Showing 1,026 - 1,050 of 1,070 comments
Isn’t this theater in Gresham?
“The Cinema 21 also had the six month moveover run of "Star Wars” from the Coronet after a legal dispute between United Artists and 20th Century-Fox. United Artist’s Coronet had one of the most successful “Star Wars” run in the country when UA decided to bump it for “Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind.”
The move-over run of “Star Wars” began Dec. 21, 1977, one week after the Coronet run ended. The Cinema 21 engagement included a 70mm blow-up version of the “Duck Dodgers In The 24th And A Half Century” cartoon short.
Dolby (CP100) was installed at the Centre in August 1977 for an upgrade engagement of “Star Wars.”
“Was this a roadshow house? Does anyone know what big films played here hard ticket?” (RobertR)
“Man Of La Mancha” (1972)
“In the early 80’s they installed Dolby Stereo capabilities in Cinema One for the opening Empire Strikes Back” (rhett)
“the Totowa Cinema had Dolby Stereo as early as the 1977 release of Star Wars, I also saw the remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers there and it was presented in ear-splittingly-loud stereo.” (PeterApruzzese)
According to Dolby Labs' records, a Dolby sound system was installed at this theater in December 1978. It was a CP100, which allowed for both 35mm optical stereo and six-track magnetic 70mm playback.
“The Sound Of Music” played at this theatre for 133 weeks!
“ ‘2001: A Space Odyssey,’ which had its world premiere at the Uptown on April 1, 1968…and played there for 18 months or so.”
“I thought 2001 had its world premiere in the Loew’s Cinerama in NY.”
The world premiere of “2001” was on April 2, 1968. The Uptown engagement ran for 51 weeks.
The three premieres for the film’s first-week release were…
DC: April 2
NY: April 3
LA: April 4
For more about the original roadshow release of “2001” I recommend the following article/list. Be sure to click the link to the engagement list, which is page two of the article.
“The original "Star Wars” trilogy was shown at the Carnegie in early 1985 in 70mm prints and Dolby sound.“
The one-day event was held on March 28, 1985.
The event was held in the following cities:
Los Angeles (Hollywood): Egyptian
Los Angeles (Westwood): Avco
New York: Warner Twin
San Francisco: Coronet
Seattle: Cinema 150
“Southtown did have 70 mm.”
I wasn’t questioning the theatre’s 70mm presentation capability; I was questioning the person’s claim of seeing “Soylent Green” in 70mm. (I’m not aware of any 70s having been struck for that title. For that matter, I’m not aware of it even being mixed in stereo.)
“Saw Solyent Green there in 70mm.”
Are you sure you’re not confusing widescreen “scope” with “70mm”?
“Also, Star Wars…”
“Star Wars” opened in Minneapolis at the St. Louis Park. It later expanded to the Southdale and Northtown, both similar-sounding in name to the subject of this thread, the Southtown. (Both “Empire” and “Jedi” opened at the Southtown.)
By the way, the Southtown Theater is actually located in Bloomington, not Minneapolis proper.
“70mm Presentations at the Coronet”
Correction: The above post represents the NORTHPOINT, not the CORONET.
70mm Presentations at the Coronet
Source: View link
Title (Premiere Date)
RSE = Reserved Seat Engagement
The Dirty Dozen (June 28, 1967)
That’s Entertainment! (June 26, 1974)
A Star Is Born (Dec. 25, 1976)
Capricorn One (June 2, 1978)
Dersu Uzala (Oct. 26, 1978)
Superman (Dec. 15, 1978)
Alien (May 25, 1979)
Apocalypse Now (Sep. 21, 1979)
1941 (Dec. 14, 1979)
The Empire Strikes Back (May 21, 1980)
Poltergeist (June 4, 1982)
Gandhi (Dec. 29, 1982)
Blue Thunder (May 13, 1983)
The Right Stuff (Oct. 21, 1983)
Ghostbusters (June 8, 1984)
Starman (Dec. 14, 1984)
Silverado (July 10, 1985)
Year Of The Dragon (Aug. 16, 1985)
White Nights (Dec. 6, 1985)
The Last Emperor (Dec. 9, 1987)
Last Action Hero (June 18, 1993)
In The Line Of Fire (July 9, 1993)
Geronimo: An American legend (Dec. 10, 1993)
Gone With The Wind (1968, 1971, 1976)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1971)
Doctor Zhivago (1971)
Jesus Christ Superstar (1976)
Sleeping Beauty (1981)
Lawrence Of Arabia (1989)
70mm Film Festival Sep 27 – Nov. 14, 1996
2001: A Space Odyssey
The Last Emperor
Lawrence Of Arabia
My Fair Lady
The Wild Bunch
Oklahoma! (Feb. 16, 1956; RSE)
Sleeping Beauty (Feb. 11, 1959)
Porgy And Bess (July 22, 1959; RSE)
Ben-Hur (Dec. 23, 1959; RSE)
King Of Kings (Oct. 25, 1961; RSE)
Mutiny On The Bounty (Nov. 20, 1962; RSE)
55 Days At Peking (May 29, 1963; 70mm unconfirmed)
My Fair Lady (Oct. 29, 1964; RSE)
Hawaii (Oct. 19, 1966; RSE; 70mm unconfirmed)
Camelot (Nov. 1, 1967; RSE)
Funny Girl (Oct. 10, 1968; RSE; 70mm unconfirmed)
Star Wars* (May 25, 1977)
Close Encounters Of The Third Kind (Dec. 14, 1977)
Outland (May 22, 1981)
Quest For Fire (Mar. 5, 1982)
Blade Runner (June 25, 1982)
Return Of The Jedi (May 25, 1983)
Greystoke (Mar. 30, 1984)
Gremlins (June 8, 1984)
Amadeus (Sep. 19, 1984)
2010 (Dec. 7, 1984)
The Goonies (June 7, 1985)
SpaceCamp (June 6, 1986)
Aliens (July 18, 1986)
Little Shop Of Horrors (Dec. 19, 1986)
Lethal Weapon (Mar. 6, 1987)
The Witches Of Eastwick (June 12, 1987)
Die Hard (July 15, 1988)
Cocoon: The Return (Nov. 23, 1988)
Batman (June 23, 1989)
Glory (Jan. 12, 1990)
Gremlins 2 (June 15, 1990)
Die Hard 2 (July 4, 1990)
Edward Scissorhands (Dec. 14, 1990; 70mm-CDS)
Hook (Dec. 11, 1991)
Lethal Weapon 3 (May 15, 1992)
Cliffhanger (May 28, 1993)
True Lies (July 15, 1994)
*Highest box-office gross in the U.S. May 25 – Dec 13, 1977
Oklahoma! (1962, 1966)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1970)
The Sound Of Music (1978)
Star Wars Triple Feature (One-Day-Only; Mar. 28, 1985)
Return Of The Jedi (1985)
“I also saw CLOSE ENCOUNTERS here in 70mm in October 1977”
“Close Encounters” opened at the Coronet on December 14, 1977.
“Universal did a great diloyalty to Charity on DVD. The soundtrack and stero surround is horrible. The rere3corded it in 4.0 and it is just the pits. The VCR version was great.”
I bet the “4.0” version on the DVD (which is mislabeled on the packaging) is a direct transfer of the original master. (Little known secret: many of the six-track mixes used on 70mm films were based upon four (and sometimes even three)track master mixes.
You really think the “VCR version” is great? Pan-and-scan and 2.0 audio…
On this project…
…we accounted for film that ran for about six months or longer. “Star!” is not present. “Sweet Charity” opened at the Rivoli on Apr. 1, 1969, so “Star!,” which premiered Oct. 22, 1968 could not have run for more than about five months. I don’t have access to my notes which might provide more details, so someone else will need to chime in. While recognized as a flop, the film played longer than one might expect in many places (21 weeks in L.A., for instance).
“In 1982 a private owner cleaned it up and reopened it as the [‘New’] Columbia”
Anyone know the name of the owner/company that operated the theater at this time?
Re whether or not both screens were 70mm-equipped, I may be able to answer my own question. In checking some notes and newspapers ads from a prior research project, it appears that “The Thing” was advertised in a manner suggesting it was being shown in 70mm on both screens.
As for the HPS-4000 sound system, I guess no one knows much about it.
Was 70mm projection available on both screens at this point? And which was the HPS-4000 screen?
You’re incredible! You are distorting the facts in a clear attempt to discredit me and to win some sympathy for yourself from the Cinema Treasures readers. The letter I sent to your publisher could hardly be called nasty. It was written in plain language with a clear purpose including a sensible solution to the situation.
And to claim that I provided a list of spelling errors and typos again is misleading as if those were the only items on the list of corrections. For the record, typos and spelling errors represent only a fraction of the errors found in your book. To claim I’m bizarre in this instance is outrageous. I’ll tell you what’s bizarre: That you do not seem to think it is a problem to have HUNDREDS of errors, both factual and grammatical, in a book for which readers are expected to pay $30+ to me seems quite bizarre.
If you say you were unfamiliar with me and my work prior while preparing your book, fine. You should have no difficulty, then, in explaining the many similarities our works share (the 70mm section). Whether or not you knowingly or unknowingly used previously published works for your own, the fact is you used sources that are not credited in your book’s bibliography, several of which you mentioned to me in our email exhanges (copies of which I have saved). I’ve also saved a printed copy of your outrageously deceptive “review” posted on Amazon.com before it was recently removed, I suspect as a result of some embarrassment it may have caused due to it being mentioned in some recent Internet discussions about your book and my review. (What kind of person would write a review of their own work, writing it as if it were someone else, then crediting their own name to the review??!!)
And what’s all this nonsense about my reference to “Class Of Nuke ‘Em High” in the review? Big deal, all I provided was a bit of background info on you, all of which was obtained from your book and an interview I read online. And my reference in the paragraph you cite was actually meant as a compliment, not an attempt, as you say, to discredit you by linking you to Troma. What I was suggesting was that you’re a better filmmaker than an author. That’s my opinion based on the work of yours that I am familiar with. It’s an opinion, which I’m entitled to. You don’t have to agree with it. But, if you’re so stuck on downplaying having made “Class Of Nuke 'Em High,” why then is it mentioned multiple times in this Rivoli thread? You mention it in at least one post plus the intro paragraph for the theatre at the top of the page. Whatever.
As to whether you are as credible as you think you are, let the book’s readers decide. Here’s a link to my review. If people actually take the time to analyze the list of corrections and judge them in a suitable context, they can decide for themselves if they fall within or outside an acceptable margin of error, which was the thesis of my review.
Personally, I really think that if you or I or anyone else wishes to continue discussing this matter it should be taken over to another thread, perhaps the link on this site for your book, or starting up a fresh one. This thread REALLY should get back to being about the Rivoli. Speaking of which…
Who is familiar with the Rivoli after it was twinned and became known as the United Artists Twin? My questions are:
1) How was it divided? Balcony become one screen, main floor become another? Or split straight down the middle?
2) John Allen (of HPS-4000 fame) told me that upon the twinning, his sound system was installed on one of the screens, making it the first (only?) such house in Manhattan and the first 70mm-equipped house anywhere with HPS-4000. So…which of the two screens had the HPS-4000 system? And was this ever promoted in the newspaper ads (it wasn’t in any of the ones I can remember)?
And regarding the crediting of “70mm” as a presentation format in newspaper ads for blow-up titles that were also roadshows…
You’re right that “70mm” was not often included or emphasized in the ads during the ‘60s. Generally, it was the reserved-seat aspect of the show that was the “gimmick” emphasized in the advertising.
However, re “The Sand Pebbles,” the Long Island engagement ads (or some of them) did include “70mm” in addition to the “Panavision” and “DeLuxe” credits. And in Los Angeles, both “Funny Girl” and “Oliver!” did include mention of 70mm in their ads. But most of the blow-ups didn’t; one would need to consult a secondary source to determine if a 70mm print was what was shown.
“Star Wars” opened May 25th 1977 playing both the Cinerama and Kapiolani theatres. Both theatres played the film in 35mm.
“Empire Strikes Back” opened at Cinerama on May 21 1980 in 70mm
“Return of the Jedi” opened May 25 1983 also in 70mm.
I think your memory is playing tricks on you (or someone is playing a Jedi mind trick…).
“Star Wars” opened May 25, 1977 in selected markets, though my research has shown that Honolulu was not among them. While the movie did open simultaneously in the two theatres you mention, the Hawaii release wasn’t until June 8.
In addition, I have reason to believe the Cinerama Theatre’s engagement initially 35mm switched over to a 70mm print, which began being advertised in the newspaper ads during October 1977.
You’re correct about “Empire” opening in 70mm on May 21, 1980.
I think you’re misremembering the specifics about “Jedi.” Yes, it was at the Cinerama. Yes it was a 70mm presentation. But my research indicates the Honolulu opening wasn’t until “Wave 2” on June 24, 1983.
Damn, why does it seem like I’m always correcting people! (Is this a good habit or a bad habit? I guess it depends on how you look at things.)
For more on the release of the original “Star Wars” movies, including the dates, locations and presentation types of the initial engagements, I encourage you to read the following articles I prepared just for occasions such as this one:
70mm engagements at the Stanley-Warner Beverly Hills (aka Pacific Beverly Hills):
Lawrence Of Arabia (Dec. 21, 1962; RSE)
Becket (Mar. 18, 1964; RSE)
Lord Jim (Mar. 4, 1965; RSE)
The Flight Of The Phoenix (Feb. 2, 1966; 70mm unconfirmed)
The Taming Of The Shrew (Mar. 21, 1967; RSE; 70mm unconfirmed)
Julius Caesar (Sep. 22, 1970; RSE; 70mm unconfirmed)
Ryan’s Daughter (Nov. 17, 1970)
Mary, Queen Of Scots (Dec. 22, 1971)
Re-Issue/Second Run/Move-Over/Return Engagements include:
Doctor Zhivago (1968, 1970)
Patton (1970; RSE)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1969; RSE)
The Sound Of Music (1973)
Gone With The Wind (1974)
70mm engagements at the Carthay Circle:
Around The World In Eighty Days (Dec. 22, 1956; RSE)
Porgy And Bess (July 15, 1959; RSE)
Can-Can (Mar. 10, 1960; RSE)
The Alamo (Oct. 26, 1960; RSE)
El Cid (Dec. 18, 1961; RSE)
The Agony And The Ecstasy (Oct. 20, 1965; RSE)
The Shoes Of The Fisherman (Nov. 15, 1968; RSE)
Re-Issue/Second Run/Move-Over/Return Engagements include:
The Sound Of Music (1966; RSE)
Gone With The Wind (1967; RSE)
70mm engagements at the Fox Wilshire:
Sleeping Beauty (Jan. 29, 1959)
Solomon And Sheba (Dec. 26, 1959)
Exodus (Dec. 21, 1960; RSE)
The Sound Of Music (Mar. 10, 1965; RSE)
The Sand Pebbles (Dec. 28, 1966; RSE)
Far From The Madding Crowd (Oct. 19, 1967; RSE)
Star! (Oct. 31, 1968; RSE)
Goodbye, Mr. Chips (Nov. 7, 1969; RSE)
Woodstock (Mar. 26, 1970; 70mm presentation unconfirmed)
Fiddler On The Roof (Nov. 5, 1971; RSE)
Man Of La Mancha (Dec. 13, 1972; RSE)
Re-Issue/second run/return/move-over engagements include:
Ben-Hur (1969; RSE)
The Sound Of Music (1969)
South Pacific (1969)
Doctor Zhivago (1970)
2001: A Space Odyssey (1971, 1975)
Around The World In 80 Days (1971)
MGM Fabulous Three (1971)
My Fair Lady (1971)
West Side Story(1971)
Camelot (1973, 1974, 1976, 1977)
Fiddler On The Roof (1973)
Man Of La Mancha (1973)
This Is Cinerama (1973)
Hello, Dolly! (1975, 1976, 1977)
Gone With The Wind (1976)
Logan’s Run (1976)
A Star Is Born (1977)
I could not confirm "MASH” was blown up to 70mm although it was listed in some places as released in this format. I utilized
Booking and Buying Guides when I compiled my lists and cross referenced them with newspaper ads, studio publicity and film collectors who salvaged some of the original release prints.
In many cases it was a judgment call since distributors often
listed materials in their booking guides that were not manufactured
or used. Newspaper ads and studio publicity were not always accurate either. When compiliing lists, all you can do is use the
data that’s available at the time and update it if new data surfaces.
I know you are a fanatic about 70mm but there will always be a margin of error unless you personally attended the presentation which would be impossible when discussing films shown thirty years ago. In at least one case I was present when the NYC cinema advertised on the marquee and in the newspaper as “Die Hard” being presented in 70mm. I visited the booth and the projectionist showed me that the copy had been damaged in a platter and they had switched to 35mm Dolby without informing patrons.
For those unaware of your activities, let me inform them
that your have been trashing me and my book on other sites, posting derogatory comments and even contacting at my private home to start arguements, all of which has been saved in my records. I would appreciate it if you did not engage in these activities here.“
Whoa, chill out, dude! What makes you think I’m picking on you here? Re “MASH,” all you had to do was respond by stating that you came across information on it after completing your book. It should be obvious that I’m asking because, given my “fanaticism” about the subject of 70mm movies, I’m genuinely curious as to how you located details on any 70mm prints having been struck for that title.
Moving on, your “Die Hard” example makes no sense as I do not understand how this relates to your comment about there always being a margin of error in research. This example is not the same as when (or if) a distributor or exhibitor deceptively advertises a film in 70mm when no such prints were made. In the case of “Die Hard,” the 70mm status has never been in question as its distributor did in fact strike a number of 70mm prints (one of which I saw in its initial Los Angeles engagement). I don’t, by the way, believe it was common practice for a film to be promoted in 70mm DURING its release when in fact no prints were even struck. Likewise, I don’t think the opposite occured regularly either: a 70mm print being screened and NOT advertised as being in 70mm.
Richard, I wasn’t intending to debate the merits of your book in a thread on the Rivoli, but since you brought it up…. To state that I have been trashing you and your book on other sites is incorrect. Where has this occurred? If you’re referring to the book review that is posted on my own (and Bill Kallay’s) website, www.FromScriptToDVD.com, then I think it is incorrect to state you’re being personally trashed. I think you’re just pissed off that I gave your book a thumbs down review. If you want a positive review, next time write a better book! Despite our prior communication, I believe my review was objective and loaded with examples and evidence to support my claims. And as for the telephone conversation you mentioned, I did not call to initiate an argument; I called to ask you if you had received and looked over my list I had sent of corrections to your book’s many errors and to ask if you had any intention of having the book reprinted with the corrections incorporated. In fact, you’re misleading the readers here by failing to mention that, for the majority of the duration of the call, we had a pleasant discussion which lasted a good thirty minutes…long enough for you to plug your movies that are available on DVD in the hope that I would purchase and/or review them.
The fact is I wrote you and your book’s publisher in an attempt to address the issue of the book’s many errors and for some references that I thought had been ommitted from the book’s bibliography, a subject on which you have been evasive. The reason I keep bringing up your book, whether it be here on Cinema Treasures, my website, or elsewhere is because I believe potential readers ought to know of its pros and cons and, through exposure, wish for your book to sell in high numbers…so you and the publisher can justify a second printing, which would enable you to make the appropriate revisions and improve it to the point that it would be a worthwhile addition to one’s bookshelf, which in turn would help improve your own credibility as a scholar/historian.
Now, can we return the discussion to that of the Rivoli….