Uptown Theater

3426 Connecticut Avenue NW,
Washington, DC 20008

Unfavorite 46 people favorited this theater

Showing 126 - 150 of 413 comments

JodarMovieFan
JodarMovieFan on July 7, 2009 at 9:25 am

I thought I saw them advertising in the Weekend. Given the fact that the alternatives are AMC’s Georgetown and Regal’s Gallery Place and their respective eeny weenie tiny screens, Washingtonians know the Uptown is the place to go for true widescreen enjoyment. I was looking at the Harry Potter advance ticket shows and they are selling 3am shows for opening day. I’m guessing someone is confident there will be demand for it assuming the midnight show sells out.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on July 7, 2009 at 9:15 am

Weeks ago, AMC removed ALL their theaters from the movie clock of the Philadelphia Inquirer. They are the only chain to be gone from the movie clock.

moviepalacelover
moviepalacelover on July 7, 2009 at 8:42 am

The Uptown has not been advertising their showtimes in the Washington Post for the past several days and that has me worried. They still show their film schedule online — Transformers is showing now and the new Harry Potter film begins next week — but why are they not advertising in the Post? Their lease with AMC is about to expire. Will it be renewed? I am very concerned about this last movie palace in D.C. Any latest info about this wonderful theater would be appreciated.

JodarMovieFan
JodarMovieFan on May 25, 2009 at 9:06 pm

My friend and I saw Angels and Demons here last Sun (5/17/09) to an almost sell out crowd. We sat in the balcony in the bleeder seats (by choice). It has been a long time since I saw a movie here sitting in the balcony…I’m guessing Who Killed Roger Rabbit? (in ‘70mm back in '88). The movie was still engaging and we could hear surrounds even up in the balcony. Of course, the huge screen helps. Since I had low expectations for this movie, it turned out to be a decent thriller of sorts especially with the ending twist. Now if only they had booked Star Trek here….

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on March 24, 2009 at 7:53 pm

Movies at the Uptown look very good to me, including “The International.”

bufffilmbuff
bufffilmbuff on March 23, 2009 at 8:54 pm

Anyone know if AMC has gotten the new bulb or is the image still dim?Are they going to keep it open or what?

bobc007
bobc007 on January 22, 2009 at 2:10 pm

As I have posted earlier, I was lucky enough to work from time to time as a projectionist at The Uptown in the early 1980s. I recently posted a “newsreel” about The Uptown on YouTube. It consists of video I shot in 1990, 1991, and November 2008. Here is the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BwPO7JPdKCY

JABilmes
JABilmes on January 5, 2009 at 7:57 pm

I saw Frost/Nixon there over New Year’s weekend, in no small part because it was playing at the Uptown. Decent crowd for a Sunday matinee, around 40 people with me in the balcony. But maybe they’re still waiting for that new bulb? The image seemed a little dim to me.

SWATMAN
SWATMAN on June 17, 2008 at 2:32 pm

AMC has renewed there lease for another year to see if they want it or not.

bufffilmbuff
bufffilmbuff on June 17, 2008 at 12:01 pm

So what is the status with AMC? A few months ago it was said the lease was expiring and the Uptown would close. Or have they decided to stick with it?

Giles
Giles on June 16, 2008 at 9:16 am

what does that mean exactly: ‘scorched lens’?

SWATMAN
SWATMAN on June 14, 2008 at 10:31 am

The Ironman print was screened several times before the Uptown got it. Also the lens at the Uptown has a problem which is called scorched lens. They are waiting for a New Lens and New Bulb that mite be a 5,000, 6,000, 7,000 Watt Bulb to improve the picture.AMC has order new upgrades for the Proj. booth.

Giles
Giles on June 13, 2008 at 10:42 pm

unlilke the crappy print that Paramount sent of ‘Iron Man’ for it’s engagement at the Uptown, ‘Indy 4’ (which I finally saw this evening) looked much better and sounded fantastic. The cigarette burn/reel changes were also not as noticeable as they were on the ‘Iron Man’ print I saw.

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on June 9, 2008 at 6:59 am

Loews and Cineplex Odeon “merged” much earlier. A quick google search indicates a 1998 antitrust agreement,so about that time. In reality, Loews tookover. Cineplex Odeon continued in print ads, but Loews operated the theater. As I wrote in the Intro, Warner was the 1st operator, and with whatever corporate changes Warner had, continued until whenever Circle tookover.

Coate
Coate on June 8, 2008 at 10:48 pm

Bill C…You’re correct that Cineplex Odeon operated the UPTOWN
during the 1990s. However, its current operator is AMC.

Here’s a breakdown of the UPTOWN’s ownership during the past thirty years.

Circle: 1979-1988
Cineplex Odeon/Circle: 1988-1989
Cineplex Odeon: 1989-2005
Loews Cineplex: 2005-2006
AMC Loews: 2006-Present

Prior to Circle, I believe RKO-Stanley Warner operated the theater.

rlvjr
rlvjr on June 8, 2008 at 2:08 pm

WIZARD OF OZ definitely played the UPTOWN a few years ago. We saw it on Saturday and the line was around the block, with many, many people turned away. Great show, great use of the Uptown.

moviegoer
moviegoer on May 7, 2008 at 11:50 pm

I lived in DC during most of the 1990s and as far as I know, it was a Cineplex Odeon theater during that whole time.

To address your question from a couple of weeks ago, Giles, the only film festival I can remember there during the 90s was the Warner Brothers 75th Anniversary Film Festival which ran for about a week in 1998. It included all the WB classis, with each day devoted to a different decade (more or less). Obviously 2001 wasn’t a part of it, nor Lawrence of Arabia nor the Wizard of Oz, but I don’t remember any other film festivals, per se.

I believe the Wizard of Oz did play there for it’s 50th anniversary though. That is, it definitely played there because I saw it, and I think the occasion was the 50th anniversary of the film. At one point it closed for 6 months or so for renovations and it repoened with a showing of Vertigo. I think it was a restored version of the film and the whole evening was run by AFI. I was there for that also, and Kim Novak was there to introduce the film.

sguttag
sguttag on May 6, 2008 at 11:42 pm

Giles…For the Uptown specifically, it needs 70mm, blow up or origination in 65mm to properly fill the screen. The 70mm print, even if a blow up, will allow more light through the aperture and also improve the image steadiness (less magnification) and overall focus (the Uptown uses deep curve corrected lenses for 70mm and effectively also has curved field lenses for 35mm 1.85. Scope is its weakest format)

65mm origination is absolutely where Hollywood should be by now…it has only been over 50-years since the current format came into being! It is significantly better than 35mm (or digital) and will allow a higher resoultion image to start from for any future generations that may surpass what we currently have. I’m quite disappointed that Steven Spielberg has not ventured into 65mm origination. Remember, 65 or 70mm won’t make a bad film good but will make a good film better. I give a lot of credit to Ronny Howard and Kenneth Branagh for shooting in 65mm. Some say that Far and Away killed 65mm photography because it wasn’t one of Ron Howard’s best films…but what does a origination format have to do with the story or people’s acceptance of that story? If it was shot in 35mm would people have liked it better? One thing is for sure…Far and Away has a better source image for any future releases than any move shot in 35mm or present day digital. In fact, George Lucas has done himself a HUGE disservice by shooting the last two Star Wars digitally because he has locked the image in turn of the Century technology that was inferior to what was available. Then again, some people may think it is better to have lesser quality versions of those movies.

As to Sony 4K…it has less light available than the current 2K DLPs. They also lack any ability to deal with the deep-curve screen without throwing away pixels. I’m sure Sony is evolving their product but the last time I did any critical evaluation of it…the color wasn’t right and while static images looked pretty darn impressive…motion images seemed to smear up quite a bit. Most that look at the same source file projected on a DLP 2K and the Sony 4K seem to favor the DLP image. Resolution wise, Sony clearly has an edge. I know in a non-cinema application the Sony image outshown a DLP image but with art images rather than a movie.

Does AMC have the clout to force a 70mm print for a theatre like the Uptown? Probably…they control a sizable number of theatres and probably have more than the Uptown that could benefit from 70mm. Striking one print is a HUGE overhead…once the IN is created…subseqent prints become progressively cheaper as the cost of making the IN is absorbed over the various positives. However, would AMC make that sort of pressure or even the simple request? That is the question and it is likely a “no.” They are a big chain…they tend to do things that are detrimental to projection, not improve it. Think about it…if they required high quality projection from their theatres…why would many people prefer digital cinemas over film when film has a very clear advantage over digital in just about every respect (resolution, color space, contrast)?

SG

Giles
Giles on May 5, 2008 at 10:27 pm

those scenes shot for ‘The Dark Knight’ were shot with IMAX (70mm horizontal) cameras/film stock.

yes, Ron Fricke’s next film ‘Samsara’ is/has been shot in 70mm, and according to imdb, will get released in 70mm (2.20 aspect ratio), 35mm and digital projection (2.35).

I saw the PDF up on the Cannes website and they make no mention of the rumoured 70mm premier there [insert sad face]

In regards to the Castro Theatre 70mm film festival depending on the film’s you might see me there as well :) Any excuse to go to San Francisco is a good excuse.

JodarMovieFan
JodarMovieFan on May 5, 2008 at 9:25 pm

Thanks, Steve. What of the 4K DP installs that Landmark and AMC are reportedly using? Are they appreciably “brighter” than the 2K units?

I remember watching the restored Vertigo in 70mm DTS. It was so perfect that it looked like it was shot yesterday.

Re: 70mm. Reportedly, the new Batman had some sequences filmed in 65mm and the director who brought us Baraka is working on a sequel, again in to be released in 70mm. In70mm reports a possible 70mm print of the latest Indiana Jones, but there has been no word on that being a reality.

San Francisco’s Castro Theater is having a 70mm retrospective the first week of July. They had one last fall, too. Its a shame the Uptown can’t have at least one of these during the slow periods. I’m contemplating a visit there as long as I can still use my NWA miles. :)

Giles
Giles on May 5, 2008 at 9:13 pm

do you believe AMC would have enough pull to make studios restart the trend? Are we talking about true 65mm shot productions or would 70mm blowups also work?

HowardBHaas
HowardBHaas on May 5, 2008 at 9:12 pm

Strip screen removed during renovations which resulted in “Vertigo” opening the theater when they were done? For contrast, why does it matter if strip screen or the current screen?

sguttag
sguttag on May 5, 2008 at 9:05 pm

DLP on the Uptown screen is going to be a bit challenging. Not that one can’t fill it or even possibly get the brightness. The resolution really isn’t there and there are no lenses available to compensate for the screen’s depth. They would just throw away pixels.

While it is true that the Uptown has rarely hit SMPTE specs for light output (the 70mm run of Vertigo being a notable exception), it normally can put out a passable picture if the equipment is kept in alignment. A DP will have the same problems.

Unlike in many large screen applications, at the Uptown, the screen is not only large but rather close…any imperfections…like the lack of pixel density in a 2K system is going to show itself much more unless you are in the balconey.

The problem you saw was a matter of getting more light on the screen, which need not come from a digital projector but an alignment of the existing equipment. What makes you think that a company that will put out a haphazard film presentation will give a digital presentation any more care?

I don’t recall anyone other than the studios…which normally relented, complaining too much about the light levels when I was at the Uptown. The Uptown’s image starts to look pretty good when you hit 12fL but starts to degrade a bit once you go above 14fL as things will wash out. Remember too, Cineplex chose to remove the strip screen which absolutely killed the contrast in that theatre.

No, what the Uptown needs is 70mm film…it is the best technology available in 2008 for lighting up that screen. Shame on AMC and others for not insisting on 70mm for these sorts of venues.

Steve

Giles
Giles on May 5, 2008 at 5:52 pm

don’t get me wrong, I’ve seen stellar 35mm prints at the Uptown, DREAMGIRLS and V FOR VENDETTA near the end of their runs and they were very impressive, here though, the print looked like it was run through with coffee. I can’t believe Disney would go through the whole process of installing a DP system only for the premier of ‘The Guardian’ and then just UN-install it, if it can be done, why do it for a one off premier, NEC systems tout they can install DLP systems on large screens (up to 100 feet) well…. come on AMC. I think I was jaded by the recent 70mm run of ‘2001’ at the Silver which while not perfect still WAS an event.

JodarMovieFan
JodarMovieFan on May 5, 2008 at 3:29 pm

Giles, thanks for saving me a trip. I was about to see the film there but opted for DP at my local Regal, which was SUPERB. Maybe its time for the Uptown to get an DC Cinema install. It should get the newest and best to make the most of its screen.

If AMC were to see the light and have 2001 here to celebrate its 40th anniversary, I’d be happy to revisit this venue.