it’s very empty most of the time. In fact, if it closes soon, it won’t be a suprise. McClurg Court has the upper hand. Besides being in possession of the largest non-IMAX screen in Chicago, it is located across the street from the Streeter rental complex which will be completed soon. And it’s in walking distance from the Lake Point Towers. I wonder though, if one could buy the space next door and create screens out of that space, then take former 2-3 and return it to a balcony? I dunno, I thought I might throw some more ideas around.
I agree Chris. Here in Chicago, AMC’s River East 21 is just like this. That’s why I can’t wait for Kerasotes to show them how it’s done at the Roosevelt Collection with their planned 65ft side-masking screens.
Stake in Esquire Theater site to be auctioned
This is how the Showplace 14 will look when finished.
Is there any way I can see caps from BO magazine?
That’s cool. I’ve heard good things about that chain.
And another late 80s CO is saved!
Ahh Michael, I’m 19 (why did the great stuff happen before my time?). So I’ve only seen this on cable. A great movie, up there with “The Godfather” as one of Francis Coppola’s best. I would love to see a 70mm print of “Apocalypse” (hopefully in Chicago) someday.
I know my dad saw it at either State-Lake or River Oaks.
I wonder if they plan to combine screens? Thus getting rid of some that seat 67.
No. The Diana was always at 177th & Halsted in the Washington Square Mall. This is a freestanding structure at 182nd.
I haven’t been this way since May. Is this place still standing?
Movie534, read this. But especially read the last paragraph.
We need to band together to get Chris Nolan or another director that shoots on film to get behind this.
Does any of the screens at the Rockaway feature side-masking? By side-masking I’m talking about the screen’s masking opening up at the sides for scope (2.35: 1) presentation as opposed to AMC’s typical top-down masking (screen shrinking at the top/bottom for scope).
AMC has top-notch lobbies, exteriors, but the way they build their screens leave little to be desired. I just hope they’ve made an exception.
When I finally run theaters, I will have both film & digital. And will hire experienced projectionists to run film (hopefully Maxivision) in the largest screen.