As the sign (now gone) from the front notes, this was used as a filming location in The Color Of Money during its billiard days. I believe it is to be converted to a bar; the interior is entirely gutted.
Well, yeah, exactly, tradition should be preserved, that’s the whole point of theatre restoration. Otherwise, just go ahead and build a new theatre. I certainly have no problem with corporate sponsorship, it’s when corporate ego overtakes the focus of the theatre that it’s problematic. With the Palace and Oriental, the original names maintain the focus- nobody calls it the Ford Center, and I don’t think many call it the Cadillac. They were good comprimises between history and modern economic reality. If you refer to them as Palace, or Oriental, people know what you mean; it would be nice to have the Majestic name known again. But go ahead and let them name it Lasalle Bank Theatre for now; with the way banks are these days, odds are good that it will be something else in 10 years, and maybe the proper name will return then.
Well, first off, Wrigley was known as Weeghman Park when it opened in 1916 until 1920 when the Wrigley family bought the Cubs; it had this name until 1926 when it was renamed in honor of Wrigley. What we would find objectionable would be if it was renamed Chicago Tribune Park, since they own the Cubs now. So that example really doesn’t hold. Lasalle Bank doesn’t even own the theatre.
We all understand the reasoning behind selling naming rights, as it’s a lucrative business; two of Chicago’s other centers are the Cadillac Palace (originally New Palace) and Ford Center for the Performing Arts Oriental Theatre (Oriental Theatre). These are okay, because they respect the historical names of the theatre. Corporate sponsorship has become a necessary evil. It crosses the line, however, when it does not respect the historic name of the theatre. If you are restoring the rest of the theatre to its original state, why not also restore the name? If LaSalle Bank owned the theatre, as the Shuberts did, sure. But the name Majestic was chosen to reflect the palatial character of the theatre; it was lost when it was renamed Shubert. The Oriental or Palace might not have as much impact if they did not have these names reinforcing the nature of the architecture.
I can’t see what this has to do with liberalism or socialism, and it’s not a question of the theatre being in danger of demolition. It’s a question of preservation; if you’re going to restore it to its former glory, then do it.
From Russell Phillips' [url=http://www.photoeye.com/Gallery/forms/index.cfm?image=1&id=185859&imagePosition=1&Door=6&Portfolio=Portfolio1&Gallery=0>Galleries</a>:
As the sign (now gone) from the front notes, this was used as a filming location in The Color Of Money during its billiard days. I believe it is to be converted to a bar; the interior is entirely gutted.
Well, yeah, exactly, tradition should be preserved, that’s the whole point of theatre restoration. Otherwise, just go ahead and build a new theatre. I certainly have no problem with corporate sponsorship, it’s when corporate ego overtakes the focus of the theatre that it’s problematic. With the Palace and Oriental, the original names maintain the focus- nobody calls it the Ford Center, and I don’t think many call it the Cadillac. They were good comprimises between history and modern economic reality. If you refer to them as Palace, or Oriental, people know what you mean; it would be nice to have the Majestic name known again. But go ahead and let them name it Lasalle Bank Theatre for now; with the way banks are these days, odds are good that it will be something else in 10 years, and maybe the proper name will return then.
The lobby is actually intact in the center storefront. And the building to the rear is the former stage.
Well, first off, Wrigley was known as Weeghman Park when it opened in 1916 until 1920 when the Wrigley family bought the Cubs; it had this name until 1926 when it was renamed in honor of Wrigley. What we would find objectionable would be if it was renamed Chicago Tribune Park, since they own the Cubs now. So that example really doesn’t hold. Lasalle Bank doesn’t even own the theatre.
We all understand the reasoning behind selling naming rights, as it’s a lucrative business; two of Chicago’s other centers are the Cadillac Palace (originally New Palace) and Ford Center for the Performing Arts Oriental Theatre (Oriental Theatre). These are okay, because they respect the historical names of the theatre. Corporate sponsorship has become a necessary evil. It crosses the line, however, when it does not respect the historic name of the theatre. If you are restoring the rest of the theatre to its original state, why not also restore the name? If LaSalle Bank owned the theatre, as the Shuberts did, sure. But the name Majestic was chosen to reflect the palatial character of the theatre; it was lost when it was renamed Shubert. The Oriental or Palace might not have as much impact if they did not have these names reinforcing the nature of the architecture.
I can’t see what this has to do with liberalism or socialism, and it’s not a question of the theatre being in danger of demolition. It’s a question of preservation; if you’re going to restore it to its former glory, then do it.
Here is an early Decorators Supply Company photo of the Revelry
Here is an article on the Shubert project as well as the Chicago theater district at large.
Here is a 1949 photo of the Chicago and State-Lake by Stanley Kubrick
Here is a 1949 photo of the Chicago and State-Lake by Stanley Kubrick
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
A stunning auditorium view of the United Artists, 1985. Such a shame, it looks in good shape.
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Pickwick Lobby and Men’s Lounge, 1984
A STUNNING photo of the Pickwick’s Fire Curtain, 1985
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Paramount Auditorium, 1983
I seem to recall seeing somewhere that the Parkway closed when Landmark opened the Century Centre, but i’m not certain.
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Parkway Lobby, 1985
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
ORiental Lobby, Early 1980s
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Nortown Candy Counter, 1982
Nortown Upper Lobby, 1984
Nortown Auditorium Entrance, 1984
Nortown Auditorium From Balcony, 1983
Such a pity, the shape it’s in now. Life’s too short, if you e-mail me (see profile) I may be able to show you more recent photos.
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Music Box Lobby, Early 1980s
Music Box Auditorium, Early 1980s
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Congress/Mexico Theater Lobby, 1984
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Lake Theater Lobby, 1984
Lake Theater Auditorium, 1984
Here are renderings of what the Hinsdale would have looked like renovated
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Lobby, Early 1980s
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Esquire Ladies Lounge, 1984
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Coronado Lobby, Early 1980s
Coronado Auditorium, Early 1980s
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
Colony Theater Auditorium, Early 1980s
From Russell Phillips' Galleries:
1982 (pre-restoration) photos of:
Foyer w/ Vending Machine
Ladies Lounge
Auditorium Entry and Proscenium
Auditorium
From Russell Phillips' [url=http://www.photoeye.com/Gallery/forms/index.cfm?image=1&id=185859&imagePosition=1&Door=6&Portfolio=Portfolio1&Gallery=0>Galleries</a>:
1982 (pre-restoration) photos of:
Foyer w/ Vending Machine
Ladies Lounge
Auditorium Entry and Proscenium
Auditorium
Here is a 1985 photo of the auditorium, Of the lobby. Does anyone know what became of the organ? I saw it up fr sale on theatreorgans.com once, but I never heard where it sold to.