Egyptian Theatre

6712 Hollywood Boulevard,
Los Angeles, CA 90028

Unfavorite 94 people favorited this theater

Showing 101 - 125 of 245 comments

RobertR
RobertR on August 22, 2008 at 8:31 am

Spirit of St. Louis premiere
View link

bruceanthony
bruceanthony on August 11, 2008 at 6:34 am

Cliff the Beauty of the Egyptian was destroyed during the latest renovation. It was quite a shock to see “Gilda” in the current state of this theatre. I saw many films here through the years and was even a flagship house for lazy United Artists during the roadshow years and later. Sound and picture are superb but it was awesome during the roadshow years. Remember “Ben Hur” played here for two years.brucec

Cliffs
Cliffs on August 11, 2008 at 1:32 am

I’ve been waiting for what seems like forever to find a movie to get me over to the Egyptian (sorry, but the homosexual cinema of the Ukraine isn’t exactly in my demographic). Got to go to the premiere of The Clone Wars today and after all of the doom and gloom in this thread I was fearing the worst. Much to my great surprise, I really enjoyed the theater. No, it doesn’t have the opulence or grandeur of the Chinese, El Capitan, or even the Cinerama Dome, but I found it to be quite a bit better than just a typical “screening room.” Now I certainly understand the complaints of this theater not being restored to match its original design and that’s something I can’t argue with. It’s going to come down to personal preference… the pre-show presentation versus the feature presentation. As for screen size, I would say the screen is comparable to the screen at the Village. I found it quite large and certainly more so than the average multiplex. Does it match the size of the theater’s former incarnation? Probably not, but it’s certainly larger than the screen at the El Capitan. I also found the sight-lines in the theater to be excellent. It’s kind of half traditional/half stadium, with another half devoted to the balcony (yup, three-halfs). I would actually say that the screen is bit TOO high (although it ensures unobstructed views for everyone).

I think that in our passion and appreciation for these theaters, we sometimes forget that the films are supposed to be the reason we’re there in the first place. While I can appreciate and mourn the loss of what this theater might have once been, I have a deeper appreciation for what this theater currently represents. After the loss of The National, this hits home especially hard. This is a state of the art facility that has reminders of its history everywhere you look. It’s a wonderful place to see great films in a town that has more than its fair share. Go just about anywhere else in the country and see if you can find something as good as The Egyptian, even in its current form. I will certainly have no hesitation visiting this theater again and again (including next week during the double feature of Alien and Aliens).

Clearlight
Clearlight on July 28, 2008 at 10:04 pm

Here is a marquee shot from this past Friday night

GaryParks
GaryParks on June 13, 2008 at 10:55 pm

It should be noted that in ken mc’s 2005 post linking to photos of the Egyptian, there are three which are of other theaters. There is one exterior shot of the Egyptian in Long Beach, and the last photo is of its interior. There is one other interior shot of some other Egyptian (maybe Pasadena?) also. The corbelled proscenium and sunburst ceiling grille of Grauman’s were imitated many, many times in subsequent Egyptian style movie palaces. The sunburst grille even appears on a small scale in Oakland’s Parkway Theatre, still extant and running movies.

GaryParks
GaryParks on June 13, 2008 at 10:45 pm

The painted scene on the wall behind the usherettes in the photo linked to the previous post was restored and can still be enjoyed today. It is on the left wall of the courtyard just before the pillared portico. What is interesting about it is that this is the only scene in the whole building which was completely copied from an actual piece of Pharaonic art, although with some artistic license. The original piece is considerably smaller, and is carved on a slab of stone. It was done during the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III in the 18th Dynasty—he was an ancestor of Tutankhamun—and depicts Thutmose twice in the company of the gods Horus and Set. The heiroglyphs are all legible to those who can read such things and include, in cartouches, the name Thutmose, and the name Menkheperra, the latter a ceremonial name given to him on his accession to the throne. It is the name which has the scarab in it. Other heiroglyphs include the common titles “Lord of the Two Lands,” “Ruler of Upper and Lower Egypt,” “Living eternally,” etc.

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on March 26, 2008 at 10:21 pm

Here is an interior photo, circa 1922, from Ben Hall’s book “The Best Remaining Seats”:
http://tinyurl.com/24tvja

JSA
JSA on October 23, 2007 at 9:27 pm

Macbear: If your main goal is to see a 70 mm film that you like, more than likely you will not be dissapointed. Other than the fact that you staring at a blank screen before the show, once things get going it’s not bad. But the Egyptian in its current state is not remotely close to the grand palace it used to be.

JSA

markinthedark
markinthedark on October 23, 2007 at 7:46 am

I saw Baraka at the Egyptian and was impressed with picture and sound. Its not the Cinerama Dome but the new screens proximity to the audience makes it seem rather large, especially when opened for 70mm.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on October 23, 2007 at 5:32 am

I haven’t seen 70mm there, but the comment was the screen isn’t huge enough and some people don’t like the decor of the place. Having enjoyed a 35mm classic at the Egyptian, I’d ignore the decor critics. If the film is a giant classic epic like Lawrence of Arabia, then perhaps the screen size might be disappointing if you’ve seen the film already on a huge screen. If you haven’t already seen the film, or it isn’t an “epic” then don’t miss it. There are 70mm prints shown that won’t be shown elsewhere in the area.

xfrql
xfrql on October 23, 2007 at 1:33 am

I was interested by the comment some way up that this theater cannot show a 70mm film well; any further explanation would be welcome, as i might make a trip to their 70mm fest at some point. Thanks!

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on October 20, 2007 at 6:57 am

William,
/theaters/21875/
There’s another British fellow writing “projection suite” so maybe that is a proper British term for projection booth (as per your comment above)?

Brucec,
I admire your love for historic theaters. I also respect what the late Jim Rankin wrote above. It is worthwhile reading again.

bruceanthony
bruceanthony on October 19, 2007 at 9:29 am

Its to bad the Egytian wasn’t given a beautiful restoration like many of the restored films that are screened at the theatre. There was a nice tribute to Julis Roberts and American Cinematheque in the Friday October 12 issue in Variety which also talked about the historic Egyptian. I miss the giant curve screen which I saw many films through the years. The current screen is a bit small though the picture quality is superb. The Egyptian is a major let down in its current condition and doesn’t look anything like a movie palace. Im surprised that they charge money for tours of this theatre. Can you imagine tourists who come from Cities like St. Louis which has the Fox theatre and then take the tour of the Hollywood Egyptian in its present condition. I have stated this before that cities large and small have restored theatres that look a lot more majestic than the current Egyptian such a shame. I love there programming and they have helped Hollywood Blvd slowly come back from its seedy state from a few years ago.brucec

kencmcintyre
kencmcintyre on October 19, 2007 at 6:59 am

Here is an LA Times ad dated 5/21/80:
http://tinyurl.com/24543v

michaelvp
michaelvp on October 19, 2007 at 2:03 am

Hi. Came upon this site on accident. Can’t stop reading it… Briefly wish to share with you something you might appreciate…..
I saw The Empire Strikes Back on the day it opened on May 21, 1980. As I’m sure most of you know, the place to see it was at The Egyptian. My mom got my brother and I out of school early that day. We had, again as anyone alive at the time will recall, waited 3 years to see that movie… And while it wasn’t playing at the Chinese Theatre, at least it was on Hollywood Blvd, and at least there was still a line around the block for many many days ( weeks? ). So, the excitement was there just plenty for an 8th grader like me…. We got there around 2 in the afternoon, and by 4 there were thousands more people ( or at least it seemed so from the front of the line) . We had famous people in line with us with their families and kids.. Everyone was talking.. Hoping it would be good. An atmosphere of.. well.. its hard to describe. If you have ever been in a line for a Star Wars move on the opening day, then you know… Lord of the Rings was similar…
Anyway.. we went in… and watched the movie… The entire audience roared and clapped when the movie began. Cheered when we first saw Luke, Han, R2, etc.. all for the first time.. The ENTIRE audience actually gasped when Luke flew out head over first through the window… etc. etc… Clearly, it was an amazing experience, and a huge part of that was because of the theatre we were all in.
I now live in Orlando, Florida. I saw Return of the Jedi here. Obviously, not an experience equal to the one of 3 years earlier… So.. Right then and there (1983), I told myself that if George Lucas made the rest of the Star Wars movies, I would go to Hollywood to see them.
Which I did. 3 times. Took my ma and brother, too.
so.
Yes. I, on occasion, fly all the way to Hollywood just to see a damn movie….
The Egyptian of 1980, for me, was that great.

And then I remembered something… as I was reading al the stuff on this page…
I remembered that I had the little paperback novelization of The Empire Strikes Back with me on that day ….and I remembered that I kept my ticket stub from that day in that book….
so.. I just now went looking for the book on one of my book shelves..
and i found the book..
and i opened the book…
wow.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on October 18, 2007 at 8:29 pm

Oh, it sounds like the sink at El Capitan has too many uses!

William
William on October 17, 2007 at 4:34 pm

Howard, I was just saying suite was the wrong word for it. All the theatres for many years all had bathrooms for the projectionist. The El Capitian only has a sink in the booth.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on October 17, 2007 at 4:08 pm

William,
I didn’t characterize it here as a “suite” and know it is a BOOTH, however, the original upstairs booth at the Boyd has several rooms including a bathroom. It does sound like a suite!

William
William on October 17, 2007 at 3:48 pm

Howard, the rest looks good. In British cinema it’s a Box.

In the Todd-AO install they did not take out the stage and proscenium. Just like the Cinerama install at the Warner Hollywood Theatre. In the D-150 install they when almost to the back wall of the stagehouse.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on October 17, 2007 at 3:34 pm

William, I know that in American English, it is a projection booth. I don’t know whether in British English (where Ken Roe is) if it is a suite, but eventually we will likely adjust that since this cinema is American.

I saw different reports on when the destruction was done. We will review that.

Presumably the rest looks good?

William
William on October 17, 2007 at 3:22 pm

Howard, the Todd-AO install (1955) fact is wrong. The demolition of the elaborate original Egyptian proscenium arch, happened with the 1969 install of the D-150 screen. The Todd-AO install put the screen in front of the old proscenium arch, like the Rivoli Theatre in NYC. And the projection booth (box) is not called a suite.

HowardBHaasEsq
HowardBHaasEsq on October 14, 2007 at 4:07 pm

Thanks, Mark for your answer which is what I was thinking. A major project like this didn’t get completed without earthquake retrofitting, and government oversight. There is no need for any blogger (without engineering expertise)to scare away audiences by implying the theater isn’t safe.

Enjoy the new Introduction.

markinthedark
markinthedark on October 12, 2007 at 9:28 am

I think what Howard is saying is don’t question the structural integrity of the building based on what you see unless you are an engineer and understand such things at a professional and technical level.