Ziegfeld Theatre

Originally planned for Cinerama but it was only installed briefly for THIS IS CINERAMA (70mm version) from 11 May 1973 until 12 August 1973

In February 1983 I was almost stuck in the Ziegfeld overnight. It was after a showing of GANDHI while a blizzard was socking New York. I was considering asking the Ziegfeld staff if I could sleep in the theater instead of going out into the brutal storm. I always regretted not having done it! New York's best theater by far.

How I can book a ticket (October 21)?

Can Someone help me a friend of me said something about "The famous yellow letters appeared in the Ziegfeld Theatre" and i gotta find out what it means

is the Harry Potter and the chamber of secrets premiere going to be in ziegfeld? if so how much is the ticket, and when is it?

I will be in New York from mon dec9 thru dec 13 and wanted to know if you will be previewing a movie that week . we always see a movie at your theatre. Please let me know thanks

Free Premiere TIX!!
http://home.attbi.com/~j.duponte/wsb/html/view.cgi-home.html-.html

Still a great place to see a movie and one of the all-too-few premier "opening night" theaters remaining in the city (the other being the similarly modern but plush Loew's Astor Plaza on West 44th). It features a very large yet simple streamlined modern auditorium with none of the baroque architectural flourishes of the classic movie palaces. Like the Astor Plaza, the balcony rises at the back of the theater, rather than being vaulted over the orchestra seats. Also like the Astor Plaza, the theater is located underground with the large structure visible from street level serving as a spacious lobby area. The seats are plush, red velvet and the giant screen is concealed behind a heavy curtain that still opens and closes between each showing.

Vintage photos and programs line the walls of the upper and lower lobbies, depicting former Ziegfield shows and performers from the roaring days of the famed Follies at the New Amsterdam and Selwyn Theaters on 42nd street. Sound and projection are state of the art.

The theater is on West 54th Street (an adjacent open plaza stretches to West 55th) just west of 6th Avenue on the north-east fringe of the theater district in midtown Manhattan.

The Ziegfeld is NOT underground. The lobby is at ground level and the theater is one level up.

To clarify just a bit further, the concession area and theater entrance are indeed one level up.

Once on the second level, the main auditorium is accessed through two short passageways just adjacent to the concession area. The passageways flow to the left and right, wrapping around the balcony seating area.

At their opposite ends, the passageways stop at the foot of the balcony seating, and from here, the auditorium slowly descends towards the large screen, which, presumably, is located at or near ground level.

(The open plaza that Ed mentioned is formed in part by the right wall of the auditorium.)

Went to a revival screening of "Funny Girl" here not too long ago...and during the intermission (remember those??), I laughed at the realization that it was the perfect place to see this film, as not only is Flo Ziegfeld portrayed in the film by Walter Pidgeon, but as previous posting writer Ed Salerno wrote, the antique programs of the Ziegfeld shows are behind glass in the lobby, and one can find the listings for Fanny Brice in some of them! Going back for the rest of the film after intermission, it was like having absorbed a DVD supplementary program!

An odd personal side note: the night John Lennon was killed less than 20 blocks north, I passed the rear of the theater that has its own vertical marquee, and the Ziegfeld was showing "Rock Show", a little known Paul McCartney concert film! I was drunk on sake from a nearby sushi bar, when i took in Paul's hitting-a-note look on the poster...and then i got home to the news. Freaky! (I think the film only showed that week.)

The Zieglfeld and the Astor Plaza were always a pale copy of the great NY cinemas. It's a great shame that they survived and the Rivoli, the Criterion, and the Warner Cinerama(Strand) were torn down. And this well after there was supposed to have been a renewed interest in historic theaters.

Vincent
I agree 100% not one of the real Broadway palaces survived even though many were open into the eighties or ninties. When you think of what was there and destroyed, The Rivoli, The Warner Cinerama, The Capitol, Loews State, The Criterion, The Paramount and to a lesser degree the Strand and DeMille. I am sure I am forgetting some but unlike other cities that have restored at least one palace, NY tears them down. Remember a few years ago when they had the idea to build above Radio City and keep the theate intact? Why could that idea not have been used for The Rivoli or State?

Well it was pretty heart breaking when the restored Lawrence of Arabia and My Fair Lady were playing at the Ziegfeld and the Criterion was sitting there in Times Square all chopped and falling apart. And this was at one time the top booking for the biggest films. I kept thinking why don't they turn the Ziegfeld into a Toys R Us and restore one of New Yorks great buildings. This was also one of New Yorks greatest blocks with the stupendous advertisements that floated and blinked above the Criterion day and night. Now these ads are straight from Tokyo and don't have a thing to do with NY.
When I saw Funny Girl at the Ziegfeld there seemed to be 20 minutes of ads before the film. I wonder if this happened when it first played the Criterion...

I'm sure there was not. I remember when I was a kid it was a big family outing when we all went to the Rivoli to see "The Sound of Music" with my parents and both grandmothers. How special those roadshows were. The only real place that compares at all is Radio City Music Hall and I cant remember the last time they had a movie or premiere there. I dont know why I missed "This is Cinerama" when the Ziegfeld first opened, I have always wanted to see this and doubt they will ever go to the trouble to run it again.

You're lucky you missed it it was lousy. One strip Cinerama and no curtain. Maybe some day NY will present a restored 3 strip Cinerama print. I mean NY has not see this in 40 years what are we waiting for? Must we fly to Seattle? Where are all the influential film lovers who can make this work? Maybe all they want to do is go to the Angelica. By the way I wish I could have seen SOM at the Rivoli.

A friend in LA saw all of the Cinerama revivials at The Dome some were 3 projector also. New York always seems like a step child for film. When is the last time anyone played 70mm? Although they are not as frequent anymore LA has had a few recent 70mm engagements.

The current Ziegfeld Theatre is a joke in comparison to the original one, which was designed by Joseph Urban and Thomas Lamb and first opened in February,1927 with the namesake producer's stage musical, "Rio Rita," followed later that year by "Show Boat." The 1,600-seat auditorium broke convention by being egg-shaped, with the stage opening at the narrow end. A huge and exquisitely-colored mural, "The Joy of Life," a stylized version of a medieval tapestry, covered the ceiling and side walls. To pay for its $2.5 million cost, Ziegfeld had to borrow from newspaper publisher William Randolph Hearst, who took control of the theatre when the producer died in 1932. Hearst rashly leased the Ziegfeld to Loew's Theatres, which for nearly ten years ran it as a movie house. Due to its location on the west side of Sixth Avenue between 54th and 55th Streets, the Ziegfeld was considered too far from the Broadway-Times Square theatre district for first-run product, so Loew's showed double features with program changes twice a week. Finally, in 1943, producer Billy Rose bought the Ziegfeld and returned it to stage plays, also repairing whatever damage Loew's had done to the interior decor. After more failures than hits, from 1955-63 Rose leased the theatre to NBC for use as a TV studio. Rose then once more tried stage bookings, but in 1965, the short-lived "Anya" proved the Ziegfeld's last attraction. Rose decided to sell the property to a real estate developer. Ironically, he died while negotiations were going on, but his executors finally made a deal for $17.1 million with Fisher Brothers, which demolished the Ziegfeld in September,1966 to make way for an office tower.

The saddest thing of all to me was UA's moronic closing of Cinema 150 in Syosset. It put the Zeigfeld to shame with a huge dimension 150 screen. It was totally renovated in the early 90's with all new seats, drapes, carpet, screen and lighting. They never advertised the theatre for what it was. I introduced friends in Manhattan to the place and they used to travel on the LIRR after that to see films there.

Robert, you're killing me. I'm getting bent all out of shape by what I missed. Why couldn't anybody save it? It was so recent. There is nothing left in NY!

Here is a link to a photo of part of the facade the original Ziegfeld Theatre.

I was there on the opening day of the theatre. They showed a few movies dealing with Ziegfeld. Included was "The Great Ziegfeld," and "The Ziegfeld Follies." A reception was held in the concession area where champagne was served. Many of the original Ziegfeld "girls" attended. Although senior citizens, they still maintained a poise & beauty that singled them out from the average woman...I also saw Lowell Thomas introduced in the theatre when they showed his "This Is Cinerama." It was owned by Walter Reed Theatres for a while. One should put this beautiful movie theatre in perspective and not get carried away, comparing it to other theatres.

Walter Reade (not Reed) was a pioneer movie exhibitor. By the time of the building of the new Ziegfeld, he had died and the circuit was run by his son, Walter Reade, Jr., who later died in middle age in a skiing accident. During the son's lifetime, the company also ran Continental Distributing, Inc., which acquired and released "foreign" films for showings in art theatres.

Sorry for the misspelling of Walter Reade, but it has been a long time since I have seen his name in print. Other premiers I saw during the 1970's at this theatre were THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT & TOMMY.

I agree you have to put the Ziegfeld in perspective. It is not a Movie Palace but its the best house to see a movie in NYC.Its to bad NYC didn't save any of there film palaces in Times Square with the exception of the Mark Hellinger(Warner Hollywood)which is now being used as a church. brucec

I worked as a projectionist at the D-150 in Syosset. We had been hearing for years that the landloard wanted UA out in order to redevelop the valuable property the theater stood on. We were told the rent was increased many times and finally to a point where UA could not operate the theater with a profit. It weas a sad time because we had already just recently lost the last of the major Long Island Roadshow theatres, the Syosset, which had been cut up into three theaters, or should we say screening rooms,and then torn down.While it may not have been a movie palace, the D-150 was still the best place on Long Island to see as well as hear a movie with it's amasing sound system (thanks Joe Kelly)

I seen Oliver Stones "The Doors" here in 1991. I was like 16 and snuck in the side exit. I walked in backwards and then reversed myself for the ultimate walk up the stairs against the crowd and managed to get into the theatre for the next showing.That was a fun memory from a fun time in life.

It is very disturbing that the majority of the grand Times Square theaters have been demolished, with the exception of the Astor Plaza.
The Rivoli, Criterion, State, Cinerama, Forum, Embassy, Victoria and even the more modern National, are GONE !
Instead, there are those bizaare 10 or 20 story multiplexs on 42 street. As far as New York theaters, the Astor Plaza, Ziegfeld and the Beekman are truly the last of single screens that I/m aware of.

The Astor Plaza is on its way out also.

I/m not surprised. Really pretty sickening.

We really need to protect our landmarks better.
A lot of old theaters around the country have either been closed or met with a worse fate.
Some of these theaters were classics!
The Ziegfeld not only belongs here, but it fits in well with everything around it.
I agree with Rubi.
Thank you.
George Vreeland Hill.

Just wanted to mention that the upper portion of the original Ziegfeld is also visible in the classic Men on Girder, 1930 photograph of Empire State Building construction workers taking a lunch break -- hundreds of feet in the air. (The theater can be seen at bottom center.)

The ironic thing is seeing the new Empire and the Loews on 42nd street, both of which try so hard to replicate the look of a genuine movie palace (well, at least on the outside--especially with the Loew's gargantuan vertical marquee). Then around the corner is the old marquee for the Paramount, and the theaters in the Virgin Megastore are called "Loews State." Just makes me sad, especially since the preservation movement was pretty much born here with the demolition of Penn Station.

Our ray of hope: the Loew's Kings still sits in brooklyn, relatively intact. As the burough gentrifies at an amazing pace, no doubt soon the affluent will discover the old houses of Flatbush, and it will be econimically viable to open the Kings again. I mean...did you ever think the Loew's Jersey in sketchy Jersey City (no offense) would actually ever be reopened?! It still amazes me.

Let's hope NYC will get a genuine operating movie palace once again--I'm afraid the Ziegfeld just doesn't cut it for me.

As I've mentioned about Loew's Kings, it is in the heart of probably the biggest West Indian community in this country, likewise, a renovated entertainment center for that community, and for that matter, everybody else, just seems so perfect. Especially with the municipal parking lot just behind it.
I realize that it would cost millions, buts its interesting, that the Kings just sits there, and has not been turned into a church, supermarket, or anything else.
I can only be hopeful that something positive will happen !

The original facade is also visible in the Jack Lemmon movie How to Murder Your Wife. If memory serves he is walking along a girder on one of the skycrapers going up on 6th Av and you can see it in the background.

Tell me I'm not paranoid, but there is nothing listed for the Ziegfeld on either Clearview's site or on Yahoo Movies. Has the grim reaper unexpectedly arrived???

Perhaps not, Andy. I just checked with the theater. The woman who answered the Ziegfeld's box office hotline said the theater is closed until March 5 for renovations.

Thanks Patrick --- I'll keep my fingers crossed for the best. With so few single-screeners left (and the recent news about the Astor), it's hard not to worry.

I couldn't agree more. It'd be a real shame to lose the Ziegfeld.

"Closed for renovations" is another way of saying that we're not doing enough business to keep open. The Ziegfeld has been known to cancel performances, especially during weekday matinee hours, when not even one person turned up to buy a ticket.

The ZIEGFELD should return to it's policy from back in the 1980's and maybe earlier, which is that whichever movie was playing there, could not show at another theater in Manhattan.
The last few times I went, the place was pretty filled up, so hopefully they are just doing some basic renovations, and keeping it as a single house.
When I saw CHICAGO there, there was not an empty seat to be found, and when we left, the line went down 54 st, up 6th av, and back up 55 street.
I/m cautiosly optimistic !

I am the Division Manager for Clearview---the Zieg is reopening on 3/5 with "Hidalgo"....not to worry, the Ziegfeld is here to stay!

Great to hear !!! Thank you for the good news, even I was getting a little worried..
Thanks again.

It's unfair to compare the Ziegfeld, built in the 1960s, with the movie palaces built in the 1920s and 30s. The fact is, plaster ornamentation, fancy carpeting, hidden basketball courts and cloud ceilings aside, those old theaters would be terrible places to see modern films with digital 5.1 channel soundtracks today, in spite of the fact that many of them played 70mm 6-track films.

Those old theaters were built with long reverberation times because amplifiers were very low powered in those days. Today, you want just the opposite: very short reverberation times to increase dialogue intelligibility and perceived channel separation within a broad sound field.

The Ziegfeld remains (IMHO) the best place to see a movie in NYC. My understanding is that it's not profitable, but it is used for many premiers and it's great that Clearview elects to keep it open as a single-screener. The single-screen Astor Plaza is closing soon and that is also a big loss.

If the Ziegfeld doesn't find a replacement soon for "Hidalgo," which is currently also playing at eight other Manhattan theatres, I suspect that it will be posting another "Closed for Renovations" sign.

The problem with most Manhattan Theatres is that they charge the full admission prices right from the time they open their doors. In older days and up until the late 1970's, There was a matinee price that changed at 5 P.M. to the evening price. Theatres that opened prior to 12 noon usually had an early bird special that changed to the matinee price at noon. This encouraged people to attend matinees since they could save a buck or so. Manhattan Theatres don't offer the so-called bargain matinee where usually shows starting before 2 P.M. are at the children's/senior price. It would make sense to do this since the theatres are empty anyway. This is why the corporate executives who run these chains have no idea of the art of running theatres and are not the showman and entrepeneurs of executives from past decades. After all, if there were a reduced admission for matinees, they would be able to sell more the over-priced concession items that they offer. How about it Clearview Cinemas in Manhattan, be the leader, not just a cable operator with theatres to sell home cable to customers.

I'm just guessing at this, but I suspect that all first-run theatres in Manhattan, at least, have an un-written agreement to not cut prices except in the cases of seniors and adults. Distributors probably also insist on it because the boxoffice takings will be less. In the boroughs outside Manhattan, some price-cutting does exist. The Center in Sunnyside, Queens, for example, charges only $3.50 (or possibly $4.50) every Tuesday from opening to closing.

Some of the Manhattan theatres in more fringe areas like The Metro and Olympia when they were Cineplex theatres did have bargain matinees. I susupect you are right about the unwritten laws about cutting prices. It would take a chain like Clearview to make a statement by doing so.

After a discouraging re-opening with "Hidalgo," the Ziegfeld is again "Closed for renovations." If it ever re-opens, it should be interesting to see what those "renovations" amounted to, if anything.

The Ziegfeld will reopen on 4/9 with "The Alamo".

If that's the new Disney movie, I predict another quick closure. The Ziegfeld might do better with an exclusive 70mm revival of the John Wayne epic of the same title.

I just spoke to someone at the Theatre and she said there are no "renovations" going on.She said people come but not enough to cover their operating expences.

It made me feel very sad.It may not be a "movie palace" like the Roxy,Paramount or Loews Paradise,but it is one the best places to see a movie in the city.Sitting in the balcony area with a full hosue as the rich heavy gold curtian parts and the movie magic begins. I have enjoyed many movies there.There is an atmosphere in a large one screen house that can't be mached even in the largest screening room in a multi-plex.

We will soon loose the Astor Plaza,which has the best sound system I have ever herd.If the Zig goes we will all be loosing the last great theatre in the greatest City in the world.

What great experiences I had watching APOCALYPSE NOW and the revival of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA in that empyrean. At the Ziegfeld on Sunday, October 15, 1972, I was the first person in line for the opening of FELLINI'S ROMA; so I bought the first ticket sold in America for that film! The night before I had seen the world premiere of Bertolucci's LAST TANGO IN PARIS (untrimmed)at the New York Film Festival. After the Fellini film I went to Truffaut's TWO ENGLISH GIRLS at the Fine Arts on 58th Street. Good weekend!

We might be looking at the destiny of the Ziegfeld from this point on. Much like the El Capitan in LA - which isn't open at all times, but instead is 'closed for renovations', sometimes for weeks-plus stretches - with the exception of not showing exclusively Disney product (unlike the Mouse House-owned El Capitan), maybe the Ziegfeld will only be open for special engagements (say, a three-week run of 'The Alamo' come April 9th, and then closing or moving directly onto the next appropriate big-screen-type film).

One quick thing to keep in mind when having noted in the past that the Ziegfeld was 'closed for renovations' - quite frequently (in the NY Post and Time Out NY, at least), when a theater closes, even if it's closing permanently, publications which run film listings will, as a placeholder, note that the theater is 'closed for renovations'. Why that's done I'm not quite sure (except perhaps for a lack of basic research) but I suspect it's at the discretion of the listings editor.

Most multiplexes have at least one screen change per week. The Ziegfeld seems doomed unless the industry comes to its rescue by permitting a weekly change of program. Each week, the Ziegfeld could be part of one of the new saturation openings. I don't see how that would hurt any rival theatres because the Ziegfeld really isn't near any that play mainstream movies (the artie Paris is probably the closest). With a new show every week, the Ziegfeld would stand a better chance of making a profit. That was what made theatres of old like Loew's Paradise and Loew's Valencia successful. As soon as they had to run their programs for more than a week, they became big losers.

I would assume that Clearview makes back some of its loses on the Zigfield when it four-walls the place for the many red-carpet world premieres it does for studios. The theater has a lot of prestige in the industry for these star-studded events, and I am sure that the theater is going anywhere...yet.

Any chance they could program some recent classics there. Would love to see a film like Titanic on that big screen. They should try to get the new Harry Potter movie. Bet they could make money showing that film.

Lets get Clearview to put in Cinerama (3proj) and give the east coast a chance to see the magic the west coast sees at the dome.

Remember that when the Ziegfeld showed Cinerama it was the one strip version which I assume was some form of 70mm. They didn't even have a curtain to give you the impression of an everexpanding screen. Also the fact that there is no back to the orchestra only an aisle separating it from the elevated loge would probably preclude it from the proper presentation of Cinerama unless it was feasible to project it from the very back.

That could be an issue but I seem to remember seeing a picture of a Cinerama theatre where they shot all three projectors from an elevated booth. Does anyone else know? Also what did the Zeigfeld look like when they ran "This is Cinerama". Was it a screen hung in front of the one now? Also without curtains it must have looked really odd. Back then all theatres still had curtains even the cut up ones.

Let's not be too hard on Clearview or any other operators of movie houses these days; the cut-throat competition by the movie makers and distributors now spell the rules by which exhibitors (movie houses) live! The distributors are in cahoots with the movie makers, of course, and now make exhibitors sign huge, terrible contracts that make the distributors the virtual owners of the theatres, and almost no theatres can play what they want when they want. The 'big fish' will always seek ways to eat the 'little fish' and now with DVD/tapes out almost as soon as the title appears ont he screen, the theatres are mere fodder for the big fish. Have sympathy. (And read all about it at www.bigscreenbiz.com)

The 1973 re-issue of "This is Cinerama" was a single strip 70MM version which slightly cropped the original image. The three Cinerama theatres here had ground floor booths. To put Cinerama into the Ziegfeld, you would cover the front half of the theatre with drapes and a larger curved screen. The Ziegfeld was not designed for those larger aspect ratio films.

It was a curved screen in front of the current one and it was odd. In place of a curtain there were simply lights reflected on the screen. Read Vincent Canby in the NYT Arts and Leisure from this time('73.)He wrote a Sunday piece about how disappointing the presentation was.
I'm surprised Lowell even agreed to it.

Concerning what Jim wrote the proper presentation of classic films can only done now as a not for profit enterprise. It is now a lost art like ballet or opera and needs the support of those who feel passionate about it and have money or time. We should have great presentations of Lawrence or How the West Was Won just as one goes to the Met to hear Tosca or see Sleeping Beauty.
Why do people find this such an odd idea and not worthy of consideration? What's wrong with a film museum with a truly magnificent screen that can properly show 70mm, Todd AO and Cinerama? The visceral impact is one of the greatest joys of moviegoing.

What are your thoughts on The Gramercy? That theatre would be convertable to Cinerama. MOMA is leaving there but again it would take people with alot of money to create a film museum.

Three strip is the only way to see Cinerama. Still remember seeing How The West Was Won in that format. They would have to cut half the seats out of the Ziegfeld to show three strip and they would never do that.

Three strip is the only way to see Cinerama. Still remember seeing How The West Was Won in that format. They would have to cut half the seats out of the Ziegfeld to show three strip and they would never do that.

I think the Ziegfeld will be around for awhile. The studios use it for all the major premieres and is the only one with the capacity for such premieres unless they start using Radio City again.There are plenty of big summer popcorn movies coming to keep the Ziegfeld open. I think New Yorkers should support Loews Jersey when they show films because here is a true movie palace.brucec

"Troy" premiere was here tonight (5/10/04.

What is the deal with the Ziegfeld right now?? Is it going to stay closed and be used only for premieres? It seems that they won't be playing new releases since they're playing at all the multiplexes anyway.

Will be re-opening on May 28th with 'The Day After Tomorrow'

Sometimes theatres close when there is a lack of real product or they do maintenance to the theatre before the busy time of the year. Back in the golden days, some of the big Times Square houses closed for short periods of time because of product and maintenance.

Last night I went to see The Day After Tomorrow at the Ziegfeld.There were about 700 there for the 7:oopm show.I was struk be the beauty if this theatre with its red velvet on the walls and the thick yellow curtian that covers the screen.

I sat in the "balcony area dead center.The sound and projection was 10++ the curtian closing and opening adds to the movie experience.

Watching a movie about the New York City getting hit by natures furry in the the LAST movie palace in NEW YORK was BREATHTAKING!!

I was happy to learn the Ziegfeld is presenting Day after Tommorrow in 35mm film format rather than with Digital projection, which the theatre had installed and recently removed. I want to see movies on film and no other way. Digital projection is ok I guess on a small screen but NOT on the Ziegfeld screen.

I am really sorry to hear that the Ziegfeld is not open as much as it used to be. I had no idea. I admidt, I haven't been there in a while, but when in Manhattan, and in the mood for a movie, I always used to check to see what was at the Ziegfeld first, before going to a movie.
The last movie I saw there was "A Thin Red Line". I have seen many movies there, and nothing beats the screen there. It's a great "old feel" theater.

The Ziegfeld is open---we're now showing "The Terminal" and will open "I, Robot" there on 7/14.

That's great to hear. I didn't think anything other than that till reading this thread, so was a bit sad at first.
I no longer live in Brooklyn, so don't go to the Ziegfeld as much as I used to. I have been planning to see "The Terminal" anyway, and I think your post just made me plan a trip to the city with a friend, with a sidetrip to see "The Terminal" at a certain theater...

Joe....do you work at the Ziegfeld?? Will there be any special programs coming up like restored epics? classic movies? or will it just be the standard releases?? also are 70MM films that were great at the Ziegfeld now kaput??

Re: Digital projection ...I had no idea the Ziegfeld removed their equipment....whic is a good idea, I saw Attack of the Clones in digital there and was extremely unimpressed...Last year I saw Lawrence of Arabia in 70MM and was blown away. The Ziegfeld is one of THE best theaters in the country, I hope they don't give in to the masses and just play the contemporary crap. It would be great to see some re-releases on that big screen. It's something to look into. Go to the Astor Plaza discussion and you'll see what I mean. If the Ziegfeld staged some kind of retro festival...it would do big business...

Rhett wrote: If the Ziegfeld staged some kind of retro festival...it would do big business...

That's probably true! Going back through the NY Times, especially during the 1970s, The Ziegfeld and Radio City Music Hall ran either film retrospectives or special engagements of the "biggies;" "Gone With The Wind (in its tilt-and-scan psuedo-widescreen format), "Doctor Zhivago," and "2001: A Space Odyssey." There were also runs of "The Sound Of Music" and "The Bible...In The Beginning."

But by the 1980s, the only 70mm re-issues around Manhattan you could see were of the "Star Wars" Trilogy and "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" (not that I would be complaining if I lived in Manhattan at that time!)...and return engagements of "Poltergeist," "Rocky III," "Annie" and "Gandhi." Of course, there was the fantastic re-issue of "Lawrence Of Arabia" in 1989. There were a few in the 1990s, but few and far between.

I've never had much luck with the Ziegfeld. I saw CLOSE ENCOUNTERS there, and every other reel was out of focus. Two years later, I went back to see APOCALYPSE NOW -- and every other reel was out of focus. I haven't been back.

That's too bad Ken, you must've had the bad luck days when you went or just bad coincidence. I saw Apocalypse Now in 70MM twice at the Ziegfeld, and it was the best experience. What you comment on is basically what happens at mostly all theaters these days because the theaters are run by hacks with no feel for the moviegoing experience or teenage dunces.

Too true. The half of Apocalypse Now I saw in focus was a stunning experience.

I worked for Century Theatres in the 60s (I was an usher at the Queens) back in the days of single-screen theatres, union projectionists operating carbon-arc projectors, managers who regularly checked image and sound, and ushers who maintained law & order. Today that sounds like an impossible paradise. The only theatre I've been in recently that upholds these standards is Cinestudio in Hartford CT.

The Zieg does employ union projectionists, full time!

Just my luck I draw the one who's cross-eyed.

Funny Ken.....your so right though. There's nothing worse than having a lousy premiere movie experience. I bet everytime you think about Apocalypse Now, you remember it as blurry.

I agree with your assessment of the golden times of movie theaters. My very first job was at a theater in NJ as an Usher. I kept law and order. Back when there where smoking sections. The projectionista (all union) were great guys and back then when a picture went out of frame or out of focus, it was quickly repaired. You didn't have to wait 5 minutes, get out of your seat, trek though an entire multiplex to find some kid at the candy counter and tell them to fix it. Those were the days.

Ken F: Are you familiar with the Century Plainview on Long Island? It ran some 70mm during the '70s and I'm curious to find out anymore information about it. There is a Plainview theater listed here on this site, but there's not much info on it. Thanks.

Indeed, times have changed in regards to getting a "cinematic" experience anymore. Though it's not totally absent, film presentation quality is subpar these days and has been for a long time now. At least (from my memory), there was greater care in how films were presented in the finer theaters in my area during the 1970s & most of the 1980s.

I could go to an AMC or one of the mall UA theaters in Orange County and be guarenteed that a film would look terrible, sound terrible and the screen would be very tiny. But if I went to the Orange Cinedome, Edwards "Big" Newport and some of the better Edwards theatres, I would usually be given a good-to-great presentation. There were times when the Dolby Stereo soundtrack, advertised as such in the newspaper, wasn't turned on. There were times when the picture would *briefly* be out-of-focus, but overall, I kept attending those theatres because of their A) Ability to put on a good show, B) Ability to get either Dolby Stereo or better yet, 70mm prints, and C) Ability to maintain and upgrade their theatres.

Now we're given hype on how big the screens are nowadays, but in truth, the screens are big for 1.85:1 films, then the masking is brought down on the screen to fit in a 2.39:1 frame. This method truly takes out the scope in 'scope! Most shows on a Friday or Saturday night are sold-old, even when the film is on five screens (in bigger auditoriums, too). And we're paying much higher prices at the box office and especially at the snack bar for less presentation-wise.

Now, the Cinedome is gone and the property in sat on for 30 years still remains empty while throngs of teens attend the oversized and sterile AMC and Century (who owned the Cinedome) megaplexes down the street. Big Newport and its chain, Edwards, is now a part of Regal. The Big 1100+ auditorium (I know, nothing compared to the old NYC palaces :)) was refurbished, but the last time I was there, Regal was showing those annoying digital pre-show video ads. And most of the Edwards theaters have gone downhill or have been shuttered.

To Ken F: I too remember the Plainview, having worked there for a few years. unfortunatly it is gone now having been converted into office space. It was run by Century theatres, the best cicruit in it's day. The booth had three Century JJ 35/70 projectors with Peerless corelight carbon arc lamps. Many 70mm roadshow engaements like "Ben Hur" were presented there. The last 70mm I believe was a re-issue of "sound Of Music". Like all Century theatres, the first show of the day began with a showing of the National Anthum.

The first 70mm film I saw at the Ziegfeld was A Star Is Born in 1976. I rememebr being totally upset because WB masked off the film as if it was filmed as a flat.Other films were done the same way Altered States adn ET. The first true 70mm I saw at the Ziegfeld was The Muppet Movie. After that I saw Fame in 70mm. To me if a film is done in 70mm than it should be shown in widescreen not masked off than called 70mm. Anybody else have any other comments on this?

But those films were blow up which is simply a marketing tool. To have seen "true" 70mm at the Ziegfeld recently you would have had to have seen Lawrence and Lady.

The Ziegfeld should show Lady again for its 40th anniversary in the fall and Music in the spring in Todd AO for its birthday. And get Wise to come to New York to celebrate its world premiere in New York at the Rivoli 40 years ago.

70mm does not necessarily mean full widescreen. All 70mm indicates is that the projected film is 70mm wide.

70mm presentations were not just for width. Some directors chose 70mm for better quality 6-channel sound. Coppola's ONE FROM THE HEART was framed at 1.37 and it had at least one 70mm print.

STAR IS BORN, ALTERED STATES and ET were all 1.85 films.

I know that a lot of film studios don't want to do 70mm anymore becuase they said when it does to DVD or video or for TV they loose to much.

Thanks Vito for the information on the Plainview. Do you remember how many seats the theater had?

In regards to some 70mm films being "flat," a number of films shot in the 35mm 1.85:1 aspect ratio were blown up to 70mm. Some include "Days Of Heaven," "Lethal Weapon," "Empire Of The Sun," "Who Framed Roger Rabbit," "Stakeout," "Adventures In Babysitting," "Good Morning, Vietnam," "Batman," and the list goes on. Tati's "Play Time" was filmed in 65mm, but masked for 1.85:1 projection.

Many studios, but mostly directors I think, like to shoot safe for eventual television broadcast. This is a phenomenon that has occured for years. Directors like Sidney Pollack have shied away from shooting in widescreen because of their horror of seeing their beautiful compositions ruined on television. But with the long time practice of letterboxing available since the days of Laser Disc and now DVD, there's no reason why some directors can't choose widescreen again.

There are numerous reasons for the lack of shooting in 65mm for commercial films. There is a perceived notion that it's more expensive and cumbersome than shooting in 35mm and now digital. Truth is in the scheme of a movie's budget, shooting in 65mm isn't that expensive. And considering that studios are paying for digital intermediates to improve picture quality on Super 35mm films, and that Warner Bros. spent a considerable amount on IMAX DMR prints of "Harry Potter 3," the arguement against shooting in 65mm is quite ridiculous.

Yes Vincent, it would be great to see "My Fair Lady" and "The Sound Of Music" at the Ziegfeld for their anniversaries. In fact, how about a Todd-AO 50th Anniversary Festival? "The Sound Of Music," "Hello, Dolly," and "Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines" have been restored by 20th Century Fox. Heck, I'd even see a 70mm print of "South Pacific."

Joe Masher what is the possibility of this?

It's entirely possible and something we've been talking about....for now it's "The Terminal" followed next month by "I, Robot".

I honestly do not remember the number of seats the Plainview had. The orchestra had at least 800 and the balcony another 300 so perhaps 1100 in all.

ZIEGFELD THEATRE [1969- ]
54TH STREET
NEW YORK, NY
70mm 6-Channel Stereo [1969]
Marooned [1969]
Gone With The Wind (70mm) [1970]
The Bible ... In The Beginning [1970]
The Sound of Music [1970]
Doctor Zhivago [1970]
Ryan's Daughter [1970]
Cleopatra [1971] (186 mins.)
2001 a space odyssey (70mm) [1972]
This Is Cinerama (70mm) [1973]
Earthquake (Sensurround) [1974]
Rollerball [1975]
The Ten Commandments [1975]
Close Encounters of the Third Kind [1977]
Apocalypse Now [1979]
Quest For Fire [1982]
Gandhi [1982]
Brainstorm [1983]
Antarctica [1984]
A Passage To India [1984]
Lawrence of Arabia [1988]
The Abyss [1989]
Spartacus [1991]
My Fair Lady [1994]
Vertigo [1996]

ZIEGFELD THEATRE [1969- ]
54TH STREET
NEW YORK, NY
70mm 6-Channel Stereo [1969]
Marooned [1969]
Gone With The Wind (70mm) [1970]*
The Bible ... In The Beginning [1970]*
The Sound of Music [1970]*
Doctor Zhivago [1970]*
Ryan's Daughter [1970]
Cleopatra [1971] (186 mins.)
2001 a space odyssey (70mm) [1972]**
This Is Cinerama (70mm) [1973]
Earthquake (Sensurround) [1974]***
Rollerball [1975]
The Ten Commandments [1975]***
Close Encounters of the Third Kind [1977]
Apocalypse Now [1979]
Quest For Fire [1982]
Gandhi [1982]
Brainstorm [1983]
Antarctica [1984]***
A Passage To India [1984]***
Lawrence of Arabia [1988]****
The Abyss [1989]
Spartacus [1991]
My Fair Lady [1994]
Vertigo [1996]

Thanks Archives for the Ziegfeld titles in 70mm. I have some additional notes on some of the titles. I also have some additions.

*These titles were part of the "4 For The Ziegfeld" series.

**I don't recall finding a "2001: A Space Odyssey" re-issue in 1972 in the NY Times, but I do have records of it playing in 1970, 1974, 1975 & 2001/2002. Do you have an opening date for the 1972 engagement?

***These titles were shown in 35mm. "Earthquake" seemed to have had 70mm engagements around the world, except for the U.S. "The Ten Commandments" did have some 70mm engagements, but not in NYC at that time, unless you have some info on that. Thanks.

****"Lawrence Of Arabia" was re-issued in 1971 at the [UA] Rivoli (though, a 70mm print is unconfirmed) and in 1989 in its restored version.

Some additional titles that played at The Ziegfeld in 70mm:

That's Entertainment [1974]
The Jolson Story [1975]
That's Entertainment, Part 2 [1976]
The Return Of A Man Called Horse [1976]
A Star Is Born [1976]
Tommy [1977/Re-issue]
Grease [1978]
The Muppet Movie [1979]
The Rose [1979]
Saturn 3 [1980/70mm presentation unconfirmed--Advertised February 10, 14, 15 & 17 only]
Fame [1980]
Can't Stop The Music [1980]
Raise The Titanic [1980]
Close Encounters Of The Third Kind "Special Edition" [1981--originally opened at the New York Twin on August 8, 1980]
The Jazz Singer [1980]
Grease 2 [1982]
Raiders Of The Lost Ark [1982/Re-issue]
Pink Floyd The Wall [1982]
Yes, Georgio [1982]
Staying Alive [1983]

--through mid-1985

Bill I beleive the '71 reissue of Lawrence at the Rivoli was in 70mm but it was cut so badly to allow more frequent performances that the NY Times published a piece in its Arts and Leisure section detailing the mauling. Reading this kept me from going.

Joe Masher that's great news. With a lot of publicity and increasing interest in Todd AO and 70mm you should get some sizeable crowds and you won't have to share the films with anybody else like you have to with Terminal. But is there any way to get rid of the detritus now shown before the film. When you showed Lady, Spartucus and Lawrence years ago it was so classy.

Joe Masher is the guy in here we need to seduce...Joe, do you need a new car??

I think it's great someone affiliated with the Ziegfeld is in on this dialogue..it gives all us film lovers hope, especially that Joe is a member here. I think it'd be great to see a 70MM fest at Ziegfeld, especially since the Astor is going going.....

BTW...does anyone know if there are any DVD's or Laserdiscs that were mastered from a 70MM print??

Rhett:

You ask about Laserdisc remasters from 70mm prints.

STAR!, the 1994 pressing of SOUTH PACIFIC and OKLAHOMA, 1991 pressing of WEST SIDE STORY, Box set of CLEOPATRA,SOUND of MUSIC,MY FAIR LADY were all from the 70mm masters. It is unclear whether MGM used the 70mm master of GOODBYE MR.CHIPS for the laserdisc.

Another two exceptionally high quailty discs were the Box set of THE KING AND I and the 1991 pressing of CAROUSEL both from the CinemaScope 55 masters.

I have been following with great interest all the comments about 70mm film presentations. Being from Lancaster, PA I have never attended a film at the Ziegfeld. However, back in the good old days of movie going I did patronize the Loew's Capitol, Loew's State (prior to "piggybacking"), Criterion, Rivoli, Warner, DeMille Theatres on visits to NYC and the desire to see "70MM Roadshow presentations." When NYC was not on the plans, there was always the center city Philadelphia Theatres - Boyd, Stanley, Fox, Randolph, Goldman, Midtown. Now all but the Boyd in Phila. and DeMille in NYC are history. Count me in as a possible attendee of 70MM films at the Ziegfeld. I would love to sit in a theatre, actually see the curtains open as the lights dim, and then see a "giant screen presentation." If anyone gets to the Central Penna. area, I would strongly suggest you check out the Allen Theatre in Annville, Pa. It was a small town run down theatre that a theatre lover restored. It actually has a curtain that "hides" the screen. And, although, it may not be a 70MM size screen, it is certainly the largest in the area that we have available. Anyway, bring back the old days when movie going meant more than sitting in a shoebox. The show started at the box office!

Remember the days when presented in 70 mm and Dolby stereo actually meant something. I still remember seeing Indiana Jones and the temple of doom in 1984, what a thrill! I wish we could go back to those days of showmanship by movie theatres.

Here's a list of 65mm film-to-tape transfers for Laser Disc/DVD:

2001: A Space Odyssey
Baraka
Chitty Chitty Bang Bang
The Greatest Story Ever Told
The Hallelujah Trail
Hello, Dolly!
Lawrence Of Arabia
Oklahoma!
The Sound Of Music
South Pacific
Spartacus
Star!
Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines
Tron
West Side Story

-courtesy of Mike Coate in Widescreen Review's new "The Ultimate Widescreen DVD Movie Guide"

Thanks Bill....BTW....how's your NJ list of 70MM presentations coming?? when will it be available?

Thanks also to Porter.

Hi Rhett and fellow readers of Cinema Treasures:

We are aiming for sometime in July or early August for the list to be finished and posted.

Manhattan is pretty well finished. Mike just came back from a short trip to NYC this week and filled in details for missing Long Island engagements (from 1955 to about 1974). He is scheduled to go back to the NYC and NJ next month and will fill in NJ engagements during that same time period. As you know, a lot of 70mm engagements weren't advertised in the NY Times for NJ and Long Island until around 1974 with a re-issue of "Gone With The Wind."

We hope you'll enjoy this list when it's published. I was going back on my notes and realized we actually started this project in 2002! There's quite a bit of 70mm presentation that occurred in Manhattan, Long Island and Northern New Jersey. There will be pictures and ads in the publication, as well. Thanks!

If I remember correctly, when the theatre opened in 1969 weekend evening performances were supposed to be attended with men with sports coats and ties only and women in dresses, but I think this practice only lasted a week or two.

In remembrance of Marlon Brando, I can't help but remember 8/15/79, the premiere of "Apocalypse Now". Reserved seats were $5.00. I remember the anticipation through the whole film, waiting for Brando to come o, you could feel it in the audience.

In the opening scene, I actually thought there might be a band with a tamboreen (spelling?) behind the screen and that there might be a helicopter in the theater. I had never seen or heard anything like it, all in 70MM 6-track stereo. I can't believe it was 25 years ago, it seems like yesterday. It's too bad the Ziegfeld doesn't show 70MM flims anymore. It was grand theater presentation.

70mm is a dead issue. Clearview will never spend the $$$ necessary to do it right. Trust me- the Dolan's don't give a damn and never will.

JTH...it is a damn shame too. There is nothing like a 70MM presentation, that will even make bad movies a fine movie memoriy. I saw Staying Alive in 70MM , it was great. It seems that they are relying on this Digital Projection as the new thing and I must tell you I am unimpressed. I saw Attack of the Clones (at the Ziegfeld) in Digital Projection and I was not awed at all. Give me a good 35MM print anyday. In fact the 35MM I saw of Attack of Clones was much better than the digital.

I saw Lawrence of Arabia in 2002 at Ziegfeld in 70MM. AWESOME. Little did I realize that that would be the last one. Movies, as well as presentations are consistently going downhill, thanks to the youth oriented, quick buck making garbage of today.

The interior of the Ziegfeld and its lobby are featured in the last scenes of Woody Allen's "Celebrity" back in '98, one of the most underrated movies I can think of. (Allen's masterpieces weren't the comparatively tame "Annie Hall" and "Manhattan" back in '77 and '79, they were the incendiary "Deconsructing Harry" and "Celebrity" twenty years later.) Oddly, though, the movie didn't run at the Ziegfeld (which would have been a truly bizarre experience); the Brad Pitt flop "Meet Joe Black" ran there at the time instead.

Camden

Great place. I worked here in the early 90's. It had to be 1990 when Prince's "Graffiti Bridge" premiered. It is my most memorable moment. Prince is my favorite singer and the manager knew this. So she let me go into the theater and give him a Coke. When I walked up to him I boasted about how big of a fan I was. He just giggled and thanked me for the Coke. I came back a lot of times to see "Planet of the Apes", all the Star Wars movies and many more films. I love this place.

I urge everyone to write the Ziegfeld and request that they show a 70mm print of My Fair Lady to celebrate it's 40th anniversary in October.
Also request that they hold a Todd AO 50th Anniversary festival next year kicking it off with a Todd AO print of Sound of Music to celebrate its 40th birthday.
I hope that Robert Wise is already preparing prints for this milestone.
No Sing-a-alongs please though I went to the finale night of this at the Ziegfeld and it was one of the best cinema experieces. It was demented and people behaved as if they were at an absolutely electrifying rock concert. Except of course during the wedding when the entire audience stood in respectful silence as Maria walked down the aisle.

Ziegfeld Theatre is the name, not The Ziegfeld Theatre. See the marquee and wall sign in the photograph for proof of that.

Come on guys, you know it upsets Warren when you ad THE to a theatre name. He has told us often enough :)

I agree that we need to be more sensitive to The Warren.

Ooops --- all in good humor. Really!

Hey guys lay off Warren!
Vito, when are we getting those 1st Mezz, 1st row center tickets to the basketball games at the Music Hall? Spike Lee wants to come too! And we all know what a great filmmaker he is and what a great contribution he's made to american culture.

This is all a revelation to me. On a dollar bill it says "The United States of America" but on a quarter it says only "United States of America." In which of these places do I live? I feel woozy.

Vincent, my Italian heritage says it like this,
"I got ya front row tickets rii here" :)
I actually watched a bit of the game on MSN Friday, it's sorta like a car wreck you pass on the highway, some how you just have to stop and look at it. They had chairs set up in the wings for people to watch the carnage, oops, I mean game and the players were actually gushing about playing on the worlds greatest stage. The whole thing made me sick.

Vito, I can't I just can't.It would take me years to get the image out of my head, if ever.
Maybe if they have a swimming competition using a pool on stage which they can then use for the old Eleanor Holmes number.

Does anybody know how to get Shows and Dates and Tickets to movie premieres at Ziegfeld??

Movie Premieres are by invite only from the film distributors. They rent the Zieg from us for their event.

Isnt there a way when you or anyone can stand outside to see the red carpet part of the premiere?

How do we get Cinema Treasures to update the status of this theater to open. Why it is showing closed/renovationg is beyond me.

Every few days they go through the comments people make and update info on theatres on the site.

Great. It's been that way ever since I have been on Cinema Treasures.

Does anybody know how to be at the red carpet part of movie premieres?

You might try to find out from the theatre itself or watch for new reports on major film opening there. The Chinese Theatre lists up and coming events at their parent companies web site Mann Theatres.

http://www.manntheatres.com/

The heading for the Ziegfeld does not list the architect, and I didn't see it in all the comments. It was probably the same architect who designed the Burlington House (or whatever they are calling the office building fronting on Sixth Ave. these days), since the theatre was part of that development. However, the original interiors of this Ziegfeld were by Dolly Reade (Mrs. Walter Reade, Jr.) She also redecorated several other Walter Reade theatres.

I haven't been in the Ziegfeld recently. Are the lobby display cases with relics of the legendary "Ziegfeld Era" still there? I believe that most of the contents were on loan from the Ziegfeld Club, which is a charitable group that helps ex-showgirls and other showbiz old-timers.

Yes, the lobby cases are exactly as they were.

Will there be a way to find out about the time and date of the "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow Premiere" so that fans can at least attend the red carpet portion of the event? I don't see why fans should be kept in the dark without any details concerning these events, because after all, isn't the purpose of a glamorous movie premiere to provide the studio and actors a chance to promote their movies?!?

The West Coast premiere of "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" is set for Sept. 14th, at the Chinese Theatre. You should be calling Paramount Publicity to see if there is a New York premiere of the picture. Because they are the ones that are renting the theatres for premieres. Because it's the publicity departments job to let the press and public known about these events, not the Ziegfeld's. The Ziegfeld Theatre is just a rental location for the event.

Thank you William. It is the NY premiere that I'm looking for; I forgot to mention it. I'm looking for Paramount's number now, and with your help I hope I'll be able to find out about the premiere. Coming from Seattle and only having lived in NY for about a year, I have never seen a "classic" theater such as the Ziegfeld. It is for this reason that I am so curious about finding the date of the "Sky Captain" premiere, even if it is not at the Ziegfeld itself. That, and possibly catching a glimpse of Angelina Jolie. Again, thanks for your help!

Love this movie theater because I proposed to my wife there two days after Christmas, 2002, right before seeing "Chicago." I went to the concession stand, bought a huge bucket of popcorn, wrapped the ring box in napkins and stuck it down near the top. I got to the seat, she went to grab a handful and pulled out the box. I got down on one knee and said, "Jill, I love you so much. I want to spend the rest of my life with you." Of course, she said yes and everybody around us applauded....

....until this jerk is standing behind me, saying "EXCUSE ME, CAN YOU PLEASE MOVE OUT OF THE WAY!?" The rest of the audience around us started yelling at him. "Hey, shuddup, buddy...he's proposing to his girlfriend!" "Yeah, you moron!"

Ah, this is why I'm proud to be a New Yorker.

You are a real winning combo,CaptRonLI....a New Yorker and a romantic too. Keep up the romance.

Dbrusser, in my humble opinion, the Ziegfeld is not a "classic" movie theatre. If you want to see one of those, you should go to the Times Square Church on West 51st Street, just off Broadway, which is open to everyone during church services. This theatre was originally known as the Hollywood and designed by Thomas W. Lamb, one of the masters. And if you're willing to take a subway or bus uptown, visit the ex-Loew's 175th Street, an even larger movie palace and also designed by Lamb. It's also a church and open to the public during services.

Dear Cinema Treasures Readers,

After years of research, Michael Coate and I are proud to announce that "70mm In NY" has been posted on our site, www.fromscripttodvd.com

To navigate directly to this part of the site, copy and paste the following into your browser:

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_new_york_main_page.htm

We've included a number of interesting features about "70mm In NY," including an introductory article about the history of 70mm In NY; a theatre list of 70mm equipped houses; a list of the longest running 70mm engagements in NY, and much, much more.

We feel the most exciting part of the site is the list of 70mm engagements. You can click on any year from 1955 through 2004 and find out information on which films played in the NYC-region in 70mm.

As we've seen on this wonderful site, there are quite a few 70mm fans from the New York/New Jersey region, and we hope that you will enjoy this look back on 70mm presentation in your area.

There are some sections of "70mm In NY" that are coming soon, so we please check back.

We encourage your feedback.

Best regards,
William Kallay
Michael Coate
"70mm In NY"

Just a few quick notes about Walter Reade, Jr. and his Ziegfeld. First, oldtimers might remember Reade as the first person Skouras and Fox went after legally in 1954 when Reade refused to run Fox scope films with 4-track mag. He had purchased so-called "integrators" which mixed the 4 channels down into one thus obviating the need and expense of 2 extra stage speakers as well as surrounds. For a number of years, Reade, as an executive of Allied States (independent theatre owner organization) fervently went tooth-and-nail against the Fox 4-channel policy. This is odd considering that this is the same man who a few short years later foisted the ridiculous AromaRama on a largely uninterested world. Later, his distribution arm, Continental, bought the rights to a 70mm documentary. Reade had it reprinted in something called "Wonderama" and ran the film as "Mediterranean Holiday" in a few houses in North Jersey. He even released it "in Cinerama" where it played the Warner for a short period. Later on, Reade was elected to the Board of Directors of Cinerama, Inc. and announced that Cinerama would run at his newly reopened DeMille. This never happened. In 1967, when plans for the Ziegfeld were announced, he claimed it would, too, be a 70mm Cinerama house. Also, according to a press release in the NY Times 12/22/67, "the theater will require formal attire on Saturday nights."
As for the 70mm version of "This Is Cinerama," the free-standing screen (measuring 27x63 feet) stood where the main curtain - which had to be removed - was located. Lights were shown on the screen to represent curtains, even to the extent of "draping" the prologue. This was a trick which was used for a time at the Times Square Paramount when the width of the original VistaVision screen left no room for screen curtains or masking.

Yep the '73 presentation of Cinerma was pretty bad(and never having seen a Cinerama movie I was looking forward to it. 63 feet for Cinerama and no curtain?!) Check out Vincent Canby Sunday Arts and Leisure piece in the Times when it came out. Will someone in New York please do it right?

Sad to say New York will probably never see Cinerama again :(

Don't give up hope. Keep in mind that back in 1995 somebody in Dayton, Ohio was probably saying "sad to say Dayton will probably never see Cinerama again."

As to Vincent's lament above. "63 feet for Cinerama and no curtain!". There were a number of CineMiracle presentations on screens in excess of 80 (EIGHTY) feet with no curtains. Not that I approve, but I'd take it today in a "New York heartbeat"!

If a screen were 80 feet I'd take it as well in a heartbeat!

Digital projection, which had been removed, has been returned to the Ziegfeld. :(

I had the pleasure of seeing a couple films in DLP at the Ziegfeld and did not see any problems with it. Seeing that 70mm seems to be a thing of history I don't see a problem with viewing an unscratched print of a film.
I am hoping that the Ziegeld will be showing 'The Phantom of the Opera' during the Christmas holidays. This would be the perfect theater in NYC for this engagement.

I have never seen anything in DLP, how does it compare?

DLP is O.K.; I've never been particularly blown away by it - I personally don't have any issues with celluloid, I suppose due to my familiarity with it and the vast majority of the 150-170 films I see per year in theatres which AREN'T presented in DLP - but that's just one man's perspective.

Face it: digital is the wave of the future. The only thing that's keeping it from sweeping through all theaters is who will pay for the upgrades? The theater owners or the studios? There was an aritcle in the NYTimes a few months ago about this. From what I've heard, the image is pristine but lacks the "glow" that comes from the celluloid and the projectors lamp.

I have mixed feelings about it. As much as I love the celluloid, there have been a lot of theaters where the image is not what it should be. Yes, it could be the theater's management trying to save a few bucks but it also might be because of the film's poor quality after having been run through so many times.

From what I understand, the term "silver screen" came from the projector's light source which produced a kind of shimmer to the image. With digital, we'll get that pristine image but without that special shimmer.

DLP may have a place in cinema today but I want no part of it. When I go to the movies I want to see a 35/70mm motion picture film projected. I will admit film does show signs of wear like scatches and focus drifts but DLP has it's flaws as well. In some of the theatres I am connected with we have DLP projection, and in a most cases a multipex theatre will be a showing a movie in DLP as well as a film version I have watched both DPL and film versions of the same movie and much prefer the film. As a matter of fact the theatre going public does not know or care about DLP. I remember when "Jurrassic Park" was released in DTS. In every location where a multiplex had two or more prints, it was the theatre showing the film in DTS that was always sold out. The public wanted the big sound. That is not the case with DLP, mainly because the public seems to see little or no advantage to movies projected that way. CConnolly hit the nail on the head with respect to cost, since there seems to be no real advantage for the theatre owners to install the very expensive equipment, it should be the studios who will have to pay at least a part of the expense. The studios of course save a ton of money on film costs and shipping and have the most to gain. By the way, silver screens are only installed today for 3-D engagements and IMAX.

Most people that I deal with as a projectionist do not want digital projection. They have been trying this since I started in the business. It will never match the effect of film.

Projectionist to not want digital because it is the begining of the end for them..

At Loews Raceway they run the promos before the film on video and the quality is very good but it does not have the kick that film does.

Automations and platters were the begining of the end for projectionists. I'm talking about the quality of the picture. Cost is an issue too. It will never look like film. There have been too many issues and problems with digital projection. Yes it looks good, but will never be as good as film. The whole transition to digital was supposed to start happening years ago. They were so up on doing it in the begining. Now I hear less about it then before. I,m not saying this just as a projectionist. I am saying this as a service tech, projectionist, and someone who has worked with and worked on digital projection. I do not see it being widespread any time soon.

The next two bookings at the Ziegfeld are 'Oceans Twelve', beginning December 10th, and, starting December 22nd, 'Andrew Lloyd Webber's The Phantom of the Opera'.

I would have to agree with RCDTJ, Digital projection may grow some, but it will be a long time, if ever, before it replaces film completly. Digital is flat and dull and yes it does have problems with breakdowns, and as I mentioned in another thread, the public just does not care about it.Automation and platters was the reason 25 years ago I switched from projection to management. I can still dable in the booth if I care to, but it is so boring now without lights, curtains and changeovers. I miss "putting on a show" The guys at the Ziegfeld have a platter which has to be, after the Maytag repair man, the worlds most boring job. Threading a projector once every two hours or so has to be dull. Even worse is digital, with nothing to do but babysit the thing.

Vito the public does not have to care about it the theater owners do , and as SOON as digital is perfected you will see it in all your chains..

Can I ask a question about digital? What exactly is the "medium"? Is it a DVD or something? How exactly does the movie get projected?

A few years ago, the NYTimes ran an extensive article about theaters that would receive the movie through a satellite transmission beamed from a source location. The issue was how to prevent hackers from getting the signal and sending it to some other place. Movie piracy of the highest order.

With digital, do the theaters receive a DVD or something of the movie to be shown?

The equipment installed in my theatres is run by a computor with the media (called platter) loaded on to the hard drive. So you might have one or two movies loaded as well as an array of trailers, both for upcoming movies and house specials, such as advertisements, which you would click on in order to show them. The "script" which contains the info you have programmed is them run each time you start the show. The movie is projected thru a lens either flat or anamorphic by means of the same type of Xenon light source, approx. 6000 watts, as film. I have not seen the system which is transmitted thru satellite as yet, I am not sure if that is being used yet.The entire operation is run by computor.

Longislandmovies, When I wrote about the public's lack of interest in DLP, I meant the theatre owners have little to gain here and therefore it will have to be up to thr studios to fit most of the bill to install the equipment. I suppose it's possible some day it will all work out and we will see the end of film in the theatres but I for one do not believe that will ever happen. We will more likely see a shared film and digital presentation for many many more years.

Digital still has a very long way to go. Until I see some major improvements I won't be preparing to switch over in my theater anytime soon.

I agree with Vito. One of the major problems with DLP is who will pay for it. If you make theater owner pay for it, you put all the independent theaters out of business. The theater owners definitely have nothing to gain because DLP is not going to attract more people to the movies. He is also right about possibly shared film and video. They will never replace film completely.

They want the theatre owner to pay for the equipment (last I heard, about $60,000. per screen, probably less now) that will enable the distributor will save the cost of manufacturing, shipping and storing prints - and that is not going to happen. Even if they get it to look exactly like film, the theatre has nothing to gain other than saving the cost of having an usher make up a show. Plus, they are going to have to have all the bugs worked out of it - theatres that got burned with the original SDDS unit, a $15,000. piece of junk, are going to be wary...

A number of entries here describe this theater as having a balcony.

There is NO balcony, only a rear area that rises at a steeper angle than the main orchestra level, and which is separated from the main area by a cross-aisle.

Sound balcony-esque to me LOL

What the Ziegfeld has is a stadium, which is the technical word that theatre architects used. Today the public thinks of that word meaning the entire auditorium on steps.

Years ago when big-splash premieres were done as a reserved-seat benefit with hard tickets at the Ziegfeld and Cinema I, the seat locations on the ticket were "Orchestra" or "Loge" and the row and seat number.

In the big old palaces where there was a real balcony (a cantilevered structure over the orchestra with the seats on steps), the seats were divided into loge (in the front), mezzanine (middle) and balacony (at the top), with the sections divided by cross-aisles.

Some of the larger palaces had the mezzanine on a separate level from the balcony. In the New York Paramount, for example, there was a mezzanine, and then, jutting out above that, was the balcony. At Radio City Music Hall, there were three separate mezzanines, one atop the other. The first, or lowest mezzanine, was operated on a reserved seats only policy. At peak times, such as the Christmas holidays, the second mezzanine was sometimes turned into a reserved-seat section as well.

Digital Cinema is HERE and like it or not it's soon to be at every theater near you. In fact numerous theaters currently receive their digital fature and trailer files via satellite including the Loews 42nd Street E-Walk on two screens locally. the Ziegfeld is not satellite equipped, but receives their digital "prints" on a hard drive which is loaded into the media servers. The files are compressed, encoded and encrypted. They are protected by "keys" which prevent any other specific equipment from playing back a pirated or duplicated file.

Theater owners have never been seriously thought by anyone to be required to pay for the conversion to digital. Sometime soon one or more studio backed financing plans will be in place to provide the funds. While people may not flock to DLP vs. 35mm, they will notice an increase in light output, more even light distribution from corner of image to corner of image and a rock steady picture without any degradation after multiple showings. Also, since the distribution cost will be significantly reduced vs. film, more theaters and markets will be able to show a wider variety of movies that otherwise would receive only limited distribution.

An earlier poster mentioned sound ... with a pristine digital sound file, the quality of sound will only be limited to the quality of the sound processing and speaker equipment in an auditorium.

There are limitations with the current 1.3K resolution DLP projectors in use. These will however, soon be replaced with newer 2K DLP projectors allowing screens the size of the Ziegfeld's to be completely filled and not cropped and still retain light, brilliance and clarity at least matching if not exceeding that of 35mm "analog" film. Furthermore Sony has in the works a 4K projection system.

Before "assuming" the world of cinema quality digital cinema is anything like internet based movie downloads, or even DVD like quality, consider the massive file sizes required for a cinema screen vs. a computer monitor or even a large screen HD television. DO not confuse "digital" home entertainment media with Digital Cinema.

One final thought for now ... those "pre-show" advertisements and mini-commercials shown at many theaters around the country are being projected via small NON Cinema grade projectors. They are low on light output and in most cases not designed to project the distances they are now being used for. On top of that, the source material is grainy and usually poor in quality as it was designed for use on television and has too low a level of resolution to be projected any actual distance and size.

The circuits using this pre-show technology to show "movies" are doing a disservice to the public and diminishing the quality of the experience. I suspect that the poor box office they have to date realized from their experiments may curtail it's use in the future, but that may be giving too much credit.

movieboss you hit the nail on the head

I have been hearing that Digital Cinema will be at every theater for 12 years now. If you are telling me that it will replace every screen in every theater, it will not happen. Digital Cinema is not film. You will always be able to tell the difference. I have seen the real Digital Cinema. I am not talking about the cheap imitations.

why didnt you tell me about the Aviator premiere at the Zeigfeld yesterday ;[

While 'The Aviator' was having its 'premiere' at the Ziegfeld last night, its little-publicized 12-day run (four-walled by Miramax for award-voting committees but with all remaining tickets to the public) at the Angelika was coming to an end.

As much as I cant wait to see the Aviator, I would not have wanted to see it at the Angelika. Oh by I miss the Syosset 150.

Again, why the HELL couldn't they open "The Aviator" at the Music Hall? Can you imagine seeing that there? Oh, that's right...they have the "Spectacular" there and it would interfere...

But as much as The Ziegfeld gets somewhat of a bad rep here on this site, I was there in 1995 to see "Braveheart" and I have to say I was mightily impressed with it's size, the screen and the sound. It was very nice inside though you'd never guess it from the outside. It's so plain.

I visited the Ziegefeld many times and never had problems with the film being out-of-focus. "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" was very clear.

YankeeMike mentions that he saw "How The West Was Won" in Cinerama. I also saw it in Manhattan in Cinerama but I can't remember the name of the theater. I thought it was named the "Loews Cinerama" but there is no listing for such a theater. It's true that 3 projectors were used and often the images did not exactly match and the colors of each were slightly different; making it annoying to watch. I also saw "2001, A Space Odyssey" at the same theater in Cinerama. Can anybody remember which Manhattan theater showed the 3-projector Cinerama?

Loew's Cinerama is listed here under its original name of the Capitol Theatre, one of the most signficant and influential "movie palaces" ever built.

"Can anybody remember which Manhattan theater showed the 3-projector Cinerama?
#1 the Broadway beginning 9/30/52. Then the Warner in June 53. Then the Capitol which was temporarily renamed Loews Cinerama in Aug of 1962. The 2 MGM films, Bros Grimm and HTWWW played there. Single projector "Cinerama" 70mm opened at the Warner 11/63. 3-projector CineMiracle ran at the Roxy from April through the Summer of 1958. The Russian Kinopanorama played - however briefly - at the Mayfair (before it became the DeMille). 3-projector Cinerama also ran at the Syosset (Long Island) and the Claridge (Upper Montclair NJ).

CC were you ever in the Warner Cinerama or the Rivoli or Criterion before they were twinned?
Then you'll know why we give the Ziegfeld a bad rap. Though today its the best game in town. I was hoping they would have a Todd AO retro next year for the anniversary but I doubt it. They should have had MFL for its 40th in Super Panavision 70 which they had in '93 and it was an enormous success. And how about the restored Mary Poppins for an engagement before its release on DVD(a re-premiere with Andrews and Van Dyke in attendance?) That of course would have been perfect for Nov at the Music Hall along with the Christmas show (which could have been cut in half with no loss.)But that would make too much sense. These high paid execs make too much money to actually know what they're doing.

Myron, the 3 projector Cinerama process had it's problems. You mentioned the colors not matching, this was a problem with the carbon arcs not keeping up as they burned in one or more projectors. This diference in the burning point betwen the arc and the projector gate, even if ever so slight, would cause one of the images to be slighty darker or off color. A good projectionist did not allow this to happen. Another projectionist error occured when the images did not match exactly, many problems contributed to that. First of all, the sync marks on the leader had to match on all three projectors and sound reproducer before the show started. Then from time to time there would be a film break, and when the film was repared mistakes were made. For example, a break in the film would require a splice be made, if you lost a couple of frames in the Baker print, for example, you would have to splice in a "slug" of black film to replace the missing footage, so that the three prints remained in sync.The alternative would be to remove the missing footage from the other two prints as well as the sound print, this to my knowledge was never done. In other words a film break in Cinerama was a NIGHTMARE. We had the same problem with two projector 3-D projection and it was handled the same way. I strangly miss those days. sigh

I believe the Broadway, Warner and Capitol theatres were the only ones in Manhattan that had the 3 projector system. I know it sounds crazy but I perferred seeing the lines between the films in the three projector system as opposed to the later version of Cinerama. Even know the screen was just as wide it just seemed different. While it's possible to see a 3-D movie in NY. (At the Film Forum) it's a shame there is no place in the area where a 3 projector Cinerama film can be screened. I believe the only theatre that can show those films is in Seattle.

I never saw any film in Cinerama. The first 70mm film I saw was Gone With The Wind in 1967 at the Randolph theater in Phila. It was a cinerama house so I was so awed by the curved screen.

To YankeeMike: The Arclight Cinemas Cinerama Dome on Sunset Blvd. in Hollywood can also show 3-strip Cinerama. Too bad both 3-strip theaters are on the West Coast, far away from us in the East. The closest remaining giant curved Cinerama screen is, I believe, the Uptown in Washington, DC. They played "2001" three years ago and it was overwhelming.

mikeeoklandpark, I am sorry to read your first experience with 70mm was "Gone with thw wind" which remains the worst example of 70mm
ever made.I am also sorry you missed out on Cinerama and hope some day you have a chance to experience one of the great inovations in film presentation.
Yankeemike,I would agree with you about 70mm Cinerama, it was just an improved 70mm format at best.I believe the first one I ever played was "Mad Mad World". Many people thought, gee if only they had waited a while and made all Cinerama films in 70mm it would have avoided a lot of cost with all that Charlie, Baker, Able stuff.
I never thought that way, 3 strip Cinerama was in a class of it's own and it just would not have been the same, when Mr. Thomas said "This Is Cinerama" and I pushed that button to open the curtain to show that roller coaster on that huge 3 strip screen, well...
it was breathtaking.

I was a little too young for "This Is Cinerama", but I was able to see all the other 3 strip films that came out in the 60's at both the Warner and Capitol theatres. When the train derailed in "How The West Was Won" the audiance reaction was almost the same as it would be for today's Imax 3-D films.

Some comments about the above comments.

-I saw MAROONED opening week in December 1969 at the Zeigfeld. There was a console in the theatre's center controlling everything. I assume it not there anymore.

-The Criterion used to closed down from time to time in the 70s waiting for good product. Question...what do you do with the employees during the down time? Fire 'em and rehire them?

-Here in Wisconsin, Marcus Theatres is installing "Ultra Screens" is some of their multiplexes. They make two auditoriums into one and install a 75 foot, floor to ceiling screen.

-There is guy in Ohio who has a 3 strip Cinerama print of HOW THE WEST WAS WON and shows it in a make shift sort of theatre (I think in his home!).

I hope someone in New York puts in one of those ultra screens but wont hold my breath :(

Don: I remember that console too. During a revival of WEST SIDE STORY in 1972 a guy was controlling the sound from there, and he kept making it worse. These really loud popping noises started happening - until he turned the console off and walked away, then everything was fine. I think the console is still there, only it's boarded up.

Yes Bill and Don, I was a projectionist in 1969 when Marooned opened at the Ziegfeld, at a time when automation was beginning to creep into our lives. There was a guy at that console telling people how he controlled everything including the projection. The idiot even went so far as to suggest they did not even need anyone in the booth, to which, with much sarcasum, I said "really, can you thread the projectors, control focus, and maintaine the booth from here as well"? I also reminded him and the other patrons that without the projectionist up there there would be no show. No comment came
from Mr. "I control everything".

Vito, I wonder if he was the same guy that I saw 3 years later. I'm surprised he was still working there after all that time. I think I remember some people in the audience applauding when he walked away from the console!

>>"Gone with the wind" which remains the worst example of 70mm
ever made...

Of course, Gone With the Wind wasn't made in 70mm, it was just monstrously blown up to that size 30-something years after it was made. I saw GWTW for the first time in that 70mm print at the UA Syosset 150, and I was shocked at the poor quality (everything was fuzzy and grainy) and the obvious cropping of the image at the top and bottom. I couldn't belive this was the biggest grossing picture of all time! The curved screen was pretty neat, as long as nothing was being projected onto it.

I later saw GWTW at RCMH in its proper aspect ratio, and of course it was magnificent.

Saps, I should have said the worst blow up, I knew of course it was not shot in 70, although 70 had been used in the early 30s, remember "The Big Trail" with John Wayne shot in "70mm Granduer"?
Even the 35mm magnetic four track prints of "GWTW" were horrible.
Of course many many 35mm films were blown up for the roadshow engaements, "Funny Girl", "Oliver" to name a few but they looked and sounded half way decent.
Bill, I guess the audience was made to believe that console guy actually ran the whole show. I would have had him arrested for being an impostor trying to dupe people into believing he was a showman.

Vito, I don't think I made myself clear when I mentioned the audience applauding. They clapped in the middle of the movie when he finally gave up, turned the console off and walked away. He was actually ruining the show, because all the sound glitches disappeared when he stopped whatever he was doing.

It would have been wonderful if The Phantom Of The Opera was filmed in 70mm. It would have been great on the huge 70mm screen at the Ziegfeld.

Oh Bill, I wish I had been there to witness that. In no stretch of the imagination was he "running the show", but more like ruining it. I imagine all he had was a remote sound control at the console, along with lights and curtain controls. The remote sound control is not uncommon, many producers and directors like to have one at their seat during a studio preview. As a matter of fact I sat with Arthur Hiller during his screening of the W.C. Fields life story. (forget the title)He played with it from time to time, raising and lowering the sound at will.

Vito, that showing of West Side Story in 1972 was the first time I'd been to the Ziegfeld, and when I saw the console I was sure impressed. It seemed like the theater of the future - until we saw and heard the thing in action, doing more harm than good. I have to look for it the next time I see a movie there.

Bill,I used to like to hang out around the console at RCMH to watch that guy in action. He would never really speak to anyone but he was busy taking care of business. His, in contrast to the Ziegfeld guy's, job was important to the presentation. By the way.,when you go back to the Ziegfeld and there is someone at the console, ask him what he does for a living and what his purpose is in being there. Then ask him to take a break and let the pros in the booth handle the show.(sarcasum)

I don't think anyone has actually operated the console in many years. I've seen lots of movies there and the only time I saw the console not closed up was that time in 1972. It might not even be there anymore - they may have taken it out when they replaced all the seats several years ago. I'll be sure to check for it the next time I'm there. The Phantom of the Opera is playing there now - sounds like a good movie to see at the Ziegfeld.

What would it take to convince exhibitors that there is a market for presenting movies in exclusive runs either at the Ziegfeld, RCMH or even the smaller Cinema I. Phanthom of the Opera, the Aviator, even Return of the Phoenix & Alexander among the current crop of releases deserved an exclusive run. Having seen Mike Nichol's Closer on opening day at the Loews' 19th St., felt like I was sitting in a bomb shelter during an air raid. Very different from having seen Carnal Knowledge at it's initial release at the Beekman. Poor Marcus Loew, a sad tribute to Loews on the company's 100th year anniversary.

Yes Astyanax, around this time of year many movies scheduled for wide release in early 2005 have an exclusive limited run in order to qualify for Academy Awards. Why not do something like that for perhaps 10 days - two weeks exclusively ay RCMH or Ziegfeld?
Bill, I was glad to see Phantom is being presented in 35mm film
(although 70mm would have been great),and not Digital as is is in some other locations. Wonder if they took they Digital equipment out again. I hope they did.

How many more years could this theater have in the world of high realestate values?

If this theatre goes bye-bye, where will those flashy premieres be held?

Article today in the Daily News. Appears safe for now.
http://nydailynews.com/front/story/267684p-229120c.html

Here's the article from the NY Daily News. These links eventually go away and you can't read the article later on.

It's not the most hard hitting article but at least The Ziegfeld is getting some press.

Ziegfeld defies multiplex trend
BY ETHAN SACKS
DAILY NEWS WRITER
Monday, January 3rd, 2005

When "The Phantom of the Opera" opened recently at the Ziegfeld Theatre, fans of New York's largest single-screen movie theater hoped the musical's song, "Wishing You Were Somehow Here Again," didn't prove prophetic.
Known as the place to have big premieres in the city, the Ziegfeld is in its own cinematic drama, fighting for its financial life against the more popular multiplexes. While Clearview Cinemas, which owns the 35-year old theater, shows no signs of giving up without a fight, it's clearly defying the trend.

The number of single screen theaters in the U.S. dipped to 1,684 last year from 2,280 in 2001, said Jim Kozak, spokesman for the National Association of Theater Owners. Multiplexes have changed the way movies are watched - from large, communal events to convenient ways of filling two hours.

"There's just something about those old single-screen theaters that are just so stately and interesting and harkens back to a different time," says Paul Dergarabedian, president of the movie trade group Exhibitor Relations.

"But if the business model is that teenagers love the stadium seating and they want to have a bunch of choices at the multiplex where they can decide to see one among ten different film, that's where the business is heading. The profitability of those theaters will dictate if they stay in business or go the way of the dinosaur." Degarabedian said.

The fossilized remains of what was recently the largest single-screen in Manhattan - by 130 seats - can be seen in Times Square. The marquee of the Loews Astor Plaza still advertises M. Night Shyamalan's "The Village," the film that closed the theater's 30-year run.

Real estate costs have driven many of these big single-screen theaters out of business - although Radio City Music Hall and the Beacon Theater were converted into live venues.

Clearview Cinemas spokesperson Beth Simpson reassures fans of the W. 54th St. icon, which boasts 1,195 seats. "Staying competitive with multiplexes is not really what the Ziegfeld does," said Simpson. "It's a completely different experience."

For the year-to-date, however, the Ziegfeld ranked 159th in ticket sales in New York, according to Nielsen EDI, a box office tracking service. The gargantuan AMC Empire 25 multiplex near Times Square ranked No. 1.

The Ziegfeld's house allowance - the cost of running the theater in a given week that is subtracted from the gross before a film's distributor can take its cut of the receipts - is reputed to be one of the highest in the nation.

Still, the Ziegfeld remains the popular choice to rent for gala premieres for movies like "Cold Mountain" and the "Harry Potter" films.

"The places in New York to have a premiere of what they do regularly in Los Angeles, they are pretty few and far between," said Ian Mohr, a film reporter for Variety. "If you want to get that vibe of the glitzy Los Angeles-style red carpet premiere in New York, it's very difficult to do unless you do it at the Ziegfeld. "

Celebrity glitz adds to the theater's historical legacy - the lobby showcases memorabilia from the original Broadway "Ziegfeld Follies," performed on the same site - but it's regular folks who will determine the theater's future.

"As long as there are passionate movie-goers out there who enjoy the Ziegfeld experience, I think that this theater can thrive," said Simpson.

The present Ziegfeld is not on the same site as the original Ziegfeld, but just west of it, between 54th and 55th Streets. The original Ziegfeld was on the site of a current Sixth Avenue office tower, and had its entrance on Sixth Avenue.

Vito: I was there on New Year's Eve and, sure enough, the control console is gone. It was replaced by the new seats. Phantom of the Opera was not so hot, unfortunately. What was dramatic and compelling on the Broadway stage becomes no big deal in the movie version. During the more boring moments I'm glad I had the Ziegfeld's walls and ceiling to look at!

Gone are the days sadly where Broadway shows make great musicals like Oklahoma and Sound of Music. I did love Chicago though. Was Phantom in scope?

With an over the top director like Joel Schumacher at the helm of "Phantom" what did anyone expect? But in a place like The Ziegfeld, it's the only place I'd even consider seeing something like that (and I won't).

"Phantom" was in scope and it did look great on the Ziegfeld screen, but something was missing from the whole enterprise compared to the Broadway version. Emmy Rossum sang beautifully, though. This was my second time seeing her at the Ziegfeld in 2004, the first being "The Day After Tomorrow".

I agree with you, RobertR, about "Chicago". That was a knockout when it played an exclusive run at the Ziegfeld. It felt like the good old days had returned, for a while at least.

Bill, I would have to agree Phantom is not very good. Sure glad the console is gone. Thanks for letting me know. I think the Digital projection is gone as well, Phantom, although available and playing in other theatres in Digital format, is on film.

Regarding the "house allowance" for the Ziegfeld referred to in the Daily News article. Until the mid-1990s or thereabouts, Variety published the grosses for individual theaters in Manhattan, and those entries often included the weekly "nut" for that theater ("house allowance" in Variety-speak). The Ziegfeld's weekly "nut" was in the $30,000 range; higher than any other film theater in Manhattan, including the Astor Plaza. As that figure must be at least 7-8 years old, I assume that the Ziegfeld's "nut" is significantly higher now.

I doubt that the current run of "Phantom" is clearing the weekly "nut"; I attended an early evening Ziegfeld showing on a weekday between Christmas and New Year's and there weren't more than several dozen people in the audience.

When the Ziegfeld has an NYC exclusive, it can do huge business; during the early weeks of "Chicago"'s run, many showings sold out hours in advance. But the "Chicago" exclusive run was an anomaly; the only other Ziegfeld exclusive in the past few years that comes to mind is the Disney animated film "Brother Bear." It stands to reason that the revenue from rentals for special screenings/premieres is the only way that Cablevision/Clearview can keep those doors open.

On a theater chat site a writer who was at the Ziegfeld to see Phantom last night(a Sunday!!) says there were about 14 people in the audience. This was built in '69 to be an exclusive theater not a competitor on showcase. How long can this go on?
I know I'm beating a dead horse but you guys have got to have a Todd AO anniversary festival to bring more than 20 people into the theater. Install a larger screen in front of the old one like the one you had for Cinerama in '73, get the PR and watch the crowds come. I mean have any of you who currently work for Clearview or Cablevision ever heard of Todd AO or Cinerama?
I'm probably speaking a foreign language that's been lost.

They're holding a 50th-anniversary Todd-AO festival in Bradford, England in March. I wish Clearview would listen to what Vincent is saying - there's no reason why we couldn't have that same festival right here at the Ziegfeld. People would come from all over the world to see it.

Ok Warren, Bill, Vincent and all, I say we buy the place, throw Clearview out and run it properly. Starting with a 70mm festival.

And with Vito in the booth we'd have one of the best projectionists in the business right off the bat. I'd sure love to have the chance to put my money where my mouth is ... if I actually had the money!

I would not blame The Ziegfeld for the poor turn out for "Phantom". The movie is not getting good reviews or word of mouth and it's being marketed poorly (probably because the releasing studio knows it's got a stinker).

In 1995, I saw "Braveheart" here and it was packed. I know some people here knock the Ziegfeld but I thought the place was awesome.

With the right movie, the place can be amazing. I like "Chicago" and I can only imagine that it must've been impressive there.

There are articles in the NYTimes about the dismal movie season. Yes, grosses are up for the studios but all the articles point out that it's because the ticket prices are higher. Actually ticket sales are down by about 6%. It's the second year in a row. There's been talk for awhile about posting actually number of tickets sold along side the grosses. But the studios are frightened by that prospect because it would reveal for all to see just how movie going is slipping.

Why are ticket sales down? Easy: the movies lately SUCK!

You want people to plant their money paying butts in theater seats, make something worthwhile.

CC were you ever in the Rivoli or the Criterion before they were sliced and diced?
As for my previous post about the empty perf at the Ziegfeld I got my info from a talkinbroadway site. The home page has a beautiful color interior of a picture palace. Does anyone know which it is?
Do they know they have a movie theater to epitomize a legit house?
Speaking of which a little while ago a Japanese Decca cd line had an opera series which used what they obviously thought was the interior of a great European opera house on its cover. Well that great European opera house was the Paradise in the Bronx!

Bill, thanks for the kind words, it was a lot of fun and we took a lot of pride in being a projectionist in those days. I dearly miss that.
Vincent, you mentioned seeing the Criterion before it was cut up, remember when it was renovated for the roadshow of
"10 Commandments"? curtains, seats, walls, everything was red.

Vito the first time I was in the Criterion it was for MFL in the summer of '65 as a fluke. It was raining and we couldn't go to the World's Fair. It was a matinee and as a little boy I was amazed that people were all dressed up for the movies. In the suburbs it was even at that time very casual. I had never heard of MFL and thought it was a bore. The experience itself of going to a deluxe Times Square roadshow house was however unforgettable. I have since revised my opinion of the film and had I been an adult at the time I certainly would have been a frequent visitor to that late and deeply lamented movie theater(the last time I was in it was for Alien though god knows I wish it had been some wide screen epic or musical from the 50's or 60's.)
What was the Criterion like before the 10 C? Was it much different?

My memory of the Criterion stretches back to "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein" in July '48 and "The Life of Riley" in April '49, through various Disney features in the early '50s ("Alice in Wonderland," a revival of "Snow White") to "The Ten Commandments" and beyond. It seems to me that the theater remained the same throughout, clad chiefly in red plaster with a red traveller curtain. (See Warren's web link posite on the Criterion page last 25 July and my reply on 7 August.) I remember being slightly disappointed that the VistaVision screen for "The Ten Commandments" was not as large or curved as the Todd-AO screen at the Rivoli, but that kind of screen would have required alterations such as thrusting the viewing surface in front of the proscenium, which the Criterion refrained from doing. The theater might have been spruced up for its roadshows with brighter lighting and new fabrics, but in the original colors and with no change in design.

But BOB in the Variety review of South Pacific it seems to say the Criterion installed a large curved screen just for this presentation. He comments that the heads look like the heads on Mt Rushmore.

Vincent--that could be true. I did not see "South Pacific" there, but I did see "Anatomy of a Murder" which followed it there in Summer '59, and the house seemed unchanged (perhaps they had dismantled the special screen). The last film I saw at the Criterion was "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf" (day-dating at the Tower East)in Summer '66. Same old trappings, but the audience was so garrulous that I decided to avoid Times Square for serious films and to take my business to the East side. I've never been to the Ziegfeld, since I decamped from NYC before it was built. Should I visit it if I happen to be in town?

I'm sorry you didn't see Funny Girl there I would like to have known what that was like.
I understand for Woolf the lines were down to Sixth Av! That must have been an amazing sight.
You must definately visit the Ziegfeld if you are in town. It is all that is left that in any way reflects what moviegoing was like for most of the 20th Century(though built in '69.) I have often disparaged it on this page as it in no way compares to the great NY cinemas but it was an attempt to recreate a Times Square house in the more friendly environs of 6th Av. Though it did not fully succeed(for me)I would rather see an epic or musical there today than anywhere else in Manhattan.

Vito, some of us still take pride in being a projectionist.

RCDTJ, I know a lot of projectionists who still take a lot of pride in the job. However, you must admit, in most cases. it's just not the same now as before automation, platters and multiplex's. In my day we "put on a show" Dimming house lights as the last of the intermission music began to fade, then opening the curtain just as the stage lights were dimming, and opening/raising the curtain being carefull not to expose any white screen. Then there were the reel changes every 15-20 minutes where you took great pride in timing the changeover perfectly as not to interupt the presentation. Ending the movie had to be perfect as well, the curtain had to be in the full closed position as the title faded, again no white screen or titles running over the closed curtain, with the stage lights to full up position at the same moment the curtains finished closing. Of course the big days came with the Roadshow presentations with overtures, intermissions and exit music, all coordinated perfectly.
Now a days it's all automation, you thread a platter set a timer and your finished. I prefered the days before I retired when we were showmen, is all I am saying.
Bill, I could be wrong but I don't remember the Criterion installing VistaVision projectors for "10 Commandments", I thought it was a reduction print.The only VistaVision projectors I recall were at RCMH and Paramount. In fact I recall when "White Christmas" opened at the Hall, they had temporary VistaVision projectors installed without sound heads, the sound had to be interlocked with two projectors untill the finished projectors were built and installled.
Do you have more info on how "10 Commandments" was projected?

Vincent, Bill, "South Pacific" was of course a true 70mm
(Todd-AO I think) presentation at the Criterion, "Funny Girl", "Oliver" and many others were a blow up from the 35mm neg which in my opinion never compared to the real thing. We were bombared in the 60s with these 70mm blowups and I thought they paled by comparision. The image was sharp but dull, and the colors a bit faded. However, the magnificent six track magnetic sound made up for the picture quality. Would you agree?

Vito...I remember how perfectly the curtins were timed with the movie ending. Now, it's a white with ads from a slide projector befor and after the movie. Whatever happened to showmanship?

Vito...I remember how perfectly the curtins were timed with the movie ending. Now, it's a white screen with ads from a slide projector before and after the movie. Whatever happened to showmanship?

You're all absolutely correct. Most theaters now have no showmanship. However, it's good to know the Ziegfeld is still open. Not a movie palace, but an interesting, pleasant, middle size theater that is idiosyncratic and plush in its interior, even if the exterior is just a box.

Just found out they are showing, "Phantom of the Opera." A great place for this movie.

As someone once said to me, "The Ziegfeld. Best projection in the city." Who knew this was a craft, now that it's disappearing?

Vito,
Though I didn't see Funny Girl or Oliver during their original roadshow runs(saw them in the burbs)the restored FG at the Ziegfeld just looked like any other Panavision film. Why these films couldn't have been shot in a 70mm process is beyond me after all in the same period CCBB and Star were. However I don't think the sound is as good in these restored prints as it was back in the days of true 6 track sound. Blow up 70mm at the Music Hall looks especially bad as I remember Scrooge and Tom Sawyer looking grainy and washed out.
By the way I hate exposed screens. It's like staring at an unattractive naked person.

Question for the theater professionals on this site (and forgive me for asking if it seems like a stupid question) but what, in general, were or are movie theater screens made of? Additionally, how do theaters clean them (or should I say, should clean them...some theaters these days don't look like they ever do!).

I either read about this (maybe on this site) or heard about it in a documentary that Stanley Kubrick wanted a theaters wall (where the movie was projected) painted black for "A Clockwork Orange" but that the theater made a mistake and painted it a different color. Anyone know that story and what color they actually painted it? And how many theaters simply projected onto a wall?

Thanks!

CConnolly -

Most theatre screens are made out of vinyl, which is then stretched around a frame of some sort. The are small perforations in the material to allow the sound to transmit through from the speaker(s) behind it. The front surface of the screen is generally a matte white surface (silver is sometimes used - that's what we use at the Lafayette Theatre - mostly for installations that plan to run 3-D) that has a slight bit of reflective material in it. Cleaning a screen is difficult, most products will remove the coating and the screen darkens in those sections. There are companies that professionally clean screens, but it's expensive and can not always remove the dirt & stains.

The Kubrick story is that when A Clockwork Orange was set to premiere in New York, the theatre had a screen mounted on the front wall (not projecting on the wall itself) with no curtaining or masking on the surrounding wall. The theatre painted the wall and ceiling around the screen an orange color, which would look awful with a projected image in the middle of it. When Kubrick heard about this (he always sent representative to the first-run theatres to check their presentations), he demanded the wall be painted the proper flat black color. I don't know of any theatres that use the wall, but I'm sure there's one someplace.

I might not be correct regarding the color of the walls in the Kubrick section of my post above - it might have been white and not orange. I will check out my references.

"A Clockwork Orange" opened in NYC at Cinema I -- did the management there do that? Whew!

PeterApruzzese: thanks for the info. I wish I could remember the source of the Kubrick story.

As for cleaning of the screens, some multiplexes ought to do it more often especially the Loews Palisades Center. I'm getting sick and tired of a movie's image being marred by some of the giant smears that I see on some of their screens.

The theater CConnolly, Pete and BoxOfficeBill are talking about, the Cinema I, is in the news today. It's going to be torn down this spring, unless it can somehow be saved. I'll never forget going there to see "The Exorcist" on its third day - the most frightened audience I've ever been a part of.

You should have seen the BUZZ when this theater played Last temptation of Crist. WOW

TYPO

Don, projectionist no longer have the control over the show we had in my day. It's all automated, a push of the button and what ever happens is very mechanical now. Curtains have all but disapeared and most of the theatres that still have curtains leave them open for those damm slides.
Vincent, I guess once the studio's realised they could get away with filming in 35mm and doing a 70mm blow up they saw $ signs in the savings on raw stock during filming.I so much agree that the result was a washed out pale comparision of true 70mm, By the way the original 70mm "Funny Girl" was no better than the reissue at the Ziegfeld. Those blow ups at RCMH were awful as well, the changeover to xenon lamps from carbon arc just added to the problem at RCMH, there just wasn't enough light. By ther way, if you thought the lines for Woolf were long, you should have been there in 1954 when Jane Russell's "French Line" played the Criterion in 3-D, the lines were so long you would have thought they were giving away money.

Vito it's too bad about Funny Girl. The Stradling cinematography is excellent and the the Callahan production superb. And it had the Criterion(reserved in the summer of 67 while the film was in production)which had the premiere 70mm presentations of two of the greats-Lady and Lawrence.
At the Ziegfeld you had an exposed screen and what seemed like a half an hour of commercials before the overture even started! There was a time when you paid to see a movie and that's what they showed you.

Vincent, with respect to "Lawrence", In the early days of the films release, David Lean insisted that if you did not play it in 70mm you could not show it at all. For my money, "Funny Girl" was better in 35mm four track than the awful washed out 70mm blowup, which I imagine Stradling had to have hated. As for the "Funny Girl" showing at the Ziegfeld, I can only imagine what a unprofessional cookie cutter presentaion that was, I'm guessing the overture was played with a white bare screen? Well.... there ought to be a law. To think I almost went to see it, sure glad I didn't.

Yes the overture was played with the screen stark naked(I averted my gaze to avoid the ugliness.) However they closed the screen for the intermission but I don't think they did at the end, though I might have left before the restoration credits fully unfurled. Why does it take more people to restore a movie than to make it?

As for Lean what was up with Zhivago? Boy if there was a movie that needed 70mm it was that one. And this was '65 when every roadshow was filmed in the process. How could he have possibly filmed it in Panavision and then shown it as a blow up? Though probably I would have been the only one to notice.

Vincent, that was a shocker, David lean wanted to film Zhivago in 70mm, however MGM said no. The end result, shot in Panavision, did look better than most blowups. But you are so right, Zhivago was so right for 70mm, so was River Kwai for that matter. Kwai did not even get the blow up treatment, in fact the only prints I recall were 35mm optical (mono). Columbia did not even make mag stereo prints available at the time.

Wait- there are 3 Peters? Peter Pagano, Peter Appruzzese, and me- Peter Huffman?

Does anybody here know if any of the films in the original "Star Wars" trilogy played at the Ziegfeld prior to the 1997 Special Edition releases? I know all three opened at the Loews Astor Plaza (R.I.P.), but have been unable to determine whether they made their way over to 54th Street at some point during their initial or re-releases.

SJL: I'd say the first time a Star Wars film played at the Ziegfeld was the Special Edition of "Star Wars" in 1997. You're right about the Astor Plaza - that was always the big-screen home of Star Wars in New York when the films were new. I think I would've tried to see them at the Ziegfeld if any of them had played there as a reissue.

FYI. This week's Village Voice has an ad for a reissue of "Raging Bull" that opens at the Ziegfeld on January 28 for an exclusive run prior to the release of the special edition DVD in early February.

Regarding the coming showing of Raging Bull at the Ziegfield:

It's lovely to see a classic movie up on the big Ziegfeld single screen, but when one considers this more carefully, it is probably yet another disaster for the theater. Perhpas part of a management plan to demonstrate the need to close the theater for good?

Theatrical re-releases right before a DVD release are just cost-effective marketing tools to sell the DVD. An ad gets printed in the movie sections of newspapers, where DVD buyers are likely to it. Local film critics provide further hype, doing pieces that are usually fed to them by the studios, prominently mentioning the coming DVD. The actual showing of the film is an afterthought -- making money on admissions is not what the re-lease is about. The film usually plays for a week at the smallest screen available -- because how many people will pay for a single viewing of a film they can own the next week for roughly the same price as a ticket and a popcorn? I've wondered whether anyone would notice if the theatrical re-release never really took place.

The recent pre-DVD release of "Donnie Darko" is a case in point. Even though the film has a strong cult following, and even though the re-release was the first chance to see a significantly altered version of the film, it played to nearly empty art-house auditoriums.

I hope I'm wrong -- NYC is full of true movie lovers -- but I predict that Raging Bull will play to a horribly empty Ziegfeld. What are the true motives behind this?

MGM Home Video is also releasing on DVD on the same date "New York, New York", "Boxcar Bertha".
Remember that "Raging Bull" was voted the Best Movie for the 1980's. The Special Edition of "Raging Bull" has been available in region 2 for a year now.

I noticed that the Ziegfeld was mentioned in yesterday's (1/20/05) "USA Today" article written by Ross Melnick and Andreas Fuchs, "Ten Great Places to Revel in Cinematic Grandeur." While, in a sense, I can understand why they included the Ziegfeld in the article (I can see how, in a narrow sense, it meets their criteria), the listing of it in such an article made me think of the concept and the expression, "defining deviance down."

I believe it was the late New York Senator and former Harvard professor (among other things), Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who coined this phrase. And if I understand it correctly, the idea of the phrase is to point out that a lot of behavior that was once considered bad is now considered "OK" because we have been unconsciously lowering our standards -- "defining deviance down."

So, in connection with the Ziegfeld, it seems to me that this theater is now considered a "great" place for seeing movies only because we have re-defined "cheap," "tasteless," and "uninspired" downward -- thus enabling the Ziegfeld to now be considered "great."

I've only been to the Ziegfeld a few times, and even the last time was probably many years ago. (I saw "That's Entertainment" there in the early 1970s, and I went there a time or two after that for movies I can't remember at the moment.) So my memories of it are probably a bit fuzzy. But when I first saw the theater I was kind of embarrassed at just how "tacky" it was -- even as a public space on its own, without even beginning to compare it with the truly beautiful, grand and imaginatively designed movie theaters and movie palaces that used to be the norm.

In a way this is strange for me to say, because I am all for exuberant decoration and the breaking of the "rules" of "good" modern design. But rather than being in "poor" taste (poor taste being the aesthetic preferences of a minority that happens to be out of favor with the taste "establishment"), the Ziegfeld struck me as being a place where nobody really cared about taste, and thus little real thought was given to its design. It seems to me that the owners/"designers" of the Ziegfeld just decided to use left-over materials from a "Gay '90s" steak house and to indiscriminately plaster the stuff around the inside of a plain "modern" box. (If I remember correctly, there was also some kind of New Orleans balcony type grill work also stuck up on some of the walls.)

When I noticed that the Ziegfeld began to be used for premieres, I believe I was embarrassed that such a "tacky" theater would be used for such functions in New York City and thus represent to Hollywood the "best" that the city had to offer -- when L.A. had (at least in my imagination, don't know if it actually was used for premieres) the magnificent Graumann's Chinese!

I realize, especially from reading the posts on this site, that movie theaters are more than just their architecture and design. Just as important -- actually, even more so -- is the way a theater presents a movie (e.g., the quality of the picture, the quality of the sound, etc.). And I don't mean to include this aspect in my comments about the Ziegfeld. As far as I can recall, I don't remember any problems in this regard.

While I realize the title of the piece was "Ten Great Places to Revel in Cinematic Grandeur," and thus implied theaters of a certain seating capacity (and pomposity), I wish the authors had chosen a slightly different title (say, "Ten Great Places to Revel in a Special Cinematic Experience") which would have allowed them to include smaller, luxurious (but less pompous) theaters in their article also. In that case, they could have included the endangered "Beekman" theater -- a handsome art moderne theater that offers, in my opinion, a truly special single-screen movie going experience in Manhattan.

In light of all the above pro and con about the Ziegfeld, I find the following paragraph from a NYT 12/22/67 article "A Ziegfeld Cinema to Rise on 54th St." interesting (and funny). It states, "For those who like a touch of elegance with their moviegoing, the theater will require formal attire on Saturday nights."

There is no greater disdainer of the Ziegfeld than myself Benjamin but it is all that is left in Manhattan. The very last!!
And I have to say it was better than the National or the Astor Plaza.
Talk about damning with faint praise. If it goes though I won't be too sorry. A 50 ft screen? Sheesh.

The Ziegfeld may not be ideal but it's one of the few theaters that attempts to recreate the grandeur of the old movie palaces. The only other surviving NYC movie theater (that continues to operate as a movie theater, that is) that even comes close is the Loews auditorium at the Loews Lincoln Square.

And seeing a classic film at the Ziegfeld in 70MM is a great experience (such as "My Fair Lady" in the early 1990s and the hit revival of "Lawrence of Arabia" that played the Ziegfeld for months in 1989).

I think we tend to put the Ziegfeld on a pedastal and worship her because sadly she is all we have left. In the good ole days she would have been just another movie house, and certainly not a movie palace. It sure feels good having Cinema Treasures and all of it's contributors to remember and perhaps to dream about those golden days gone by.

I saw "Raging Bull" at the Ziegfeld last night and the crowd was bigger than I expected, and very much into the movie as well. The presentation was quite good too - only 3 commercials and one trailer, and they opened and closed the curtains. It was also my first time seeing black and white on the Ziegfeld screen. I'm glad I went. Now let's see if they extend the exclusive engagement beyond the originally announced ten days - I'm sure they'll do better with this great classic than with the latest Hollywood dud they've got booked into the theater next.

Does the Ziegfeld always use the curtain? I saw "Braveheart" here in 1995 and they used the curtain. I loved it! The movie was OK but the theater, and that curtain, ROCKED.

Say what you will about The Ziegfeld but it's as good as it gets these days, theater wise.

In recent years I only remember the curtain being used for "Lawrence of Arabia" in 2002, and now "Raging Bull". It was definitely not used for "The Phantom of the Opera" on New Year's Eve - it might have made the movie a little better than it was.

Let me guess: they show those insipid ads on the white screen at The Ziegfeld? Is nothing sacred anymore?

One of the joys I remember as a kid was sitting in the movie theater and looking at the curtains and getting ready for the movie to start. Nothing was so thrilling (OK...there are and were but I was a kid) as the house lights dimming and the curtains slowly rising.

When I was kids during the 70's, every single theater I went to, from the first run houses on LI to the very lowest of the 2nd and 3rd run houses had and used curtains.

As a teen I worked at the local movie palace as an usher. One of my jobs was to "pull the curtain". Just before the 1:00 matinee I would go up the stairs and go backstage, the audience, mostly kids, knew then that the show was about to start and went wild with applause. The projectionist would then buzz me to open the curtain.
Ahh, to once again open that curtain and hear those cheers.

The curtain was working when I saw "The Day After Tomorrow" last summer. It was the only good thing about that movie!

Saw Raging Bull last night. They had the pre-film slide show which was out of focus. Then the curtains were closed, opened and the show began. There was a pretty large crowd for the 7 PM show. It was great to see this film on a large screen. The print and sound were terrific. Originally this film was going to be shown at the Film Forum in Jan. but it was pulled at the last minute. I am a regular at the Forum but I am glad they made the switch to the Ziegfeld. What a great place to see one of the finest films of all time.

The Film Forum has amazing booking but I would never travel there to see something like Raging Bull. But now that it's at the Ziegfeld that's another story. I don't mind seeing "smaller" films at Film Forum but even the restored print of Picnic a few years ago screamed to be shown on a huge Cinemascope screen, I would love to see that at the Ziegfeld or RCMH.

Regarding theater curtains: I remember wondering as a VERY YOUNG kid, whether the image that was seen when a movie theater's curtains opened or closed was an image projected upon a solid curtain or whether it was an image that shone through a thin curtain (like the sun shining through home window curtains). Of course as an older kid I realized that the image was being projected upon an opaque curtain, but when I first went to the movies as a four(?)-year old I wasn't sure.

As a pre-schooler, theatre curtains were one of the "mysteries of life" -- like figuring out whether the light inside the refrigerator was always lit, even when the door was closed, or whether it was built in some way so that it lit up as soon as one started to open the door.

- - - - - -

By the way, one scene from "Raging Bull" was shot just about down the block from the current Film Forum (that was, of course, 15[?] years or so before the Film Forum moved to its current location). The scene where Jake Lamotta first spots his future wife was filmed at the Carmine St. pool on W. Houston St. The dressing room vans (with one that was set-up to be a barber shop -- to give all the 1970s[?] long-haired guys1940s[?] haircuts) were parked on St. Luke's place. Antique cars were parked on W. Houston. And, if I remember correctly, the modern-day street lamps on W. Houston were dressed up with placards making them look like old-fashioned street lamps.

I saw Raging Bull at the Film Forum several years ago. While not like seeing it at the Ziegfeld it was still better than seeing it on a TV screen. There really are no large screen in NY devoted to classic films unless there is a special reason. In Raging Bull's case it was to promote an upcomming DVD release.

They have been running classic films at the Fox Theatre in Atlanta for the as long as I can remember in the summers. It is a wonderful experience complete with pre-show entertainment in the form of a real live (!) organ player leading crowd singalongs.

Coca-cola has sponsored this Summer Film Series for years (no ads before the show either). They have shown a mix of mostly (7 or 8) classics (e.g. 'Laurence of Arabia', 'Hitchcock') with maybe 2 or 3 current releases. I saw 'Gladiator' there when it was released and it was impressive to see on the large 50ft screen. While this may not seem special you must understand that beyond the 70s era cinderblock boxes and the new stadiumplexes of the New South, alone stands the Fox Theatre.

Now in NYC, I fear for the future of the Ziegfeld, especially with the Beekman passing, and plan to see every movie I can bear ('Robots' is playing currently, ouch) knowing that every bit counts. I suggest everyone take someone who hasn't been this summer, to help their business, if not for the uninitiated experience if it goes the way of the wrecking ball.

If the Ziegfeld ever goes away, I will soon follow.

There is a theater devoted to showing only classic films, but it's only one day per month. It's the theater of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences at the Lighthouse International building:

http://www.oscars.org/events/mnwo_yankees/index.html

Next up is "The Pride of the Yankees"; last month was "The King and I" in CinemaScope 55. I just found out this theater existed and haven't actually been there yet, but I hope to be going as often as I can.

How big is the theatre there?

A friend of mine went to "The King and I" and said the screen was very large, but he didn't say how big the theater itself was. But if it's the Academy's only theater in New York, I figure it's got to be a good one!

I wonder, did they have a mag stereo print of "King and I"?

The venue at the NYC Lighthouse is merely a small auditorium, not a real theatre.

So we're not talking about seeing The King and I at the Roxy, right?

Vito: here's the link to the "King and I" screening info. I hope they bring it back someday!

http://www.oscars.org/events/archive/mnow_king_and_i/index.html

I asked my friend how big the theater was. He said about 250-300 seats, but the screen was very impressive. So it sure ain't the Roxy, but I'm still sorry I missed this screening.

"The King and I" at the Lighthouse was a brand new restotation printdown to 35mm from the original 55mm negative. It was shown in a very wide aspect ratio with black bars at the top and bottom of the theater's cinemascope (uncurved) screen. The sound was remastered in 4-track Dolby Digital stereo. Sound seperation behind the screen was excellent however I could not hear any surrounds,unlike the presentation at the Roxy, so many years ago. This theater has small speakers in the ceiling. This print will soon be realeased to "art" theaters around the country according to the Fox restoration representative who spoke at the presentation.
OK Vito?

Pablo what does art theaters mean?
Cinema Village, Angelica, the Quad?
Maybe somebody at Fox has a functioning neuron in the brain(though I wouldn't count on it) and they'll show it at the Ziegfeld.

I sure hope Vincent is right and they show it at the Ziegfeld. If Fox promotes it properly, they should get a really nice turnout. All of us will be there for sure.

I would love to see this at the Music Hall during one of their dark periods, but I guess it's just wishful thinking.

We're lucky that in New York City "art" releases and mainstream releases often share the same venue, as at the Clearview Chelsea, Loews Lincoln Square, AMC Empire, and Regal 14th Street. Even the Ziegfeld just played Raging Bull, a picture more likely to be found at the Film Forum. So it is conceivable that King and I could have an arthouse release plan, yet play at a big screen house in NYC and the art rounds in other markets.

There is probably as much chance of Fox properly presenting this film at the Ziegfeld as there is of the studio rebuilding the Roxy at 7th and 50th and showing it with its original stage show.

Thanks Pablo, you mentioned "The King and I" had a Dolby Digital 4 track print. Dolby Digital is a 6 track process, which may explain the lack of surrounds. Perhaps only the stage speakers were used.
Generally the six Dolby Digital tracks are six descrete channels,
#1.Left #2.center #3.right #4.sub woofer and #5 are used for stereo surrounds,(left wall,right wall), and ex surrounds which create a rear speaker config. It still should have sounded great and I am sorry I missed it.

Wow Benjamin, who peed in your popcorn at The Ziegfeld? Gee, tough crowd when I'm defending this place. Hard to believe that I'm in the minority that considers The Ziegfeld a great theater. Is it a palace? No, I was cheated out of the great palaces. The Paramount, Capital, Roxy were all gone, The Rivoli, Criterion, & Warner were twinned when I came into my own as a serious moviegoer. I grew up on Long Island and as soon as I could, jumped on the LI Rail Road to the big city. The Ziegfeld was always considered first class. When you went there, it became an event. Rain or shine, you knew you were going to stand online down 54th Street and I gotta tell ya, no one complained. Getting online before you turned at the corner of 6th and you were guaranteed your favorite seat. In all my viewing, I can honestly say I never experienced a problem in any aspect of presentaion, and I can be a picky SOB.

I went to see films I had no interest in only because it was The Ziegfeld. If it was in 70MM I was there, a musical, I was there. I had the honor of seeing "Apocalypse Now" opening weekend. I still have the special program book with the full credits because the print didn't have them. If the theater was good enough for Coppola, it was good enough for me and hot damn if those helicopters didn't sound like they were above you. Musicals I saw there included, "Grease", "Grease 2" "Tommy", "Hair" "The Rose", "Fame" "Staying Alive", "Pink Floyd, The Wall" and yes (head down in shame) "Can't Stop The Music". But c'mon it was in 70MM at The Ziegfeld!!

Sci Fi was cool there too. "2001", "Close Encounters", The "Star Wars" Trilogy SE, 12 Monkeys. A piece of crap like "Saturn 5" was made better than it was by playing there. The thrill of 1100 people cheering when Apollo 13 landed safely, c'mon what more could you want plus fresh popped popcorn, take that Loews. Not going to continue boring you with all the titles, but I saw more films at The Ziefeld than my own neighborhood theater and I remember everyone of them too.

The last time I was there was for "Chicago". Miramax played it right with the exclusive and it payed off. You would think studios would learn but they are so afraid of not getting that $20 million first weekend, they are blind that exclusives can and do work. I've been to The Grauman's Chinese, been to London's Empire but I'll keep my Ziegfeld. Luxuriously comfortable seats with great sitelines, state of the art sound and projection, great bookings, it is a palace to me, with or without the gilded plaster cherubs.

BobT: When I think back on the best soundtrack experiences I've ever had in a theater, one of the best of them all was "Tommy" at the Ziegfeld.

BobT: You MUST'VE been a Ziegfeld junky to sit through dreck like "Grease 2" and "Staying Alive" not to mention "Can't Stop the Music" (you should be cited for your bravery, though).

If you look at the posts above, I too champion The Ziegfeld with much the same arguement that you make: that it may not compare well with the true palaces, it is at least comparable to some of the lesser ones such as The Mayfair/DeMille.

The place is maintained beautifully and it's a great theater to see an event film.

I was not sure where to post this, however since all of my Cinema Treasure friends visit this page I thought I would put it here
I came across and old newspaper movie listing from November 1963, if we had all decided to go to a movie that day we would have had quite a time decided where to go from the following choices.
Loew's Tower East, played "Fantasia" in 4 track stereo sound
Radio City Music Hall," On screen "The Wheeler Dealers"
On stage "High Spirits"
Rivoli, reserved seat engagement of "Cleopatra"
Warner Cinerama, reserved seat engagement of "Mad Mad World"
Loew's Cinerama, reserved seat engagement of "How the West Was Won"
Oh heck, let's just take the weekend off and visit all those fabulous theatres.

Vito: I also recently saw a paper from November 23, 1963, the day after JFK was assassinated. I noticed the ads for the two great Cinerama features playing three blocks away from each other, and I wished I was as old as I am now when that paper was new, instead of being only 9 . I would have been going to see them on a regular basis. Another great ad I noticed: Fellini's "8 1/2" playing at the New Embassy 46th St. in Times Square.

I have papers my mother saved from JFK's assasination and I think most of the Broadway theatres were dark in memorial to the president. Did it mention anything about movie theatres? Everyone was glued non-stop to the TV.

The Ziegfeld, when held in comparison to some of NYC's past movie palaces, doesn't hold up in the same league, but for what it is and for how much the filmgoing scene in the city (and in general) has changed in the last 30-40 years, it's the closest thing to a 'classic' cinema treasure we have.

I like the Ziegfeld and it is the best remaining theatre in New York City still showing movies. It does lack the showmanship that the exclusive reserved seat attractions it use to show. I went with a friend to see the "Road to Perdition" and was surprised at the lack professionalism at such a high profile industry theatre. The curtains never opened and closed during the presentation and the theate wasn't as clean that you would expect. My friend owns a theatre complex of his own with an Egyptian theme and curtains in each auditorium and was surprised that this was the one of the top screens in New York City.brucec

RobertR: The paper I saw had all the movie showtimes listed in a separate column called Movie Clock or something like that, but that was probably set up to be printed before the assassination. I don't know if the movie theaters actually closed, but I'm sure you're right about not too many people going to the movies that day.

You MUST'VE been a Ziegfeld junky to sit through dreck like "Grease 2" and "Staying Alive" not to mention "Can't Stop the Music" (you should be cited for your bravery, though).

Actually "Grease 2" was a treat because I got to go to the 70MM test run. They tested the print before the premiere. It was just a friend and I in the auditorium with the director Pat Birch and some producers in the back making sure things were working fine. I also got to go into the projection booth. Nothing like your own private 70MM screening at The Ziegfeld, which made it all the more sweet because I had been such a fan of the place. Like I said everything was better at The Ziegfeld.

While, in a sense, I can understand why they included the Ziegfeld in the article (I can see how, in a narrow sense, it meets their criteria), the listing of it in such an article made me think of the concept and the expression, "defining deviance down."

There is no greater disdainer of the Ziegfeld than myself . . . .
Talk about damning with faint praise . . . .

The Ziegfeld may not be ideal . . . .

I think we tend to put the Ziegfeld on a pedastal and worship her because sadly she is all we have left. In the good ole days she would have been just another movie house, and certainly not a movie palace . . . .

it's as good as it gets these days . . . .

Is it a palace? No, I was cheated out of the great palaces. The Paramount, Capital, Roxy were all gone, The Rivoli, Criterion, & Warner were twinned when I came into my own as a serious moviegoer.

I realize, especially from reading the posts on this site, that movie theaters are more than just their architecture and design. Just as important -- actually, even more so -- is the way a theater presents a movie (e.g., the quality of the picture, the quality of the sound, etc.).

Luxuriously comfortable seats with great sitelines, state of the art sound and projection, great bookings, it is a palace to me, with or without the gilded plaster cherubs.

Considering that I am bashing 20th Century Fox today may I continue?
Am I the only one to have noticed that the 40th Anniversary of the Rivoli's world premiere of The Sound Of Music in March of '65 has come and gone this month?
So where was the deluxe Todd AO print which should have been struck for this occasion with a run at(gulp)the Ziegfeld?
Pretty soon those of us who saw it in our youths will be gone and then who will go to see the thing in a theater ever again?

At least they played it in 70mm for the 25th anniversary at the Trans-Lux East (Gotham). It's my favorite film but I refused to see it in that sing along version.

So the Ziegfeld isn't the greatest theatre that ever existed. So what? I'm 37 and most of the greatest theatres that did exist were torn down or mutilated in some way before I was born. Nothing I can do about that. A palace it may not be, but for what's left in this city, I'll take the Ziegfeld or the Beekman as many times as I can as long as they're still here.

Seeing Tommy at it's premiere engagement at the Ziegfeld was truly an incredible experience. The pulsing stereo sound and Tina Turner's performance were incomparable. Could only be fully appreciated in the deluxe surroundings of the Z.

Tommy was one of the first movies I saw at the Ziegfeld and I can remember it as if it was yesterday. The sound and spectacle were awesome; and coming from the suburbs (RKO Twin, anyone?) the theater was a revelation. Who knew you could see a movie in such a glamorous and elegant setting.

CConnolly: Back in February you were posting on the Capitol Theater page about "The Ten Commandments." Well, the American Film Institute will be announcing their 100 Greatest Movie Quotes in June, and here is the link to the 400 nominated quotes they'll be choosing from. Check out #348.

http://afi.com/Docs/tvevents/pdf/quotes400.pdf

I was at a Q&A a couple of years ago where former NYT film critic Janet Maslin interviewed Harvey Weinstein of Miramax and in that discussion he expressed worry about the future of the Ziegfeld. I do remember walking by one night and they were having the premier for Quentin Tarantino's "Jackie Brown." In the lobby Harvey was there with Q, Mira Sorvino (Q's then paramour), Bridgit Fonda and I forget who else getting their picture snapped.

Some people might remember this, but I think shortly after Clearview took control of the Ziegfeld they put in place a dunderhead policy regarding "pick your seat." I'm not even sure how it worked, but I think it was tailored for people who reserved tickets over the phone. So, you couldn't just walk up to the box office, buy a ticket and sit anywhere you pleased (getting a good seat has never been a problem in the capacious Ziegfeld).) You would buy a ticket and have to pick where you wanted to sit. It was awful annoying and it was quickly abandoned. Anyone remember that fiasco?

And I remember going here to see one of the recent "Star Bores" films and specifically wanted to see it at the Ziegfeld because it was one of two places in Manhattan where they were projecting digitally. When I got there, they said the digital equipment had broken and they would be screening a regular film print.

I also remember viewing Scorsese's "Last Temptation of Christ" here on original release and kept thinking that someone had planted a bomb in the theatre. The screening went off, of course, without a hitch.

Bill: Thanks so much for the list! And my favorite quote is there!!!!

You're welcome, CC. The show will be on CBS June 21st (I think), and I hope the Moses quote makes the final cut.

Hardbop, I was at the Ziegfeld's first public screening of "Last Temptation" with the cops stationed at the exits and at the sides of the screen, and I too thought a bomb or some kind of big disruption was going to happen in the theater near the end of the movie.

They use the reserved seat ticket policy at the ArcLight Theatre complex (Cinerama Dome) in Hollywood. Tickets are around $14.00 and it works well. You go up to the box office and the cashier shows you a seating plan of the auditorium and then a screen shows whats available for that show. When you get to the auditorium the usher will show you to your seat. Just like the old Roadshow days in the theatres. Before Pacific Theatres built the ArcLight complex the Cinerama Dome was doing about the same amount of business as the Ziegfeld. Both are single screen First Run presentation houses.
But now since Pacific built the extra screens, this theatre complex is doing killer business. The arclight complex is what we really need in Manhattan. The only way this theatre is going to last is if Clearview could build a multi-screen plex next door and operate it like the ArcLight complex in Hollywood.

For $14 per ticket, it should work well, or I'd demand a refund! That's about $4 more than the going rate...Long before "the old Roadshow days," ushers showed patrons to their seats, regardless of the price of admission. Of course, many people preferred to find their own seats, but it was reassuring that you could ask an usher for help if you needed it.

Just look at the photo above, all that space over the theatre. Wonder who has the air rights? Leaving the main auditorium alone and building up would secure it's future.

BobT, Thats an idea.

Does Clearview own the building or are they just tenant with a lease?

There are a few companies that operate Deluxe type plex theatres that charge more than the going rate of admission.

When Funny Girl played at the Criterion in '68 a mezz seat(considered the best place for a movie though not by me) for a Saturday night was $6.00. A top Broadway musical for orch would cost you $15.00. This means that a roadshow mezz seat(which of course does not and will not never exit again- the Ziegfeld is really far back orch)would cost you today about $40.00. Then if in line with contemporary avarice we were to discuss Premium Seating a theater then could charge $100 for a hit roadshow film.

Good point from both you, Bob, and William and Warren, too, but, presuming Clearview either owns the building which houses the Ziegfeld or could, at least in theory, negotiate with the landlord to build an ArcLight-like complex around the Ziegfeld, what are the odds they'd actually do so? From what I can tell (at least based on their properties in Manhattan), Clearview has shown little motivation to build any new properties or add onto the ones they already own (or hold leases on) and with the ongoing financial troubles of Cablevision, such a venture would seem unlikely.

It looks like the Ziegfeld Theatre is at a point in it's life that the theatres in Beverly Hills went through in the mid 1970's. The three palaces in Beverly Hills (Warner Beverly Hills, Fox Wilshire, Beverly). They would still get booked with major releases during the year from the studios. And most of the year be only running evening performances during the week. And finally going to running the classic Roadshow prints that were available. At that time there was many prints to choose from, that were still runable and you had real projectionists manning the booths.
Pacific Theatres had a few locations that they showed little motivation in rebuilding. In Los Angeles there are a few of these Deluxe type theatres and they are doing killer business. The ArcLight in Hollywood, The Grove in Park La Brea area near the Farmers Market and The Bridge near Culver City & Marina Del Rey area of Los Angeles. For the $14.00 admission price you get the Deluxe service that was once availible for the price of any ticket and validated parking for about 3-4 hours.

I pretty sure that Clearview doesn't own the real estate. I worked with a guy whose brother-in-law was a mega-rich real estate mogul and he mentioned in passing that his brother-in-law "owned the Ziegfeld" among other things.

I'm not sure about this, but I always assumed that the Ziegfeld Theater was part of the same zoning lot as the skyscraper next door (and that the skyscraper got a zoning bonus for providing the through-block "park" separating the two).

If that's is the case, then I think there would some kind of constraint as to what could be built on the Ziegfeld site -- since the skyscraper next door had already not only utilized all the allowable commercial space for the zoning lot, but was bonused for the through block "park" to boot.

If this is true, and I'm not mistaken, this is actually a pretty clever use of space under the existing zoning regulations (whether these regulations are good urbanism or not, is a different question). On the Avenue, you have a tall skyscraper utilizing the allowable commercial space, with front and side "plazas" and a through block pedestrian "park" boosting the amount of space the skyscraper can have. Plus you have a low-rise theater, with a parking garage entrance (below the theater on the 55th St. side) on the side streets, utilizing the areas that cannot be built up too much. (And, I'm guessing, that the parking garage space extends beneath the through block "park.")

The latest and hopefully last of the "Star Bores" films will be opening next month I believe. I'm sure we'll start to see the fanatics camping out on the sidewalk waiting to get into the first screening. They literally pitch tents and camp out in Midtown Manhattan days, if not weeks, in advance of the "Star Bores" movies.

The Star Wars faithful will begin lining up outside the Ziegfeld on April 30th. This is a line for the best seats only - tickets have already been sold for the first show at midnight 5/19 (I got mine today).

The ZIG is not screening a film this week.The next attraction will be The Hickhikers Guide To the Galaxy(3-29),and then STAR WARS!

I'm so glad to have lived in NYC for a number of years and to have seen many a film at this fine theater. It remains in 2005 the premier screen in all of Manhattan, the rest of the big-screened movie houses all now gone and/or converted to retail spaces. The Ziegfeld has superb 70mm, digital sound and projection capabilities. I've seen such titles as "Brainstorm", "Roger Rabbit", "Yentl", "The Wall", "The Rose", "Lawrence of Arabia", "Fantasia", "Pennies from Heaven", "Victor/Victoria", "Grease 2" and many others at this spectacular house. Long may it live!

I'm curious as to why the Ziegfeld is dark until next week. I'm wondering if they are upgrading their digital projectors to the new 4K units out by Sony.

I'm sure it's dark because they have nothing to play.

According to information I heard from Clearview, the plan now is for the Ziegfeld to remain dark between major first-run engagements. And expect nothing to be playing September and October.

Do the employees go on unemployment between "major first run engagements"?

Isn't that a waste of money having a venue that isn't used? You would have at least some revenue coming in from a few patrons rather then to have nothing and still have to pay for your rent, electricity, etc. I've never heard of such a thing.

Don - I don't know. I guess it would depend on whether they were 'laid off' of if Clearview can temporarily put them in another location.

Jodar - I beleive the bigger theatres used to do this from time to time during the roadshow era, especially if they needed to do technical upgrades between engagements. Depending on the size of the venue, it certainly does cost more money just to open the doors for a handful of customers instead of being dark.

Quite a while back weekly Variety would list the weekly grosses of each theatre, and in parentheses would also indicate the "nut". This was the cost of operating the venue taking into account all expenses. Depending on the box split with the distributor for the week's revenue, it may not pay to remain open during slow periods.

They will probably make more in the rental for the upcoming Star Wars premiere and press screenings than being opened to empty houses.

At one time the Ziegfeld would fill in these dry spots with revivals of classics, many times in 70mm.

Not about The Zeigfeld, but a definite blast from the past. I rented the new DVD of "Finian's Rainbow" from Netflix because it had a full length commentary from Francis Ford Coppola. It was one of his first features and his first for a studio. It's a very entertaining commentary in which he describes what a Roadshow Engagement was and talks about 70MM. What I didn't know was the DVD has a 15 minute documentary of the World Premiere at The Penthouse Theatre on Broadway. Numerous shots of the marquee and it's sister theatre The Warner which was playing "2001". You could clearly see the old Latin Quarter across the street with Rick Nelson headlining. There are some shots of the outer lobby with the gilded mirror walls going up to the glass front doors. Fun to see the old Times Square again, worth the rental.

I went by the Ziegfeld the other day to see what was going on. 'Saharah' has already ended it's run there. They are re-opening Apr. 29 with 'Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy'. In the meantime they are selling advance tickets for the upcoming 'Star Wars' flick and from what I could see, some of the screenings were sold out already.

Funny when i was a boy in the 60's big budget Hollywood movies were for the most part for adults to which they could bring their children. Now its a guy in a gorilla suit running around with a laser in front of a computer screen. With of course some twinkie spiritual transcendental junk layered on top with a trowel.

So many comments...I'm amazed! Anyway, I'm a 20 year Southern Cali resident making my first trip to NYC later this month. Needless to say, I plan on hitting the Ziegfeld while I'm in town. They'll be showing Star Wars Episode 3 so that'll be fun. I'm a big fan of single screen theatres and complexes with very large main auditoriums. I've had more than my fair share of experiences with the great LA landmarks like the Cinerama Dome (saw the 3-strip Cinerama print of "How The West Was Won" in 2003...or was it 2004?), Grauman's Chinese, The Village & The National in Westwood and Big Newport in Orange County. I'm looking forward to checking out the Ziegfeld.

Went to the Ziegfeld tonight to see 'Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'. I can't remember the last time I was there. I know I missed a couple of great revival screenings in the past, but I was never jazzed about any of the first run stuff either. It must have been years since I was there last, and I am so glad that I went tonight. Even though many people on this blog think it pales in comparison to the the old NYC theaters of yore (which I'm sure it does), it's still an amazing place and pretty much all we have left in terms of grand old places of any kind. As far as 'Hitchhikers Guide' is concerned, I didn't know what the hell they were talking about! It seems like a movie geared to those who have already read the book. It get's points for creativity and great set design (and Zooey Deschanel is nice to look at too), but the story was muddled as hell. Kind of a shame since it was a really great looking film. The Ziegfeld screened it in digital projection with amazing clarity and sound, and coming from a Luddite like me that saying alot.

Once again all I can say is that this place is a jewel in the rough, and I hope I get to see many, many more flicks there in the future.

And just for old time's sake here are some I've seen there in the past:

Vertgo (revival screening early 90s)
The Doors
Edward Scissorhands
Jurrasic Park
Primary Colors

and probably more I can't remember. Hope they do more revival screenings soon.

Welcome to New York Chris, I would suggest you also check out the Beekman which sadly, is about to close. Take the Radio City Music Hall tour as well.

Chris, I very much hope you get a chance to see a movie at the "Loew's Jersey" and take a tour of the "Stanley." While both of these theaters are listed as being in New Jersey, they are both very, very close to mid-town Manhattan (which is just across the Hudson River from New Jersey). They are probably more convenient to mid-town Manhattan than many parts of the Bronx, Queens or Brooklyn (and certainly more convenient than Staten Island). (Both of these theaters have listings, with lots of info on them, on the Cinema Treasures website.)

As far as I know, the Loew's Jersey is the only remaining TRUE movie PALACE in the NYC area that still shows movies (albeit, mostly on weekends as a non-profit showcase, I believe). The Stanley, which is a block or two away from it, is also a TRUE movie PALACE that is used as a church -- but I believe the church gives tours of it. (Check out the Cinema Treasures listings for both theaters for more details.)

(To clarify the terminology a bit: it seems to me that the current Ziegfeld is a movie THEATER, rather than a movie PALACE. In the same sense, one would say that the Alden and the Merrick (two, modestly decorated, 1,000+ [?] seat, local movie theaters in Jamaica, Queens) were movie THEATERS. The nearby Valencia (a lavishly decorated, 3,000+ [?] seat, atmospheric), however, was a movie PALACE. The Stanley, by the way is also an atmospheric, and as a kid it reminded me of the Valencia.)

The thing I would emphasize is that despite the "Jersey City" location, both of these theaters are extremely convenient to Manhattan. They are just steps away from the Jersey City station of the PATH train. (PATH is a "subway" -- which in some ways is nicer than the NYC subway -- that connects Manhattan with towns in nearby New Jersey, just across the Hudson River.) In Manhattan, there are PATH stations at Herald Sq., 23rd St., 14th St., 9th St., Christopher St. and at Ground Zero. The trains taking the most direct route leave from the newly rebuilt World Trade Center terminal -- the other stations listed are on a train line that folows a more indirect route to Jersey City.

I have never been to the Loew's Jersey myself. But I did go to the Stanley as a kid (to see Jerry Lewis' "Visit to a Small Planet"), and this theater is a TRUE movie palace that will show people who missed the movie palace era what people are talking about.

I also second Vito suggestion about Radio City Music Hall and -- especially -- the Beekman. Radio City Music Hall will always be there (hopefully!), but the Beekman is slated to be torn down very shortly. In a way, the Beekman is an early 1950s art house version of the movie "palace" (albeit, the "Petit Trianon"?) -- it's the very embodiment of a certain movie-going way of life. Check out the page on Cinema Treasures (especially the links that someone has posted to photographs). I think you will be kicking yourself if you miss out on visiting it before it is demolished.

I'm only in New York for 2 days so it's highly unlikely that I'll go to New Jersey. And, as it turns out, it's been suggested that I see Star Wars Episode 3 at another theatre nearby. So the chances of my visiting the Ziegfeld are looking slim. Besides...I'm not interested in tours just for tours sake. I'd rather see a movie in these palaces!

"Do the employees go on unemployment between "major first run engagements"?"

We either get placed in another Clearview theater around town, or we just don't work. I worked there a couple years ago, and I'm thinking of working there again when I come back from college for the summer, but if they're only going to be doing limited engagements, I may have to go with a place that'll guarantee me more hours. It's a shame that such a wonderful theater isn't getting used as much as it could be.

When I worked there, the A/C didn't work for half of the summer, so we'd have to bribe people into the theater with discount tickets and free drinks. And a friend of mine who attended the "Kingdom of Heaven" premiere there the other night told me that part of the backlighting on the marquee was out. Little maintenance issues like that should not be plaguing one of the greatest movie houses in the world. I told the managers many times what I thought of how the place was being run, and all they could do was look at me and say "I wish it were up to me to change things".

Patrons should complain to Clearview management and do so with frequency and ferocity, perhaps then someone will fix the place, especially if its the AC. I'd be quite a livid patron, if I were to attend say, screening of the new Revenge of the Sith, in 90 degree+ indoor heat!

How is the digital projection at this theater? I know there are several brands out there, some newer and better than others, and of different quality.

So who has the best digital projection, this screen or the ones at AMC or Loews? Or are there others I should consider for the best digital presentation?

Boy, I sure am a happy boy this week. Movies for me are most definitely the films, most definitely the theatrical experience of walking into a designed house, but the excitement of getting in line for a movie, waiting for the movie, being in a room full of excited people, and enjoying the film in a packed house... unbeatable!

Wednesday night at midnight was just great. Camera crews, kleig lights, fans in costumes, packed lines, excitement! This isn't just some opening with a bunch of autograph hunters and celeb-watchers, this is a legitimate event! Three people from Clearview were there presenting the film, and Hedda Lettuce arrived with green hair to toss out prizes.

It's a little sad they've abandoned opening and closing the curtains this week, even with over an hour between shows during the marathon of screenings, but it's just great to have a great big lovely time at the movies.

I walked into one of the little teeny shoeboxes at a multiplex to catch the end credits of Revenge of the Sith and... yuck. Just 21 blocks up you could walk through a chandelieried lobby and past a curved entraneway through designed doors and sit in comfortable seats in a huge room with over a thousand laughing, clapping people with the movie projected on a large screen.

I've been to the Loews Jersey, many times. I'll be at Ninotchka at the Orpheum in LA for the Last Remaining Seats. The Ziegfeld is not an 80-year-old movie palace. It's a great modern theater. Great great great. It's just great. And it's five blocks from my apartment. Long live the Ziegfeld!

I guess the unhappy people will crap on my parade, but that's okay. I love being alive and enjoying life. Scowl your faces all you want and pooh pooh pooh on the extremely few American pleasures we have all you want, the Ziegfeld rocks!

Shade: I was at the midnight show too, which was everything you said it was, and I was there again on Saturday morning. I've been spoiled - I don't ever want to see it anywhere else except the Ziegfeld.

So, do you think is the best digital projection in the city?

I'm not sure about best digital projection (although Episode III looked better at the Ziegfeld than Episode II did three years ago), but I will say that the Ziegfeld is the overall best theater in the city, especially now that Radio City Music Hall isn't showing movies anymore.

There are so few nice places to see movies in New York. There are many places to see films, but a nice auditorium is fairly rare. We have screening facitilies here, and some are comfortable, and few have any design elements.

Loews 72nd Street East is a cool 1962 place to see a movie, but the entrance and lobbies are merely functional. This theat is a great place to see a movie though. Nice metal work on the stairs, comfortable seats (I believe taken from the Loews Astor Plaza), and two small balconies jutting out from either side of the projection booth. The upper auditorium at the UA 64th Street is very nice, and also sports a curved screen.

The Walter Reade is my favorite NY screening facility. Fresh popcorn, large indoor waiting area, often hung with posters or photographs, a single screen, comfy seats arranged smartly, and a screen that's right there in front of you. Great sound, etc.

As far as cool New York history, the Paris is pretty much it. The Paris is really good fun with a large auditorium, excellent descension to the popcorn area, and great design elements. After the Beekman goes next month (so unbelievably wrong and sad) it's really the single screen marquee theater showing new releases. I'm a big fan of the ImaginAsian (the retitled 59th Street East, aka the D.W. Griffith), and should also include that, as a departure from the airport-simulations of today's moviegoing 'experience.'

The Ziegfeld is really the best. As soon as you enter to buy a ticket, you're under a chandelier. You walk into a downstairs lobby adorned with display cases with the original theater's history and artifacts on display, then have a choice of ascending stairs or an escalator, with more chandeliers to guide you, then you're in a curved end exit/entrance lobby with black doors on one side, and then you enter the main concessions lobby with yet another chandelier, a large French My Fair Lady poster, a round soft couch, and fun signs for Mens and Ladies restrooms, and fresh popped popcorn (depends how busy). Then a choice of left or right entrance to the mammoth audotorium with raised seating in the back (308 seats I believe) and another 800 seats on the main floor. And CURTAINS! They don't always operate them, but for my third viewing of Reveing of the Sith the curtains opened and closed before the trailers, and then closed again at the end of the 9:30 show, which was great because that was the last show of the nonstop marathon which began Weds. evening (Thurs. morning).

I was in a new friend's 11th floor apartment last night at 54th and 7th and looked out the window and right there was the Zeigfeld! Would been great to have seen all the tents pitched for the anticipation of the Weds. premiere.

I'm partly seeing the film again because the film is fun, but mostly it's to have yet another reason to go to the Ziegfeld, especially with a few hundred other people there. I love seeing that place so alive.

I would have to say that for now, The Ziegfeld is safe. Think about it: the land upon which is sits is mid street and sits between two A class office towers. The footprint isn't really big enough to provide a developer with anything that they could build anything really dynamic. Just my opinion.

Add to the mix the (hopefully) anticipated outcry that would befall anyone even proposing this and I think it's somewhat safe to assume it will be around for awhile.

But. You. Never. Know.

I wonder if the Ziegfeld could be expanded upwards, maybe with a proper balcony installed and a few hundred more seats. I'd love to go to a 2000+ seat theatre on a regular basis.

If I correctly understand the property data provided on the OASIS NYC website, the Ziegfeld is on the same zoning lot (block 1007, lot 29) as the the adjacent through-block "park" and adjacent office building (whose official address seems to be 120 W. 55th St.) The lot is listed as being 200 ft. wide (the width of most mid-town Manhattan blocks), and 500 ft. deep. (I believe the blocks between Sixth and Seventh are about 800 ft. deep, so this is a pretty deep lot.)

The maximum FAR (floor area ratio) allowed on the site is 12, but the actual FAR seems to be 19.9, which means that the builders qualified for one or more bonuses. They probably got a bonus for the front and side plazas, plus a bonus for the through-block park. Whether a bonus was given for a movie theater on this site, I don't know.

(I also mention some of the zoning issues for this site in my April 14th post in this thread, above -- but at that time I hadn't looked up the site on OASIS NYC yet.)

While I doubt they would be able to build more office space on the Ziegfeld site -- I think all the office space allowed is already in the tower on the other side of the through-block "park," I would imagine they could change the use of the Ziegfeld Theater (unless they got a bonus for building it). So maybe it could become a "Toys R Us" (as someone joked in an earlier post) or a good-sized disco, etc.

If there were plans to close the Ziegfeld (due to a lack of profitability), I'd be very surprised if the outcry was significantly greater than the (apparently very little outcry) for the Beekman and Cinema I, II & III. But, then again, I've been surprised to read that people consider the Ziegfeld a "treasure" and a "movie palace," so who knows, maybe there is a large and vocal group of fans who could provide sufficient pressure. But, given the the theater's lack of distinguished architecture and the lack of any genuine historical importance (understandable, since it was only built in the late 1960s), it's hard to imagine what kind of appeal could be made and what kind of pressure exerted.

My guess is that the Ziegfeld will survive, however, because it does seem to be profitable for certain kinds of films and because it might be difficult to find an economically compelling alternative use for for this site, given the zoning.

In my opinion, the only thing that can and will spell The Ziegfeld's doom is if some developer for some reason or another decides to build a competing "palace" at a better site, say nearer or actually in Times Square. The Ziegfeld is kind of off the beaten path and let's face it, it's really not that nice from the outside, at least.

Imagine if someone were to build a theater the same size or even larger than the Ziegfeld in which to hold it's premieres?

Since this scenario is highly unlikely, I think the place is safe because there really isn't another place in Manhattan that can host a premiere AND play the movie. Yes, The Music Hall is better for premieres but it's not playing the movies for more than one night.

QUOTE: "How is the digital projection at this theater? I know there are several brands out there, some newer and better than others, and of different quality.

So who has the best digital projection, this screen or the ones at AMC or Loews? Or are there others I should consider for the best digital presentation?" (saps)

***************************************
The Ziegfeld is equipped with a current-generation digital projection system capable of showing movies at 2K resolution. So seeing "Revenge Of The Sith" at the Ziegfeld should offer picture quality as good as or better than any competing cinemas also showing a digital presentation.

Check out the following list if you're curious where the Digital Cinema presentations are being held:

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/revenge_sith_d_engagements.htm

The next attraction at the Ziegfeld will be the Steven Spielberg-Tom Cruise remake of H.G. Wells' 'The War of the Worlds' (a wee little movie I suspect at least a few of us have become well-acquianted with of late), opening June 29th.

I assume due to Spielberg's lake of interest in digital, War of the Worlds will be a film presentaion?

My friend and I visited NYC and made a stop at this theater to see Revenge of the Sith in DLP. I must say that the theater is quite ornate and large but the screen size was smaller than I expected. I suspect its about 40' or so wide, about the size of some of the larger auditoriums in your local multiplex, or like our Baltimore's Senator. Its a bit strange to have to go up the stairs, then turn right into an auditorium that seems to go down again. The lobby pictures show a Ziegfeld that had a much more decorative top structure that is missing from the current one. Was this the same theater?

The picture and sound are better than in most theaters I have experienced with this DLP/Dolby Digital Cinema set up. Excellent sound separation, with little reverberation, yet powerful subwoofers add to the aural experience! Its nice to see an 'older' theater outfitted with the latest presentation technologies and sound. If people are going to leave their DVDs and cable to see a movie, this is how it should be experienced.

I ventured in to NYC to see "Revenge of the Sith" in Digital before it ends in a few days. I must say I was impressed. It was one of the hottest days and I see that the Ziegfeld has fixed the Air conditioner problem. maybe too good, I had to put a jacket on but didn't mind. When I saw "Atack of the Clones" it was another hot day and the ac didn't work, I baked. Another reason Ididn't like the film. But now I saw all 3 new Star Wars on the Ziegfeld screen...and the digital for Sith was impressive. The curtain actually opened then closed before the previews, the closed curtains brought back "Apocalypse Now" memories from '79.

Question: How much theater remodeling have they done since the theater opened??

My only gripe...after paying a whopping $10.75, the box office girl never even looked up at me, she was busy writing a letter, and didn't even say thank you....to quote C-3PO..."How rude"

Later, I went to the Walter Reade for a screening of "Atlantic City" great flick, great print, big screen....but that theater is starting to get the grundgy look, messy walls, no closed curtain....they need to remodel.

Rhett, post your comment on the Walter Reade page. Who knows?...it might draw some attention.

Okay, I do remember the not-so-friendly cashier at the booth, who, on this day, was reading a book. She and the ticket taker were watching, in bemusement, as I was trying to buy our tickets using the automatic kiosk. It didn't work, so I ended up buying it from her. She did say "enjoy the show" and that was about it. Rude, well, its NYC. At least told us to enjoy the show, perhaps she sensed we were out of town... :)

The girl taking the tickets was courteous, she said, welcome to clearview etc. It was the box-office girl that was rude...wheres the manager during this. Why do they put people with no personality at the boxoffice where people are paying .

It would be nice if the Ziegfeld closed the Summer with a classic bigscreen film. But "That'll be the day"

Universal presents KING KONG. World Premiere Monday, 12 December 2005. Regular performances start Wednesday, 14 December 2005.

While browsing the comments here I remembered how I went to the Rivoli for my 10th birthday to see Dr. Zhivago. We also saw The Sound of Music there. I believe we also saw Dr. Doolittle there, or maybe that was at Radio City. The entire family would get all dressed up, my dad would get the car out of the lot and we'd make our way uptown. My sisters and I would sightsee all the way, I was fascinated by "Fascination" in Times Square! After the show we'd all go to The Old Homestead for dinner. It was a big event to go to the movies as a family while growing up in NYC.

If we wanted to see Batman & Robin or Beatles movies, we walked to the Loew's (Low-eez) on Delancey St. or the Essex St. theater. :o)

I miss those days.

Here is a great ad from the half assed revival of "This is Cinerama" in 1973.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/ThisIsCinerma1973Re-Release.jpg

Now, the current screen must be only 40', as it appears to be about the same size as Baltimore's Senator. So, how can they properly show Cinerama on a flat screen that is only 40' wide?

The gold drapery,teaser,and black undermasking were all removed and filled in with the largest possible somewhat deeply curved screen (27 by 63 feet). The sound system was also upgraded for this 70mm presentation. The result was a poor imitation of the original Cinerama, however the screen should have been maintained for future 70mm blockbusters.

The Ziegfeld was among the handful of theaters that was equipped with Cinema Digital Sound (CDS), the 1990-1991 precursor to the contemporary digital sound formats.

From Richard Roper:
At last week's premiere of "War of the Worlds" at the Ziegfeld Theater in New York, guests had to surrender cell phones and handbags to security personnel.You know, because of the whole piracy thing. Even though you can't get more than about 30 seconds of grainy video with your camera phone, and you'd have to be a blithering nincompoop to take out a personal video camera at a major premiere and attempt to point-and-shoot at the screen for two hours.
But here's the beauty part. The New York Times reported that among those who had to check their personal belongings were actors Alec Baldwin, Tim Robbins -- who has an extended cameo in "War of the Worlds" -- and the film's director, Steven Spielberg.
That's right. They took away Spielberg's cell phone.
Unbelievable. That makes about as much sense as frisking Donald Trump as he enters Trump Tower, asking Hugh Hefner for ID at a party at the Playboy Mansion, or making sure Bono isn't sneaking in a tape recorder to a U2 concert.
When you're taking away Steven Spielberg's cell phone at a premiere of a movie DIRECTED BY STEVEN SPIELBERG, you're not just doing your job, you're following the orders of monumentally silly people.

I saw "War of the Worlds" there last night. I had some problems with the humans in the movie - some of the scenes just didn't make any sense - but the alien war machines are a truly awesome sight. And the Ziegfeld's sound system came through spectacularly with some of the loudest and most frightening sound effects I've ever heard.

http://www.kingkongmovie.com/ef239524432ba87f1ca8f70eed4b1fa7/en_splash.html

Judging from some of the more objective reviews (not the ridiculous hack critics like Joel Siegel) "War of the Worlds" sounds techically impressive but emotionally thin and uninvolving on a real human emotional level like "E.T." or even "Close Encounters". In other words, audiences might be "wowed" by it much like they do at a very expensive interactive theme park ride but they won't walk away with much to remember it by. And THAT (IMO) is exactly what is so wrong with American films today. They're all $200 million spectacles without an ounce of anything to relate to.

A mile wide and an inch deep.

I saw it yesterday and agree with the above comments. But then the 1953 version wasn't involving on any human level either, nor, for that matter, the H. G. Wells novel (and infamous Orson Welles radio broadcast) on which all were based. The whole story is a fear-fest, in any rendition of it you care to choose.

Well it opened fairly well with an opening day total of 21.8 million,
making it the 7th largest opening. "Batman Begins" did 15.1, but Star Wars had a 50 million opening day. It will do ok, but not the summer blockbuster the industry needs right now. I don't see it beating or coming close to last years Spider-man 2

Well it opened fairly well with an opening day total of 21.8 million,
making it the 7th largest opening. "Batman Begins" did 15.1, but "Star Wars" had a 50 million opening day. It will do ok, but not the summer blockbuster the industry needs right now. I don't see it beating or coming close to last years "Spider-man 2"

I made it to this place to see Star Wars Episode 3 in early June. Very nice theatre with ornate decor and a nice sound system. Screen is way way way too small for a theatre of this magnitude. Also, $10.00 for an afternoon show? What the heck! Oh well...at least I made it. Next trip, though, I'm headed to Loews Lincoln Square...which will probably be AMC Lincoln Square the next time I'm in NYC

For anyone interested:

The premiere of The Wedding Crashers is here on Wednesday, and next week (I think it's Monday but don't quote me on that just yet) is the premiere of Bad News Bears.

i saw 'Ryan's Daughter', 'Fame', 'The Rose' and 'Earthquake' here in the '70s.

it was a lovely place to see film

It IS a lovely place to see a film, but as other posters have noted, there is room for a larger screen.

1974 the 70mm "That's Entertainment" was a smash here
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/IamCuriousYellow.jpg

1974 the 70mm "That's Entertainment" was a smash here
http://photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/?action=view¤t=ThatsEntertainment.jpg

1974 the 70mm "That's Entertainment" was a smash here
http://photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/?action=view¤t=ThatsEntertainment.jpg

1974 the 70mm "That's Entertainment" was a smash here
http://photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/?action=view¤t=ThatsEntertainment.jpg

1974 the 70mm "That's Entertainment" was a smash here
http://photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/?action=view¤t=ThatsEntertainment.jpg

Anyone see "The Island" here at the Ziegfeld? If so, did they show it on film or in DLP Digital Projection? There seems to be some confusion over what format is being shown.

The advertisements in the NY Times for "The Island" have consistently stated DLP for the screenings at the Ziegfeld.

Given the fast flop of "The Island" I wouldn't be surprised if the Ziegfeld will soon go dark temporarily---which as other posters have noted, has happened from time to time over the years.

"The Island" will limp along till "The Great Raid" opens Aug 12th

"The advertisements in the NY Times for 'The Island' have consistently stated DLP for the screenings at the Ziegfeld."
__________________________________________

No, it hasn't. For a period of time, Loews 34th Street was the Manhattan venue advertising DLP. And none of the online ticket ordering services that I've checked have indicated DLP for the Ziegfeld, either. Nor has Clearview's page for the Ziegfeld been indicating DLP.

Which NYC area DLP shows are noted in today's NY TIMES?

The DLP website doesn't indicate a DLP Ziegfeld booking either. Check it out at DLP.com, but then again, they don't have the Loews Rio venue as having it either, yet they advertise a DLP showing of it.

I disagree about the Times. I had been considering seeing "The Island" at the Ziegfeld during its first week of release but had difficulty fitting a screening into my schedule (and decided against seeing it after hearing bad word of mouth). I checked the Times' ads for "The Island" daily during that first week, and each edition indicated that the Ziegfeld (and Loews 34th Street) were presenting the film digitally in Manhattan.

I'm looking at this past Sunday's New York Post (July 31,2005) and the ad for "The Island" has The Ziegfeld listed first with a box around it and the DPL logo. The only other theatre listed as DPL is the ADM's Pavilion Theatre in Park Slope, Brooklyn.

"The DLP website doesn't indicate a DLP Ziegfeld booking either. Check it out at DLP.com, but then again, they don't have the Loews Rio venue as having it either"
_______________________________________

Is this the Rio in Gaithersburg, MD?

The dlp.com site notes only a fraction of the DLP shows for the current titles in release, "The Island," "Sky High," and "Episode III." A more comprehensive source for digital projection screenings I'd recommend (pardon the plug) is at the www.FromScriptToDVD.com website.

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/island_d_cinema_engagements.htm
http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/sky_high_d_cinema_engagements.htm
http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/revenge_sith_d_engagements.htm

Posters....Re: "Island" DLP.

I saw the film in NJ in 35MM an excellent print, but let me save you all who are debating where to see it...it is a horrible film, a complete bore, lousy acting, bad story, worse directing. Action scenes you've seen 200,000 times. Seeing it in DLP wouldn't help your experience believe me, Ziegfeld or not...skip this one, wait for the DVD

I know someone who ushers at the Ziegfeld and is in the orchestra. I am surprised to hear they have an orchestra at this theater because it's clearly not old enough to have been built for stage presentation.

Sorry...wrong link provided a couple of posts ago re the "Sky High" DLP shows. Here is the correct one.
http://fromscripttodvd.com/sky_high_d_cinema.htm

No orchestra, just a string quartet. And a jazz combo that plays on Saturday nights. Not.

I guess he plays in the combo.

Just glanced at today's "Island" ad in the Times. The number of daily screenings at the Ziegfeld (and yes, the ad states DLP) is down to three; the last showing starts at the absurdly early hour of 8:15 pm. At least Clearview decided to not to close the Ziegfeld until the next attraction.

Yeah, like they need the time between shows to handle the crowds.
I never understood the small amount of showings per day at that theatre.

Sounds like a roadshow to me. Oklahoma, West Side Story and Fiddler had 3 shows a day on weekends at the Rivoli I believe.

Now I'm really depressed - the march of film history as it progresses from Oklahoma to West Side Story to Fiddler on the Roof to ... The Island.

Aw Bill, let's not forget "Dukes of Hazard", a relative talked me into taking him to a Warners screening, makes "Island" look like "Gone With the Wind",God awful movie. They just get worse and worse.

Probably the only reason 'The Island' is still showing at the Ziegfeld is a contractual obligation between Clearview and Dreamworks, obligating it to be shown for a certain number of weeks.

Speaking of 'The Dukes of Hazzard' cinematic re-do, can anyone explain to me why theatre owners in the NYC area gave this film the usual booking treatment (multiple screen runs at select venues, openings in every booking zone, etc)? Not to sound like a complete NYC, blue-state snob (O.K., I guess I AM being a complete NYC, blue-state snob), but where did they suppose the audience is in the area for this film? If there is an audience for this film, I'd think it would be in the red states (and hopefully the folks in the red states will prove me wrong on this and not go see it this weekend)...

Interesting ad in tomorrow's Times for "The Baxter." Produced and released by IFC, it will be playing exclusively in Clearview theaters throughout the NYC metro area starting next Friday. Corporate synergy at work. The ad highlights the engagement at the IFC Center, but the list of Clearview theaters in Manhattan showing the film includes the 62nd & Broadway cinema and the Ziegfeld. Even though the film seems a better fit for the IFC Center than the Ziegfeld, it's odd to see the IFC Center favored over the Ziegfeld (not to mention a film screening simultaneously at the Ziegfeld and the 62nd & Broadway cinema).

I'll be in NYC in November (18-26) and was wondering what might be playing during this time. Any assistance would be appreciated. Also, do you need to purchase tickets in advance or can you get them at the door!!

Thanks....

like most movie theatres, you can get them at the door. They also have automated ticket machines in the lobby. Should it be a major release or something you're concerned about missing out on, Id suggest checking out
www.clearviewcinemas.com You can information about the theatre including the phone number which works well too for information
and also a link so you can buy tickets online. Ah, the Internet.

1970 saw 2001 at the Ziegfeld
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/2001Ziegfeld.jpg

"The Ziegfeld is the only theatre in the country equipped with 6-track stereophonic sound."

Don't you just love the outrageous hype present in that "2001" ad?!

That is one of the funniest ads I've ever seen. If 50' is "half a city block", then they have some mighty small blocks! And I'm sure the note of using Zeiss Favorit projectors just packed them in!!!

"The Ziegfeld is the only theatre in the country equipped with 6-track stereophonic sound."

Michael, I can just see the foam building around your mouth and the smoke coming out of your ears when you read that. I still cannot believe they actually made that claim.
Mark, the whole thing was sooo 50s, like 3-Ds,"A lion in your lap,and a girl in your arms" or CinemScope's "The miracle you see
without glasses"

Now that someone has brought up "2001". What do you think it would be like to see it projected in Imax? After seeing "Charlie and the chocolate Factory" and seeing a scene from it in that film, it got me wondering. I know there are people that think regular films presented in Imax is not what it is cracked up to be. However, I must say after seeing "Charlie" and "Harry Potter" previously, I will take an Imax film presentation over the shoebox theatre showings anytime! Even drove 50 miles to see them! Reminds me of my childhood days when we would drive into center city Philadelphia to see the "roadshow 70MM films." It is like someone else stated elsewhere on this site, you have to give the moviegoer something that is extraordinary to get them off their sofas. In addition to better films, better manners by moviegoers, better presentations would be ideal. I still remember the curtains opening, opening, etc. as the lights dimmed in the movie palaces with 70mm presentations. The overatures ended and the movie logo's filled those fantastic screen! Oh what memories!

Dennis, the IMAX theatres are gaining momentium, National Amusements has plans to incorporate an IMAX theatre in future locations. When a movie like "Batman Begins" or "Charlie" plays in IMAX, people will go out of the way to see it in the IMAX version rather than the 35mm.
Warners is very hot on the idea and has plans for more releases, the new Harry Potter will be shown in IMAX in November and Lucas is planning an IMAX release of all the "Star Wars" films. I would love to see "2001" in IMAX as well.

Michael, Since IMAX is a 70mm format, I think it may be time to start an IMAX listing on your website, it may be the only 70mm we will see for a long time.

Vito,
Surf the site; we do have some IMAX content posted. What kind of list were you thinking of?

Michael,
I had not visited the site in a while, happy to see you have included IMAX. The format is growing, many young people have never seen a true 70mm movie and are loving it. At National Amusements Cinema Delux in White Plains New York we are splitting three IMAX movies over the course of the day. Charlie, Batman, and Nascar, all are very popular. The format continues to improve with new and more user friendly software, many of the bugs have been worked out and the technical support is first rate. The prints are holding up very well, we have found keeping a high humidity level in the booth has made a big difference, we keep the booth like a rain forest and the prints love it. Oh and I promise to visit the website more often.

So why doesn't the Clearview make the Ziegfeld a real presentation house and install a real 140 degree curved 80 ft screen which would be adaptable to show everything from 1:85 to panavision to 70MM like the old times Square houses. Thereby utilizing the theater a lot more than it is being used now and garnering a lot of publicity for itself. The way theaters used to years ago when they were modernized.
Now its just being used as another screening room along with all the other multiplexes in Manhattan.
Maybe this can be the East Coast American Cinemateque.

Vito: your love for your profession was never more apparent than when you talked about the IMAX prints loving the high humidity, as if they were alive. Guys like you and Rob Endres belong in the Projectionists Hall of Fame.

Vincent I think more theatre owners haver got to begin thinking the way we do. With attendance numbers decreasing, they must find ways to bring em back to the theatres. God knows we have the resources to equip the theatre with mind blowing "Super Projection" on giant screens with better sound than they can generate at home. Other problems I hear about all the time stem from the rudeness of many theatre goers, everything from ringing cell phones to crying babies has got to be addressed, Then there is the problem of DVDs, Of course the studios make a fortune on the DVD sales, but it hurts theatre owners when the DVD is available so soon after the movies release, the talk now is to shorten the window between release of films and DVDs. We can give them what they can't get at home, it's time we started doing that,IMAX is a step in the right direction.
Multiplex's are here to stay but there has to movie theatres as well, tear down those 100 seat screening rooms being called theatres today.

theatres and DVDs.

Well thanks Bill, ya know this business just gets into your blood and becomes a very important part of your life, I think Rob Endres would agree.

Well they maybe have to start thinking in terms of showmanship again if they want to start bringing people back into movie theaters. With movie companies considering releasing films simultaneously on DVD's why in the world should anyone go to a theater when you make up for the(relatively) larger screen in the comfort and convenience of your own home. The audience that was collectively enthralled by a new film is a thing of the past.
Maybe cinema as a public experience is about to become as extinct as vaudeville.

'The Baxter', the IFC Films release booked exclusively into 47 Clearview Cinemas properties, including the Ziegfeld, experienced a near-total flameout this past weekend, grossing an estimated $37,708 for a per-screen average of $802. Almost needless to say, I think Clearview overestimated what they had on their hands, especially with 'The 40-Year-Old Virgin' and 'Wedding Crashers' as competition.

Clearview has booked a string of bombs in this place recently...The Island, The Great Raid, and now The Baxter. Over 1100 empty seats at each performance. Good Lord!

Vincent's idea about making the Ziegfeld into an East Coast American Cinematheque is so logical. How can we get the Clearview executives to read these posts? Right now the Ziegfeld is going to waste and it's really sad. Remember back in 1996 when "Vertigo" played there to big crowds for weeks? A Friday night show I attended a couple of weeks into the run was a complete sellout. Forget stuff like "The Baxter": the Ziegfeld would be the perfect home for classic movies. We can all see it - why can't Clearview?

In regards to above postings it all goes back to what we originally said. The people in charge of these theaters are NOT movie pople, just corporate hacks. We'll probably never see a 70MM classic on the big screen again (unless we go to England)

The Ziegfeld has shown revivals during the late summer/early fall period when quality first run films are often scarce. "Funny Girl" was playing at the Ziegfeld on 9/11 (I remember walking by the Ziegfeld on my way home from the office on that terrible day) and "The Way We Were" was revived during a similar time frame in 2003. I passed on "Funny Girl" but went to a sparsely attended weekend screening of "The Way We Were."

If Clearview is considering booking a revivial at the Ziegfeld during the upcoming slow season, why not take a chance on a non-Streisand film this time?

"We'll probably never see a 70MM classic on the big screen again (unless we go to England)"...or L.A. Thank you American Cinematheque!

Imagine seeing "Sweet Charity" , "Goodbye Mr. Chips", "Finians Rainbow", "SATR!",or "Half A Sixpence" again in 70mm complete with Overtute Entra Act and Exit Music again!

Imagine seeing "Sweet Charity" , "Goodbye Mr. Chips", "Finians Rainbow", "STAR!",or "Half A Sixpence" again in 70mm complete with Overtute Entra Act and Exit Music again!

Imagine seeing "Sweet Charity" , "Goodbye Mr. Chips", "Finians Rainbow", "STAR!",or "Half A Sixpence" again in 70mm complete with Overtute Entra Act and Exit Music again!

Forrest, you've picked some of the worst examples of 70mm musicals, or any 70mm films for that matter; it was these over-produced, bloated spectacles that helped close some of our best picture palaces. Nobody came to see these movies on their original release, and no one will come see them now.

But I do agree that a 70mm festival, or any decently booked and promoted festival, would help fill some seats here.

Forrest, you have selected some of the worst 70mm musicals ever made; it was over-produced, lumbering dinosaurs like these that helped close some of our best picture palaces. Audences didn't come to see these movies then, and they won't come now.

That said, I do agree that a well booked and promoted 70mm fesival is a great idea; any well-selected and well-advertised fesival would help fill the seats in this last example of a New York showplace.

Only one is a genuine 70mm film but Sweet Charity, Chips and Sixpence I think are 3 very underrated films and certainly deserving of a reevalution with a roadshow type presentation.
Well this past year I was hoping for 70mm anniversary presentations of Lady and SOM but neither came to pass.
I'm still waiting for a cinephile like Scorsese who has a passion for widesceen films to join in the fray and begin to raise funds for a desperately needed widescreen museum. Just lets make it a real one. 50 ft just doesn't cut it.

Labor Day weekend the perfect time to go to the Movies, and this great theatre is still showing The Baxter? The place must be empty! Clearview wake up!

Cablevision owns both Clearview Cinemas and IFC, so The Baxter will continue to run at the Ziegfeld for a while.

Yeah, The Baxter pretty much killed us at the Ziegfeld. As far as I know, the theater is going to be closing down for a little while soon, except for a couple premieres and special functions, then will reopen with Flightplan on the 23rd. I think.

totoro do you work for the Ziegfeld?
Then why do the people who run the place treat it just like another screening room in a multiplex? What is the point? Shouldn't they just tear it down and build another office or lux condo building?
Or else treat it like a special event movie theater. Put in a larger curved screen, use it for 70mm special events and show contemporary films as one can see them no where else like the Cinerama Dome in LA.
What is it that I'm missing here?

Good question Vincent, just what the heck is going on with that theatre? What they are doing has to have a reason or a plan of some kind. Clearly they aren't that stupid as to run the theatre the way they do. It's really irritating.

Anyone know if (when) RENT will be playing at Ziegfeld?

On my way to MoMA the last couple of nights (why isn't there a listing for that legendary venue?) and THE BAXTER is on the marquee, but the theatre is dark. I think the Ziegfeld's days are numbered. Theatres that large are anachronisms, unfortunately.

Vito I have found in life to my chargrin that when people seem as if they have no reason or plan they usually have no reason or plan. They really DON'T know what their doing.
Of course they really could be waiting for the right condo or office deal.

It's closed at the moment. They have at least for now put it out of it's misery

Sorry their should be they're. See how angry theive gotten me.

Question: When did the Ziegfeld put in a smaller screen...and WHY??? I remember seeing "Apocalypse Now" and others on what I thought was one of the largest screens I ever saw...until I went to the Astor Plaza (now closed)

When will it re open or will it?

Has anybody found out any information? I call moviefone and it shows no showtimes. This has me extremely concerned. It seems to be closed.

The Baxter is opening on September the 16th. It is not uncommon for the Ziegfeld to just close its doors for a while between film runs to clean up real well or do some work inside.

This has happened in the past.

The Ziegfeld has been temporarily closed to the public during slow periods for years. Former owners Walter Reade and Cineplex Odeon also shuttered the Ziegfeld on occasion.

Why would Clearview be resuming at the Ziegfeld the engagement of a film ('The Baxter') which completely tanked in its 47-theatre, tri-state run, and, from all reports, most notably at the Ziegfeld? Seems to be, to say the least, highly unlikely. I suspect, as per Totoro's post from September 5th, the Ziegfeld will be re-opening on the 23rd with 'Flightplan'.

Any news about "The Producers" opening in December? Can't think of any other theatre, except RCMH, that I would like to see it play.
I saw a rough cut at a test screening two weeks ago, let me tell you it is going to be HUGE. The audience reaction was tremendous, I have not seen an audience go so wild over a movie in a very long time.

I would have loved to have been at that test screening of "The Producers." Several sites (including Ain't It Cool News) have posted comments from the NJ test screening, noting that the audience response was ecstatic.

I attended the first Broadway preview of "The Producers" in March 2001. Even though the intermission lasted 45 minutes due to set problems, no one complained. A smash from day one.

Last I heard, Universal plans a wide release starting on December 21, in contrast to Miramax's slow rollout of "Chicago," which had a very successful exclusive run at the Ziegfeld.

Update on my last post: According to Boxofficemojo.com, Universal has changed the release strategy for "The Producers." Opening in limited release on Friday, December 16 with a wide release starting a month later (January 13). Very similar to Miramax's strategy for "Chicago."

This would be a perfect attraction for the Ziegfeld.

I am the only one who thinks the score is maybe the worst for a smash Broadway hit? The songs from the movie are fine but the rest are total Broadway schlock. And then there is Nathan Lane. To think that once in this world strode giants like Zero Mostel and Phil Silvers!

I spoke to Anthony Rapp and Tracie Thoms, two of the stars of "RENT" and they are having their premiere there in October. Neither knew if it was booked as an engagement though. Anthony told me he loves The Zeigfeld and hopes it plays here.

Sorry I haven't posted in a while. I do work for the Ziegfeld, but only when I'm at home (i.e. not when I'm upstate attending college, which is where I am right now). The theater is open right now, showing Flightplan, which is probably at least doing better than The Baxter. That one tanked worse than anything I've seen - and I was working there when we got "2 Fast, 2 Furious".

I am pretty sure the Ziegfeld will be getting Rent, but can't absolutely guarantee it. No idea about The Producers, but you all are exactly right - it would be perfect. Rent one month, Producers the next? The Ziegfeld could clean up, for once! Our theater never, ever makes money - it is always in the red. The rest of the Clearview multiplexes around the area keep us afloat...it's been like that for a while, and probably will be for long to come.

As for why the theater is being run the way it is, well, I don't have a good answer for you Vincent. The managers of the Ziegfeld just do as they're told, and show the movies that Clearview sends us. I know at least one of the managers would love to see Clearview doing more with the theater, but there's not much they can do about it. Switching over from a standard first-run theater to a place that shows classics would require a lot of changes. Clearview probably feels it isn't worth putting in the money, time, and research to seriously consider a switch like that, when they can just throw the latest Hollywood claptrap up onto the screen. I know it's a shame, but corporate-types are not easily swayed away from their familiar territory, and we all know it.

I wouldn't expect any changes anytime soon. Just hope that the Ziegfeld will get at least a few solid films during the course of a year.

Anybody know what is the weekly house nut for the Ziegfeld these days? Back in the 80s it was around $30G, which was enormous at that time. The films were better and they were just squeaking by then.

I'm not entirely sure which film was the first I ever saw here. I know my parents took me to see "That's Entertainment" at this theater, but I also recall seeing a re-issue of Disney's "Fantasia" at a big theater in Manhattan in the '70's and I think it might have been here... although, now that I think about it, it may have been one of the many films I saw at Radio City Music Hall in the '70's.

I remember seeing the "Grateful Dead Movie" here in 1977 when I was a pre-teen Dead Head in training. Also "Apocalype Now!" which was presented here in 70mm & Dolby without any opening or closing credits, just a program that was handed out with a listing of those involved in the production. I also recall playing hookey and coming in to Manhattan via subway on Saint Patrick's Day and braving the crowds to catch a matinee of the musical "Hair" in 1979. I still have the souveneir program from that day. A few years later some college buddies and I caught the movie version of Pink Floyd's "The Wall" at the Ziegfeld.

I know there were many other movies I caught here, but these stand out in my memory. The most recent one was "Chicago" a couple of years back. And if the Peter Jackson remake of "King Kong" is indeed booked here for December, I will most certainly make the quick trip in to see it. Now with the Astor Plaza converted to a venue for live concerts, the only other movie theater in Manhattan that compares to this (in terms of presentation and spaciousness) is the main "Loew's" auditorium at the Lincoln Square Multiplex on Broadway and 68th, which has some ersatz "movie palace" decor and features a two-aisle seating plan (with left, center and right orchestra sections) as well as an honest-to-goodness balcony.

Check out the Ziegfeld as part of the showcase for "Star Spangled Girl". It was odd back then for them to play Paramount and to be a part of a showcase.
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/CarnalKnowledge.jpg

Saw "Flightplan" there recently and it was empty! Also although it is a really nice single screer theatre the seats are very uncomfortable and the screen is really not that large!

When "Star Spangled Girl" played the Ziegfeld in 1971, the house nut was $25,000 a week. Variety reported the total one week take of "Star Spangled Girl" was $1,000 by the time it hit showcase.

Is the theater closed again? I can't seem to find out what's playing there.

I walked by the theater on Saturday on my way to MoMA and the Ziegfeld is indeed dark. The turkey ELIZABETHTOWN played there and tanked so now the Ziegfeld is closed. They'll fire up the boiler and projecter mid month for RENT. They are also going to show THE PRODUCERS.

Both films' names are listed on the marquee.

Rent and The Producers will also play at one of the multiplexes on 42nd street so the theater crowds will most likely go there. Will be interesting to see how big a crowd is drawn to the Ziegfeld because of the theater.

"The Producers" is slated to open exclusively in NY and LA on December 16 prior to a limited expansion on Christmas Day (to approx 1,200 screens) and full expansion on January 13. So the Ziegfeld may show "The Producers" exclusively in NYC between December 16 and 25.

I loved going to the Ziegfeld to see "The Wiz", "Hair", "Victor/Victoria", "That's Entertainment III", and even "Ishtar" !!! Sure hope they get "Rent" and/or "The Producers" ! I'd go in a New York minute !!!

Does anyone know when the Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire premiere will start/end? any information would be appreciated
email: jerrymouse173@aol.com

Regarding the above post about films that played the Ziegfeld. "Victor/Victoria," "Hair," and each of the three "That's Entertainment" films played there (all of which were initially at the Ziegfeld on an exclusive basis).

Not sure about "Ishtar" but I don't believe that "The Wiz" was shown at the Ziegfeld; the Manhattan first run engagements of "The Wiz" were at Loews theaters, including the Astor Plaza.

Nice photo of the Ziegfeld Marquee.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ozzdo/12874693/

I passed by the Ziegfeld today and noticed that the theater is now selling tickets for the exclusive engagement of "The Producers" starting on December 16. Close to round the clock shows are scheduled for the opening weekend: the first show starts at 9:15 a.m. and the last show at 1:30 a.m.

Just as the Broadway version set a new ticket high of $100, the film version is doing the same for movie admissions. All seats for all performances (no senior or children discounts and, of course, no bargain matinees): $12.50.

Inside word is that the film isn't very good and by the looks of the preview I agree. The sets look terrible.

Whether or not The Producers is any good, I am happy to see an exclusive booking here for a change, even at inflated roadshow prices. I wonder if that old showman Mel Brooks had anything to do with the booking.

According to the Clearview website, the inflated prices will only last for as long as the Ziegfeld shows "The Producers" exclusively (12/16 to 12/24). Ticket prices will be reduced to $10.75 starting on Christmas Day, when the film moves into wider release.

I love seeing the long lines down 54th Street when this place has a hot booking; everybody there is thrilled to be seeing a picture at the city's only remaining movie palace.

They are having the premiere of Rent tonight.

HA! 12.50 will be here to stay in Manhattan! Another sneaky trick to raise prices and eventually chase more people away!

"The Producers" looks terrible and so does "Rent". With a past loaded with great musicals, why the HELL can't someone get it right? The arguement is that todays "kids" won't believe the musical the way it used to be presented. WRONG. Kids by the millions watch non stop musicals all day on MTV and it's various channels.

Pauline Kael once said in the late 60's that the time then was ripe to create more musicals with the present (then) rock stars like Janis Joplin. That's what made the musicals of the 30s, 40s and 50s successful: they were populated with the top recording artists of the day (Doris Day, Rosemary Clooney, Crosby et. al.). That's what the studios could do: setup a musical with one or many of today's contemporary recording artists. This would probably not appeal to some of the older generation on this site (sorry...I do NOT mean this at all as an insult but it's the truth...you're not going to see or even want to see the likes of Britney Spears, Sheryl Crowe or a Justin Timberlake crooning a 50s ditty).

The studios lack the creative nerve to do something like this. If someone took the dare to create a really good musical, it would be a blockbuster. Christ, look at "Purple Rain" back in 1984. Maybe not everyone's cup of tea but it was pretty good.

Well, I've seen Rent and The Producers, and both films are extremely entertaining. The Ziegfeld will be a glorious place to experience both.

Ed, I second that, both screenigs I attended of The Producers had audiences going wild. Rent is another holiday must see. Going to see King Kong in two weeks, all three hours of it, hopefully it won't be dissapointing. With Harry Potter raking in over 100 mill last weekend, my industry friends are telling me the holiday movie season is off to a great start. By the way, did you get a chance to meet Mel Brooks at one of the Producers screenings? he attended both of the ones I attended and was very gracious and a real cut up.

Well 12.50 for an exclusive engagement reserved seat is an absolute bargain. Remember My Fair Lady at the Criterion was $5.50 for the mezz in '64. That would without exageration would be close to $50 today(and if I could see that or Lawrence in 70mm today at the Criterion I'd pay it without blinking an eye.)
After all this was close to half the price of a top ticket to Dolly of Fiddler at the time and when you consider that tickets to musicals are $110 today it makes sense.
But then most seats in the orchestra today are premium prices which range from $250 to $500.
So if you wanted to sell a premium seat to a road show film this would cost you over $100. After all premium seating is simply legalized scalping.
$12.50 at the Ziegfeld in today's loony pricing scheme when you come down to it is dirt cheap.

$12.50, eh? I remember my Mother being shocked, SHOCKED going to see "Rocky" at the big, old, grand Lynbrook theater and having to shell out a whopping $4.00.

Vincent make a very good point, most theatre owners and studio bosses would agree, todays movie prices are in line with the rising cost of just about everything today. Of course, some of my friends still scold me for the cost of tickets like it's my fault.
Movie passes make great stocking stuffers!

Hopefully Rent will be a hit for the Ziegfeld. The movie is wonderful despite some negative reviews. I would have loved to have seen it at this theater.
I saw it here in NC at a new chain, Epic Theatres which is a top noche chain.(Unlike Carmike The Worst) They have 5 theaters so far and are building more in Florida. They recently purchased a small United Artist theater down the street from where they opened the areas first stadium seat theater.

When I started as an usher in 1968 tickets were about $2. An increase to $12.50 over nearly thirty-eight years is not unreasonable.

$2 Dave? Now I know I'm old, when I ushered it was 25 cents and we got free dishes every Monday and Wednesday. I gotta go take a nap now, where is that ole rockin chair anyway?

Vito;
I heard tell many people would drop dishes during dish nights. Did that ever happen on your watch?

Gustavelifting, no, can't say that I had. Each week a new part of a compete set of dishes were given out, most people returned week after week in order to complete their set.

My Dad grew up in The Bronx in the 1940's and used to talk about dish nights and how at some point there'd be the sound of someone dropping their set followed by a responsive rise in the crowd. He grew up on 167th between Tiffany and Fox and most frequently mentioned the Loew's Spooner and the Boulevard Theater as frequent destinations along with the occasional trip to the grand Loew's Paradise on the Concourse. Those were certainly different days... and I wish I could've had a taste of the movie-going experience from back then.

I called my brother regarding the dish breaking thing, with me in the booth most of the time, he spent more time with the patrons than I did, and he told me that yes, on occassion some one would drop a dish, but it was usually accidental and the rest of the audience members would clap and cheer at the sound. Ed, you write about different days, and oh my goodness were they ever, not only did you get a free dish every Wednesday, but a double feature, a newsreel, a cartoon, and a chapter of the latest serial as well, and all for about twenty five cents. Of course many movie palaces offered eight acts of vaudeville too.

Many of those serials are now on DVD.

Gustavelifting, I did not know that, I will go out and get a couple to share with the little ones. Of course when I showed hem "Dracula" and told them how scared I was watching it as a kid, they said "scary, your kidding right"? Ah, kids today, ya gotta love em.

Is the theater closed again? UGH Rent is wonderful no reason for them not to do well with it.

The premiere for The Producers was there last night. It will run exclusive at the Ziegfeld beginning Dec. 16th.

Nice "exclusive" New York Times ad for "The Producers". They used the cursive script logo for The Ziegfeld Theatre. I don't remember ever seeing that in an ad. I remember the Walter Reade font that every one of his theatres used.

That ad really brought me back. Imagine a full page film ad for one theater with a stylized logo the way ads often were in the Times' Arts and Leisure until the 70's.

I already posted this in response to the story about the exclusive engagement of "The Producers", but I think it's worth saying here too.

Sometimes I get a little sick of the devoted reverence shown to the
Ziegfeld Theater. Think about it -- if it weren't the only large single-screen house left in Manhattan, it would merit scant attention at all.

It is not a movie palace, was not built during the movie-palace era, and the decor is frankly tacky. (If you are a gay man of a certain age, you'll probably agree that "piss elegant" is a perfect description for the style.) It is just a sad, sad joke when you consider the spectacular original Ziegfeld Theater it replaced.

Now, with the demise of the Astor Plaza, I will admit that I will choose to see a film at the Ziegfeld if possible simply because of the size of the house. That's what it has going for it, and that's all that it has going for it.

It is what it is. Let's not pretend it's something it's not.

Remember that way back in the fall of '70 when Lean's first film since his greatest success Zhivago opened he chose not the Rivoli or Criterion two great epic theaters still intact in all their Time Square glory he chose the small screened tackily appointed Ziegfeld. From the very beginning this theater superseded all the others still standing and I will never know why. One of fate's cruel jokes I suppose.

Sorry, SteveBob, but no one is pretending the Ziegfeld is anything more than it is. The last large single-screen cinema left in Manhattan.

I'll repeat what I said in this comment section back in March of this year:

"So the Ziegfeld isn't the greatest theatre that ever existed. So what? I'm 37 and most of the greatest theatres that did exist were torn down or mutilated in some way before I was born. Nothing I can do about that. A palace it may not be, but for what's left in this city, I'll take the Ziegfeld or the Beekman as many times as I can as long as they're still here."

Granted, the Beekman is gone, I'm now 38 and I've since moved back to Los Angeles, but the Ziegfeld was still a hell of a place to see a movie.

Stevebob... I wholeheartedly agree with you. This is certainly not a "movie palace" in the traditional sense of the phrase - but then, neither are probably more than 80% of the theaters listed on this site. The Ziegfeld is basically a larger more decked-out version of some of the more upscale suburban boxes that were built in the '60's (like the Fox in East Setauket or the Loew's Bay Terrace in Bayside). The seating is plush and there's a sufficient amount of velvet and brocade trim for the theater to have passed as "elegant" in the '60's and '70's (sort of wedding-hall chic). I felt the same towards the former Astor Plaza, which was a bit less flashy than the Ziegfeld but shared with it the one virtue that made both places a rare treat for moviegoers, particularly as older theaters (the true palaces) were either multiplexed or razed in the '80's and '90's: an extraordinarily spacious single screen auditorium.

That's still good enough reason to seek out the Ziegfeld when an interesting enough film is booked there. But, I would agree that there is nothing particularly palatial about the theater's architectural merits and certainly nothing in its interior appointments to merit favorable comparison with true lost cinematic treasures like the Rivoli, Strand, Loew's State or Roxy Theaters.

Wedding hall chic? I always thought of it as 'New Orleans Whorehouse Chic'... at least in the lobby...

Chic is chic.

In response to some of the above negative comments, "Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder." An attempt was made to create an atmosphere in this theatre and honor Flo Ziegfeld. The interior was much better than many of the late 1960's & 70's movie houses. It is unique in its own way, even if it wasn't built during the movie palace era. There are many people for over a quarter of a century who have felt their movie going experience has been enhanced when attending the Ziegfeld. To them, there are many pleasant memories associated with this theatre.

Just got back from a hilarious showing of "The Producers" at the Ziegfeld. Worth every penny of the inflated $12.50 ticket price. Say what you want about the theater's decor, its size as compared to the Roxy or Rivoli, etc. - I love the Ziegfeld and I'd hate to think what New York City would be like without it.

Re: Vincent's comment about "Ryan's Daughter" at the Ziegfeld - for 35 years I've regretted NOT being able to see that movie there. In December 1970 I was standing outside the Ziegfeld with my cousin, all ready to go in, when he talked me out of it, saying it looked boring, etc. We wound up seeing "Love Story" at Loew's State 1 instead. What a comedown compared to the great film experience "Ryan's Daughter" turned out to be.

Dolly (Mrs. Walter) Reade did the original interiors here. She is a nice lady, but in the lobby she did go a little overboard with the red and gold flocked wallpaper, the French provincial furniture and the red-globed gas-lamp replicas. That decor in a larger, taller room would have been ok, but in that room it was a somewhat overbearing. Still, it was more imaginative than other theatres built in that era. The decor in the auditorium, due to it's size, came across better. I haven't seen it since Wonder-Boy from Toronto had it renovated, so maybe it doesn't look like that anymore.

Bill....I personally believe "Ryan's Daughter" is David Lean's most underrated film and one of Mitchum's best. What a re-release that would make...but..that'll be the day

Yeah I missed it too for some reason and saw it only very recently at the MOMA. Yep it puts all contemporary filmaking in the shade. Astounding that at the time the idiot New York critics totally humiliated Lean personally at a public function which caused him not to make another film for 11 years.
We lost many years of his moviemaking.
And yes the film deserves a major 70mm release. Some of it is stupendous.

Rhett and Vincent: well, at least we can look forward to the next best thing - "Ryan's Daughter" on DVD February 7th from Warner Home Video (who will do it justice). Turn up the volume!

"Worth every penny of the inflated $12.50 ticket price."

Wow. Thanx for the warning. I'll be giving the Ziegfeld a wide berth in the future if they are charging $12.50 a pop.

According to Clearview Cinemas, the $12.50 price will last only for the exclusive premier run of "The Producers" and prices will return to the normal $10.75 once the film goes into wider distribution.

Does anybody know how I stop getting e mails when somebody reponds to this theater? I musty have accidently checked the block one day. I don't kow if it was Clearview Cinemas or Mel Brooks being a thief, but if I was still living in NYC I would have boycotted and would be picketing the theater. There was no excusse to raise the price for this film. I always loved this theater but would not support this.

Check your email - the link to "remove" is at the bottom of it.

jkjk

Here's a nice interior photo found on a popular photo website-
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23797386@N00/17066177/

mikeoaklandpark;
Try contacting cinematreasures.org from their 'contact us' link on the homepage.

How is the Producers? I did not see it on Broadway and I would like to see the film at my local theater.

The movie is absolutely terrible.I love musicals and loved the broadway show, but this did not transfer well into a movie. Beleive me the people who paid $12.75 to see thismovvie were ripped off. If I was a critic, my review would have statrted like this.
Mel Brooks creattes majoy FLOP in Producers movies. I would have gien it *1/2 stars and only the half because Will Farrell is the best thing in the movie.

Reaction to "The Producers" from critics and audiences alike has been sharply divided. I prefer the stage version with Lane and Broderick (which I saw six times), but the film is enjoyable if you can accept the staginess of the presentation---the film is an odd hybrid of a filmed stage production (such as the tv version of "Sweeney Todd") and a movie.

In his review on "Ebert and Roeper," Ebert said "I loved the play and liked the movie." I agree.

I felt they made it to slapstick almost like a Three Stoges movie.

Can anyone comment as to WHY the Ziegfeld installed such a narrow and smaller screen than the one they had years ago?? I remember seeing "Apocalypse Now" and thinking WOW...this is the largest screen I ever saw

When did they put in a new screen. I agree they had a huge screen when I lived in NYC 76-82.

This is the same size screen the Ziegfeld always used, excopt for the temporary "Cinerama" installation. Side masking opens a few feet for scope presentations. Existing drapery treatment limits potential screen size.

I think that the screen seemed so big a few years ago is because it was one of the biggest ones in town. But now that the newest multiplexes (Empire, Lincoln Square, E-walk, Kips Bay) have wall-to-wall and floor-to-ceiling screens, all the space around the Ziegfeld screen makes it seem smaller.

The one thing I noticed from Howard's picture is tha masking is different. It never came down below the screen in the past. Maybe they did it becuase they don't use those beautiful curtains.

Went in to see "The Producers" at the Ziegfeld the other day - now that the prices have dropped back down to $10.75. I liked the movie and thought it was very entertaining. It isn't much of a film, per se -- as others have noted, it is basically a filmed version of the staged play. But as such, its existence is justified for preserving on film for all to see the dynamic pairing of Lane and Broderick and the inspired performances of Roger Bart and Tony-winner Gary Beach, who recreate their supporting stage roles here. Unfortunately, the equally impressive stage performances of Brad Oscar and Tony-winner Cady Huffman are left only to the memories of those lucky enough to have seen the original cast, but, we are compensated with excellent turns by Will Ferrell and Uma Thurman in their respective roles. I laughed nearly as hard and long as I did in the St. James Theater 4 years ago.

As for the theater itself... I went there with the thought of taking a fresh look at the decor and re-assessing my opinion of the place. It's certainly not as horrible or tacky as it may have been in my memory and it is a wonderful space to enjoy a film - nice big screen, spacious auditorium, comfy seats - but it still stands in my estimation as an ersatz palace. The auditorium is a big box, not unlike those '60's suburban standalone's built by Century's and Loew's, but the walls are adorned with thick red-velvet carpeting and there is some decorative rope-like patterns of gold that break up the monotone. At either side of the screen (I wouldn't call it a proscenium, exactly) there is a panel with a flourished "S"-shaped motif in relief and then there is the theater's finest touch - the magnificent drapery and curtains. The photo posted above by HowardBHass on December 26th depicts all of this beautifully. It is a shame that the theater allows commercial slides to be projected on the screen between show times. It's sort of absurd to watch as the traveling curtain is closed only to be opened again seconds later for the trailers. Actually, there are a series of annoying commercial spots that precede the trailers, but I try to forget about their existence.

Had I taken my camera along, I might have snapped some shots of some of the detail work that sets the theater apart from other modern-era houses. These include the detailing at the end of each row of seats along the aisles, the fanciful signs for the bathrooms (using a rendering of stylish early 20th Century footwear to identify each gender), and the chandeliers that hang from the ceilings in the various portions of the lobby. Too bad the lobby was designed with such segmentation and low ceilings. When one enters from street level, you are in a small square vestibule, where you'll find the box office. Through another set of doors is the inner lobby where your ticket is ripped and you are sent along your way upstairs to the mezzanine foyer (where the restrooms and candy counter are located). You enter the auditorium on either side at the point where the orchestra seating ends and the raised rear stadium-style loge seating begins.

What might have really abetted the attempt at old time splendor would have been a more open atrium approach to the lobby design that might have showcased the handsome set of stairs used to get to the mezzanine foyer (there is also an escalator along the opposite wall that runs parallel to the stairs). At least there are those wonderful display cases along the lobby and staircase walls featuring vintage photos and posters from the previous Ziegfeld Theater as well as from various Ziegfeld presentations at other theaters (like the Selwyn and New Amsterdam).

"The Producers" was horrible. A filmed stage play. Matthew Broderick was horrible and Nathan Lane didn't register. Will ferrel was as annoying as ever and UMa (while georgeous) was OK. I imagine on the stage it was better with an audience BUT unfortunately the original movie is my ALL time favorite comedy so I was prejudiced. Nathan is no ZERO and Broderick is no Gene. The delivery and the comedy was just so effective....and NO, seeing it at a single screen would not have made a difference. No wonder the film is bombing.

I decided to see the original Producers at the Film Forum a few years back after having seen it innumerable times on TV since I was a boy.
I was not prepared for how wonderful it was. Zero and Gene on a movie screen are so brilliant that all those TV broadcasts now seem to have had them trapped in a cage. Next to them Lane and Broderick as someone has said are nothing more than understudies.
That being said I did see Zero 3 times in a Fiddler revival at the Winter Garden in the 70's and he was awful. The least professional performance I have ever seen.
So why did I see it 3 times? Because it was a great production. The supporting cast and the rest were impeccable with the great staging and sets and costumes beautifully recreated.

Sometime in the early 90's they started to mask the bottom of the screen for scope presentations. I recall seeing a "sneak preview" of Ghost (which was flat) and in those days you could stay for the regular feature afterwards which in this case was Days of Thunder (which was in scope) and during the interval, they opened up the side masking and a couple ushers carried in two long black strips that they used masked the bottom of the screen.
I also recall reading something around that time about people complaining that the screen at the Ziegfeld was too low and that audience heads were always blocking the screen... perhaps this was their response to that complaint. Who knows...
On another note - the quality of the presentation here has been on the upswing lately. The Island, Rent, The Producers, Tristan and Isolde, hell - even The Baxter were presented extremely well. It was pretty sketchy there for a while - sometimes worse than a third-rate multiplex. Good for them!
As you can probably tell, I'll see any old crap they put up here. ANYTHING. I just don't want them to close. The Astor Plaza was my house of choice, but now this is all we have left. Gotta support it.
I also heard that they will be doing a short program of revivals... anyone know details?

I heard they are returning THE BAXTER for another week! lol

Speaking of scope. We chatted here earlier about Steven Spielberg and why 99% of his fils are filmed inflat. I took a peak in one of the auditoriums where Munich was playing and extremly surpirsed to see he filmed that in scope.

Actually, the Ziegfeld used a strip across the bottom of the screen when I worked there as a relief projectionist starting with "Close Encounters" in the '70's. The screen height was the same for 1.85 35mm and 2.21 70mm ratios, but the bottom was masked to provide the correct 2.35 anamorphic aspect ratio. Perhaps they stopped doing that after I stopped working there in (I guess)the late '80's, but they do have a good projection crew there, and since its a premiere house they do have to be able to meet studio specs for both film and digital presentations.

If the Ziegfeld ever closes, that's it for movie going in NY. It will be the theatrical apocolypse (did I spell that right?). I mean it. We'll be left with shoebox theaters and dwindling audiences.

And I love all this analysis and handwringing over why audience attendence is dwindling. The movies, by and large, are garbage. Even "King Kong" failed to ignite audiences. A large scale passionate remake of what was/is a B rate movie is not what audiences want right now.

REndres' insight might explain why the screen seemed a tad larger for "Lawrence of Arabia," which would have been projected in the 2.21 aspect ratio for Super Panavision, than it was when I saw "Apocalypse Now" here back in '79 (still one of the most stunning film experiences I've ever had, with the projection and sound having a lot to do with it). And here I thought it was all those desert vistas that only made it SEEM bigger!

Re the comments taking down the Ziegfeld for not being a true movie palace: Would it be fair to liken the Ziegfeld to, say, Avery Fisher Hall, in that both are the city's "premier" venues for their particular purposes (AFH is after all the home base of the NY Philharmonic) and that both are roomy, sleek and efficient (except for AFH's sometimes boomy acoustics), but not all that plush/ornate as compared to Carnegie Hall in AFH's case or the Rivoli or Criterion in the case of the Ziegfeld?

Fascinating point about Spielberg... He filmed his first 4 theatrical features in scope ("Sugarland Express", "Jaws", "Close Encounters..." and "1941") as well as all three Indiana Jones movies. In the last 15 years, only "Hook", "Minority Report" and "Munich" have been released in 2.35:1 ratio. And "Hook" might have been his last true anamorphic scope release since both "Minority Report" and "Munich" utilized the Super 35 process (based on RKO's old Superscope) which utilizes a flat negative from which a widescreen image is carved during the transfer process. This process has come into favor in recent years because new prints can be struck using the full 1.37:1 negative aspect for T.V. and full-screen video release. There is fascinating information on various widescreen processes at the widescreen museum website... though I'm sure that's not news to many on this site.

Paul Bubny... I think that would be a very fair comparison regarding the Ziegfeld and Avery Fisher Hall. We as aesthete's are disappointed that the Rivolis and Capitols and Strands have all been demolished and all we are left are pale architectural shadows like the Ziegfeld (and until recently, the Loew's Astor Plaza). However, as pragmatists, we must acknowledge that there is much to be appreciated about the Ziegfled, particularly when compared to the alternatives that currently exist.

Movieguy 718,
What's this about revivals?
Where did you read about this?
Any details?

REndres, are they running reel to reel or platter?
Some of the biggest problems with projection today comes from the use of platters, with brain wraps, thrown prints etc.
I understand the need for platters in a plex or manager operator theatre, but not in a single screen or even a twin operation where the booth has a projectionist.

They are running platter. The last time I worked there covering an emergency was in 1990, but I had run a revival series before that and they were using platters then. They still have two 35/70mm Century JJ's, and the third position is for digital cinema projection. They were using a Texas Instrument prototype projector for the last "Star Wars" and a Christie for "The Island", with Dolby Digital Cinema Show Store and Player. When they do digital projection for premieres they have a 35mm print running on the platter as a back-up.

Thanks REndres for that information. Now can you give me your opinion as to why they would choose to use a platter in a single screen operation, with a licenced union projectionist, instead of reel to reel? Help an old man understand the thinking behind such madness. Apparently they are doing the same thing at Graumans in LA, the big (original) house has a platter. An industry friend of mine in LA,who attended the premere of "The Producers", told me that about half way thru the movie a brain wrap caused the print to jam in the gate causing the image to burn away. Is that supposed to be progress? In both locations they have a professional maning the booth, with two projectors, sitting for 2 hours watching a platter go around instead of running reel to reel. Thank God I am retired!

I'd like to second Vincent's request to Movieguy718 about the rumored revivals at the Ziegfeld. Wouldn't that be great? They showed them a lot in the 1970's in between big premiere engagements. I recall one especially good double feature: "2001: A Space Odyssey" and "Yellow Submarine". Another one: "West Side Story" and "Around the World in 80 Days" - that was the first show I saw at the theater (1972).

Yes Bill, I think we are all salavating over Vincent's idea

One of the reasons that theatre chains use platters in single screen theatres is they have cut the hours of the union projectionist and the other hours are handled by management. This fact has happened in many large single first run houses across the country. Another thing is the studios prefer to have the film run on a platter during major events like premieres. No matter how good an operator you are , you are only as good as your last change-over. I've had operators tell me that it would be easier to run it reel to reel. But the studios do not want to take the chance of a operator screwup. Yes, Grauman's Chinese has a platter in the main house. But the operator also has to operate the six-plex next door too. The days of one operator per booth or theatre is long gone. Was the main premiere of "The Producers" at the Chinese or over at the Brand new AMC plex in Century City? When the Chinese Theatre had the twin houses next door that operator had to handle those theatres too. In Westwood, California all those single screen first run theatres are handled by two operators and management. Another reason is they only have to deal with one xenon lamp during a screening for those EK/Wetgate
showprints. I've run many premieres and major studio screenings over the years on the West Coast, so I've been right there in the booth for all of that progress.

Hey Guys,
I was told that they were toying with the possibility of showing the Godfather movies in February.

Ummm...guys...check out the Clearview Cinemas website :-) It's better than what you could hope for!

I'd say this falls under the heading of A Dream Come True. My only big concern is how many times I will get to attend a showing of "West Side Story".

Thanks, Movieguy, for being the first to announce what we Ziegfeld lovers have long been waiting for.

And if any Clearview executives are reading this page: Thank You! I'm sure we at Cinema Treasures will be attending in force.

Am I crazy? I can't find the list on the Clearview site?

Here's the website: http://clearviewcinemas.com/

And holy cow! What a line-up!

Anybody know yet the "format" (gauge, audio system) of these individual presentations, in particular, WWStory?

Oh BOY! They're showing "The Godfather". Man, that's a hard one to catch. It's NEVER on cable.

But I would like to see "Chinatown" on a big screen.

Sorry for the sarcasm but I agree that they're using their heads now with programming like that. I work just a couple of blocks away and I'm wondering if there's someway I could sneak one in. I could say I've got a long meeting to attend...

Hi William, good to hear your thoughts, although I think when you use the word progress it should be "progress"
I understand the need for film transport systems in multi screen or manager/operator theatres, however that does not apply to the Ziegfield where full time union projectionists are employed. As for the studios prefernce to platters over reel to reel, please, the chance of error on one of these contraptions is far greater than running reel to reel. Platters can, and often do, have brain wraps which can delay the show for several minutes, prints can be thrown
either off center or completly off the platter where the print dangles like a dead fish, causing delays of a very long time or even complete cancellation of a performance. Then there are the scratches on prints caused by rollers forced out of alignment or damage done to them by mylar prints brain wrapping. In addition I have seen prints with reels spiced together either out of frame or out of sequence, I even saw a show where the third reel was spliced in up side down. As you know, I could go on with the problems cused by platters. As for reel to reel, like most professional projectionists, I could count the number of missed changeovers or other mishaps I experienced on one hand. Yeah, I know, I'm an ole fool for trying to hang on to the past, but one of the biggest problems, next to people taking on cell phones,in our theatres today is poor projection caused by poorly trained amatuers, running platters (God I hate them) and killing off the great art of
projection. There I feel better now :)

Oh my god. So there is a programmer out there who knows what he's doing?
Please, please, please, let Ben Hur, WSS and MFL be in genuine 70mm!!!
How can we find out?

I would doubt that they are in 70mm - I don't think MGM had any runable prints of WSS in 70mm and now that Sony owns the film, they would probably not strike 70mm prints since the capability to run them is so limited (they can't do magnetic striping at the labs any longer). I think MFL's 70mm prints were junked when Kit Parker Films closed up shop. I don't know about Ben-Hur, the last 70mm of it that I saw was in 1990 or so - I'm running it in 35mm for 4 days in April at the Lafayette.

So does this mean we'll never see 70mm again?

This is the best cinematic news I've heard in quite a long time. 70mm would be a blast of whipped crime atop an already frosted cake. I wonder what the life expectancy of this programming will be beyond the weekend of the Academy Awards telecast.

Hi Vito, Thanks for your thoughts. I the main problem is that there are so many poorly trained amatuers in the booths today.

I still run reel to reel here in Manhattan. And it feels good :)

Why would anybody junk a 70mm print of My Fair Lady? It would be like tearing down Penn Station all over again. I believe the Moma might have one. I saw it there a few years ago(screen was too small to do it justice.) Does it still exist?

Vincent - Not neccesarily, but it will be more and more rare since the only new prints they can strike are 70mm DTS prints and there are even fewer theatres that can play that format than standard 70mm mag sound. And virtually all of the vintage 70mm prints from prior to 1983 have faded and/or succumbed to warping by now. So the only 70mm prints you'd be seeing - if any - will be prints struck from 1983-2001 (that probably have a lot of mileage) or newly struck with DTS tracks. If you want to see 70mm, your best bet is to keep your eyes on the festivals in L.A. in England, where they sometimes run the rare good condition studio prints but often also run totally faded prints.

Re: junking prints - they would usually do it once the print reached a certain level of wear. And when a company closes up shop, it's cheaper to junk the prints than it is to store the films until the new buyer is ready for them. Sad but true.

I guess we were lucky to see the prints that still existed in the 70's.
I still hope the MOMA print or the Music Hall print from their Warner Brothers festival can be used.
By the way when the Ziegeld held the 93 restoration it was only for 9 days. Would this print then be available? Or would 27 showings wear down a 70mm print?

No, a run of 27 shows wouldn't wear a print out unless there was a mechanical issue. But that print and the other MFL's from 1993 - there were probably only 3 or 4 struck - played a number of other venues and at each stop there would certainly be a chance for additional wear and tear. When most films finish their runs, the majority of the prints are junked whether they are worn or not. The Music Hall print would have come from Kit Parker, so it's most likely gone. If MOMA has a 70mm print in their permanent collection, they probably would not loan it out.

The print of MFL that we played at the Radio City Warner series came from Kit Parker and was amazingly beaten up for a relatively recent release. The film case for one of the 70mm reels looked as if it had been run over by a fork lift. We were doing a concert when the print came in, and I had to take the case down to the stage where our stage crew took the case down to the shop and literally cut the reel out of the case. The reel itself was bent above the print so that the two flanges actually touched, and we had to pry them apart to get at the film. Fortunately, 70mm wound tightly is pretty firm, so the print itself wasn't damaged, but I had to splice the reel to the next reel. When we called to ask for a replacement reel and case Parker's office said to send it back on one our house reels --that "those old theatares had reels lying around."! No -- it went back spliced to the next reel. We had played "Exorcist" in the only 70mm print existing just before MFL, and there was a splice in MFL that reminded me of the prior film as so many frames had been cut out that Julie Andrew's head snapped around much like Linda Blair's. The "Exorcist" print was also almost completely faded. When the production department head asked if the "pea soup" scene was in tact, I said, "Yes. But think tomato soup!"

By the way, there was some thought given to releasing some prints of Malick's "New World" in 70mm, since it some of it was shot on 65mm, but apparently there weren't enough prime theatres left that can do 70mm to make it worth while.

Too bad, I was just thinking, that the Ziegfeld screen is so flat - pleasing as the size of the screen is from mid-center orchestra. I mean, I don't recall any curvature at all. I assume that the 35mm prints that will likely be exhibited were intended for flat screens despite the aspect ratios. This may sound like a dumb question, but humor me: When original scope films were projected, was there an optical correction made in the print for the screen curvature or was the process controlled wholly by the anamorphic projector lens? I seem to recall from a DVD of "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" where several trims from the original cut were included as extra features and were shown in a distorted wide screen image that had been corrected for projection onto the deeply curved Cinerama screen. So, for single-strip Cinerama projection, the correction was obviously in the print itself... does the same hold for the widescreen processes behind "Ben Hur" and "West Side Story"?

Great story REndres, but what did you mean you had to splice to the next reel? did you not run reel to reel? (Oh no, here we go again)
by the way, what are your thoughts about the ziegfeld running platter

That's a shame, as "The New World" would look dazzling in a wide-gauge print and there are so few opportunities to see new movies projected AND filmed in 70mm anymore outside of the IMAX theatres. But in NYC, almost all of the 70mm-capable houses are gone, to say nothing of the situation in smaller cities.

Ed Solero:

In terms of standard 35mm "anamorphic" (CinemaScope, Panavision, et al), no correction was made to the prints. The reason they curved the 'scope screens for 35mm early on was because it was easier to get a focus on the edges of the image. As the projection optics improved, the curvature wasn't as neccesary.

For films exhibited in 70mm single-lens Cinerama, they made optically-rectified (on the sides) prints to compensate for the extreme curvature of the screen. Standard 70mm films (West Side Story, Sound of Music, et al) were generally not designed for curved screens. Please note that there are also exceptions, MGM's Camera65 productions such as Ben-Hur had special 70mm prints made that required a special anamorphic lens to project the extreme wide ratio of that film. Normal 70mm films are not as wide as 35mm CinemaScope/Panavision films.

Much more information about this can be gained by visiting the Widescreen Museum website: www.widescreenmuseum.com

And early Cinemascope is wider than Panavision.

Thanks Peter and Vincent. After realizing that I had posted a link to the excellent widescreen museum site a number of posts back, I availed myself of the information therein and have received a nice education on the rectification process associated with single strip Cinerama presentation. I really hope this policy continues at the Ziegfeld beyond the 5 weeks currently scheduled. I plan on seeing (finally!) "Ben Hur" and "West Side Story" on the big screen at the Ziegfeld (and will probably take the kids to experience the original "Raiders of the Lost Ark" as intended), but I look forward to a screening of "2001: A Space Odyssey" - if only my prayers would be answered.

I saw MFL and "The Exorcist" at RCMH. Lady, I thought looked terrific but "The Exorcist" was a disaster. Especially since they advertised a restored 70MM print. It was so bad that when William Friedkin and Ellen Burstyn came out on stage after the film, Friedkin apologized for the terrible condition of the print.

Not a comment about the Ziegfeld, but about theatres with with/without projectionists...
I have seen movies in theatres with fulltime projectionists who do a truly crappy job - and if there's a problem, they can usually be found sitting around or holding up a wall or having coffee and usually are incapable of fixing the problem anyway. I have left the auditorium to try to get sound/projection problems fixed up to SIX times at a single showing (at a union theatre with a "tech" on duty) with zero results - for really simple things to fix (wrong sound format, pictures out of focus, picture on the wall, low volume.) Conversely, I've been in manager run theatres where they do a superb job and if there happens to be a problem, it is usually fixed. I always come away with the feeling that the projectionists just don't want to be bothered.
At the manager run theatres, the answer to a complaint is "I'll fix that for you right away" and it usually is done by the time I'm back in the auditorium. At union theatres the answer is "I'll let the projectionist know." The second time "I told the projectionist, I'll call him again." The third time I get a manager and it's "The projectionist said he was just up there and nothing is wrong. I'll call him again." The fourth time it's "The projectionist said that's what the movie is supposed to sound like." Then I have the manager come into the theatre with me at which point he says "Oh, I see. I'll call again." The fifth time I tell the manager that it's the fifth time I've had to come out about this and then he says "I'll go up there myself." And then he does and manages to fix the problem.
Additionally, most complaints are about loud trailers (that really aren't that loud anymore) and every single projectionist I have spoken with either doesn't know about or is too lazy to use the capability of the new sound processors to set a separate sound cue for each commercial/trailer so that the feature can be shown at the proper level. They're too busy holding up the walls.
Sorry to vent on you guys, but I see about 150 movies each year and that has been my experience in general. There are good and bad in all professions, but here in NYC, I find that there are more bad projectionists than good.

Not a comment about the Ziegfeld, but about theatres with with/without projectionists...
I have seen movies in theatres with fulltime projectionists who do a truly crappy job - and if there's a problem, they can usually be found sitting around or holding up a wall or having coffee and usually are incapable of fixing the problem anyway. I have left the auditorium to try to get sound/projection problems fixed up to SIX times at a single showing (at a union theatre with a "tech" on duty) with zero results - for really simple things to fix (wrong sound format, pictures out of focus, picture on the wall, low volume.) Conversely, I've been in manager run theatres where they do a superb job and if there happens to be a problem, it is usually fixed. I always come away with the feeling that the projectionists just don't want to be bothered.
At the manager run theatres, the answer to a complaint is "I'll fix that for you right away" and it usually is done by the time I'm back in the auditorium. At union theatres the answer is "I'll let the projectionist know." The second time "I told the projectionist, I'll call him again." The third time I get a manager and it's "The projectionist said he was just up there and nothing is wrong. I'll call him again." The fourth time it's "The projectionist said that's what the movie is supposed to sound like." Then I have the manager come into the theatre with me at which point he says "Oh, I see. I'll call again." The fifth time I tell the manager that it's the fifth time I've had to come out about this and then he says "I'll go up there myself." And then he does and manages to fix the problem.
Additionally, most complaints are about loud trailers (that really aren't that loud anymore) and every single projectionist I have spoken with either doesn't know about or is too lazy to use the capability of the new sound processors to set a separate sound cue for each commercial/trailer so that the feature can be shown at the proper level. They're too busy holding up the walls.
Sorry to vent on you guys, but I see about 150 movies each year and that has been my experience in general. There are good and bad in all professions, but here in NYC, I find that there are more bad projectionists than good.

If you check the Widescreen Museum, Martin Hart has a copy of the original CinemaScope handbook on line. The cuved screens were also meant to emulate to some extent the Cinerama screens although the curve was shallower, dictated by the projection throw as a radius. Another reason for the curve in addition to focus was light distribution. The Fox "Miracle Mirror" screens were aluminized and fairly high-gain. You could actually run Polarized 3-D on them. In addition they were embossed with lenticulations to further focus the light into the audience. There were for a while "Miracle Mirror" screens which were designed for theatres with a steep projection angle such as the Music Hall which has a nominal 19 degree downward projection angle. The lenticulations would be embossed at a 5 degree tilt to bring the light (which would be be reflected off the screen at a downward angle into the orchestra) up to cover at least the back of the house and front balcony. Fox insisted on a curved screen for all CinemaScope installations, which meant the Music Hall couldn't run Scope until MGM released "Knights of the Roundtable" a year later. They wanted it at the Hall and said they didn't care if the screen were curved.

Vito: Yes we ran reel-to-reel for MFL, but since one reel (and case) had been destroyed I was able to splice the two reels on one. We did use 6,000' 35mm reels after we installed xenon lamps to save strikes on the bulbs, and as did the Ziegfeld, we doubled up a number of our 70mm prints combining two reels on one. You could usually do that because the 70mm single reels were designed for 30 frame 70mm release and could accomodate two of the average 24 frame 70mm release reels. When I think about all those double 70mm reels I lifted at the Ziegfeld I shutter -- I'm not sure I could do that now! We did use platters for "Lion King" because Disney wanted Dolby Digital sound and there was no 70mm digital format at the time. Thus we interlocked a 70mm print to a 35mm print with Dolby Digital running on the next projector. (Although this really belongs on the Hall site, we also ran "Napoleon" and other silent features on 6,000' reels to make it easier for the conductor to keep the score synchronized consistantly on each show by minamizing any discrepency that might occur with multiple changeovers.The opposite situation occurred with the Universal festival. We were running archival prints and the studio didn't want them assembled on platters or 6,000' reels. We always wanted to accomodate the producers when we could.)

REndres -
Thanks for clarifying the early days of CinemaScope via Marty Hart's site. I haven't read through all of his material in a long time.

Regarding the weight of 70mm reels, how would you compare it to a fully-loaded 6000' reel of 35mm acetate? I've always wanted to run 70mm but, sadly, will probably never get to do it. But at least I've run just about every 35mm format during my festivals at the Lafayette.

Thanks REndres, I feel better now. Yes, I too ran double 70mm reels (oh my acking back) at the D-150 in Syosset, New York and also in Hawaii at the Cinerama. I did a few 15 hour grind days lifting those suckers and still feel the pain. That was unusual, generally I ran single 70mm reels which weighed quite enough thank you very much.
As for the 6k reels, they were very common in many theatres due most in part, as you said, to the Xenon lamps. Interesting note about "Napoleon" I can see how 2k reel to reel could be problematic for the conductor. Lastly you mentioned the producers and of course the other studio guys (ya had to love em) who would always show up for the technical rehersals (dry runs)to put in their two cents,
I never minded though, cause if we did not agree with their ideas we
would forget them after they left. In addition, every now and then they had a good idea. One thing they all had in common, and that was they all wanted it played loud.

A double 70mm reel packed out to the edge (and sometimes over it at the Ziegfeld) weighs more than a full 6,000' 35mm reel, at least in part because of the magnetic tracks which do add some weight. When we started using 6,000' reels at the Hall some of the older operators on the crew protested. I took a single 70mm reel up to the hospital and weighed both it and a full 6,000 reel and could point out that the 6,000' 35mm load weighed less. I don't think in most cases they doubled 70mm before I was there. I was always a lttle afraid of doubling 70 at the Hall because of the way the Simplex reel shafts were made, but I never had one snap off. The Ziegfeld had ZeissPrevost 70mm machines which were made for 70mm when I was there so I didn't have the same concern.

I do remember getting called to the Ziegfeld on an emergency after a blizzard one Saturday when we were running "Gandhi". Since I live a few blocks away, I kept a theatre key and a booth key at my apartment, and would frequently get called. On that day I took a 70mm double first reel off the projector, and slipped putting it on the rewind shaft. The reel landed on my foot. While it didn't break any bones (or damage the reel) it was not a pleasant sensation! Then I thought, "Why shouldn't it hurt? I've just dropped the first 30 years of Gandhi's life on my toe!"

Just spoke with Clearview and Fair Lady will not be in 70mm. Bummer. So what genuine 70mm films still exist in that format? And will we ever see them again in New York?

Oh Rob that's a riot! Good point about the weight of the two reels, the difference,of course, was the diamater of the reel which made it a bit harder to handle. In addition we often used "floating hubs"
which was good for the takeups but much harder to handle. I also remember doubling up a lot of the reels on a 70mm musical picture because in order to avoid a reel end in the middle of a musical number, many of the reels ran only 11-12 mins. You spoke of mounting prints on reels running just to or slightly over the edge, I remember many a time joining two reels together not knowing for sure if they would both fit, just shouting "come on baby you can do it" Alas it not always did. I never really liked having the print run over the edge, although I did. I was always concerned some relief operator would not pay enough attention during rewind and cause damage, it happened to a print of "Hello Dolly" and the boys in the booth caught holy hell. At the next union meeting after that incident, we were forbidden by the union president to allow reels to run over the edge. By the way, ever see a 70mm print on a platter have a brain wrap?, not a pretty sight.
So what do you hear about the prints being used in the upcoming festival? any 70mm?

Hey Movieguy, I dont know what theaters you are going to but if what you said was happening, the union guy would be replaced. To say that the managers do a better job than the union prjectionists is absurd and shows what little you know about it. As far as the loud trailers, that has been a problem for years. Everyone knows about it. If you can show me a processor that can change levels for each trailer I would love to see it.

Hey Movieguy, I dont know what theaters you are going to but if what you said was happening, the union guy would be replaced. To say that the managers do a better job than the union prjectionists is absurd and shows what little you know about it. As far as the loud trailers, that has been a problem for years. Everyone knows about it. If you can show me a processor that can change levels for each trailer I would love to see it.

Hey Movieguy, I dont know what theaters you are going to but if what you said was happening, the union guy would be replaced. To say that the managers do a better job than the union prjectionists is absurd and shows what little you know about it. As far as the loud trailers, that has been a problem for years. Everyone knows about it. If you can show me a processor that can change levels for each trailer I would love to see it.

REndres: That's a great story (though painful for you) about "Gandhi". I went to the Ziegfeld to see "Gandhi" on the Friday night of that blizzard weekend in 1983. I and many of my co-workers had picked that night to go before we knew a blizzard was coming, and we decided not to call it off and go anyway. To our amazement, the place was packed to the gills. It's still one of the most memorable shows I ever attended at the Ziegfeld.

It was interesting to hear about the 70mm print of "The Exorcist." The Los Angeles County Museum of Art (LACMA) screened a special 70mm print of the film, if memory serves, in 1997. The print I saw was in pristine shape and the sound was very good. You never know how these prints will end up in the future. As for "My Fair Lady," there was a 70mm screening at California State University at Long Beach sometime in the late 1990s. That print, however, was severly pink, faded and had a "click" running through one of the front channels via one of the reels. The head of the festival, Gary Prebula, stopped the film midway and said that it was the same print that screened at Century Plaza in Century City during its re-release in 1994! How could a print get so beat up in so little time?

There are some new or fairly new 70mm prints around.

"The Sound Of Music"
"Vertigo"
"The Agony and the Ecstasy"
"Doctor Dolittle"
"Playtime"
"Those Magnificent Men In Their Flying Machines"
"The Greatest Story Ever Told"
"It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World"
"Hello, Dolly"
"2001"
"Lord Jim"
"Patton"
"The Sheltering Sky"
"Tron"

These have all screened in the Los Angeles area in recent years in 70mm DTS (except for "The Sheltering Sky" and "Tron"). It probably depends on which theatre, if any, has a DTS decoder for 70mm in New York, to book a print. And most of these screenings were either near capacity or sold out.

Hey RCDTJ,

Absolutely... the SDDS 3000 and all Dolby processors from the 500 series on. They allow you to set a sound cue for commercials, trailers and feature. The SDDS has memory - it will remember the level for a trailer even if it is removed from the platter and is reintroduced later. The Dolby does not have a memory feature but it CAN accept different fader settings for trailers and feature.
I had a conversation with a "tech" from a Loews theatre about this. His response was "it's too much trouble, we have to program the machine every time we move the film." Gee - that's what I thought they get paid to do?

Sorry Movieguy, I simply cannot accept your comments regarding projectionists. Sure, in every industry you have people who are as you described, but in my many years in theatre business I have found the guys in the booth to be hard working, dedicated profressionals who would never disrespect the the fine art of projection. We are a breed of individuals who love the job and get great satisfaction and joy in putting on a good show. As for volume in trailers, it was a major problem for a while, the studios and producers recorded them at a high level to get your attention in selling the picture. several of the industry's most prominent organizations, including the Motion Picture Association of America, the National Association of Theatre Owners, and THX's Theatre Alignment Program have decided to work together on developing a set of guidelines to regulate trailer volume. As a result, an industry committee dubbed the Trailer Audio Standards Association has been formed to help ensure that volume levels enhance, rather than hurt, the moviegoing experience, so as you pinted out, have improved over the last few years. Problematic, too, was that the difference in dB levels between trailer and feature presentations was still quite discernible. Trailers were so loud, theatres turned down the volume because they were getting complaints, and then not turning them back up for the features. You are quite correct in your statement regarding level adjustment settings in sound processors and automation panels, however, their are some flaws contained in those options as well. As the Loews guy said it can be troublesome, due to the fact that in a multi screen operation, prints are moved from house to house and trailers are interchanged, replaced, updated on a regular basis, so it can become difficult to keep track of all those settings. Keep in mind not all trailers are recorded at the same level so it's not just one level adjustment involved. Hopefully I have caused you to change your opinion of "the guys in the booth"
honestly, the vast majority want to put on the best show possible.

I know all about different fader settings. I install this equipment daily. My point was that you can't have automatic settings for individual trailers. You can have saved settings for the feature and trailer mode only. As Vito said, every trailer and commercial has a different level. You cannot be at every machine every show and sit there while they run through and babysit the volume. Also as Vito said, the majority want to put on the best show possible. Do you think the managers do? They had no choice but to learn how to thread up and hit the start button. The owners don't give shit about the customers. It's all about saving money. The reason presentations are going downhill is because the qualified operators are being replaced by film threaders! That's a fact.

Hey Vito & RC - I'd love to continue this with you via e-mail before everyone gets pissed about this being off topic ;-)

You are absolutely right that some people do try to put on a good show - the guy at the Ziegfeld does a good job, Stanley at the Astor Plaza used to put on a great show . The people at the Union Square and Battery Park do the best job out of all the multiplexes in the city. They don't use the fader memory feature or dual fader setting capability - they just leave it set for the feature and seem to deal well with the trailer complaints. At Loews E-Walk I can tell which projectionist is on duty based on the presentation - I believe they have 3 guys on staff - ONE of them does a good job. The Chelsea 9 (already a crappy theatre - even on a good day) took 45 minutes to manually switch over formats because "we can't find the projectionist." The dialog for MatchPoint at the Village 7 came from the right channel speaker and the projectionist had no clue how to fix it (it was running in the wrong program - he couldn't figure out how to push one single button and quite frankly his attitude was one of "I couldn't care less.") I had to explain to the manager what to do and he manged to fix it. And it cost him 4 free passes and two refunds. AND he invited us to stay and see the movie anyway.

I don't mean to demean the profession - and I'm sure all you guys are consummate pros who actually took/take pride in putting on a good show - but I'm also sure that you can see why I'm a little miffed.

As for the fader settings, why not do as my friend does: My buddy runs a 6 screener - 5 Dolby Digital & 1 SDDS. In the Dolby houses he sets the trailers to 4.5 and the feature between 6 and 7. In the SDDS house, he tries to get all the trailers to run in the SDDS format and sets it to -2.0 and sets the feature between -0.5 and 1.5. He actually goes into the auditorium and listens to the movie. He has said that on ocassion, he has had to run some movies at 7.5 and 2.5 DD/SDDS respectively to get clear dialog. He does have to move films a couple times a week for screenings, etc and says it's not a big deal 'cause it is just two cues. Sure, every commercial/trailer has a different level, but you can group all the commercials/trailers/etc and set them at one fader setting and the feature at another. No need to babysit the volume. I've watched him do it and I've heard the results. It's a great and relatively simple solution.

OF COURSE THEATRE CHAINS DON'T CARE ABOUT THE PRESENTATION - THEY ARE WAY TOO CONCERNED WITH SELLING POPCORN!!! That's why you'd assume that theatres with fulltime projection staff would do a better job - all the projectionist has to do is work with the film. But again, in my experience, here in the city, it doesn't seem to make a difference. They put on just as crappy a show at the AMC as they do at the UA East as they do at Lincoln Square and Lincoln Plaza (where we just tried to see Mrs Henderson Presents - which was presented at a volume so low that about half the dialog was inaudible. Mrs Henderson herself couldn't hear what she was saying!!! My complaint was greeted with "I'll let the projectionist know." Ten minutes later we were getting a refund.

Bill Kallay:

There's no way that the faded print you saw of MFL in the late 90s was from the 1994 restoration. Those 1994 prints were made on LPP film stock which does not fade. They were obviously misinformed and received an original print from the 60s or 70s.

I worked at the Ziegfeld in the 80's. The projectionist was a crack addict who put BACKDRAFT on in the wrong reel order at the World Premiere. The run of MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON was destroyed because the asshole never seemed to be able to run a complete show. Has the Ziegfield really survived local 306?

God help the Ziegfeld and may it survive tragically bad history of projectionists!

I remember that screening of Backdraft!!
I also agree that the presentation at the Ziegfeld was iffy for a while there.
Since Clearview has had it though, it's been quite good.
RENT rivaled some 70mm shows I've seen there.
EVERYBODY GO TO THE REVIVALS!!! If enough people support it, maybe we'll luck out and get a series every year!

There has to be a reason the Ziefeld is doing this festival....at a low price no less...is it an experiment based on this room?? or is it a sign of a closing...I myself am really psyched...I hope the prints are good....I hope they put an effort into this...I wonder how successful "Chicago" and "Gladiator" and "Rings" will be as they might be just too recent..I'm looking forward to WSS, MFL, Ben....I'll keep checking for reviews on the prints..

I was saddend to hear the "Backdraft" story. I was working in Hawaii
at the time but the news reached us there, a blemish on the great profession of projection to be sure.
I am hoping REndres will be able to report back to us regarding the format being used to show WSS, MFL and others. 70mm prints are getting harder and harder to find, I worry we may end up seeing them in 35mm possibly with mono sound. I played WSS twice in 70mm and several times in 35mm. None of the 35mm prints had magnetic tracks, they were always optical (momo) So I am not sure if any 35mm stereo prints exsist. In addition, I don't recall hearing of any Dolby remastering as was the case with MFL. But whatever it turns out to be I agree we must support the showings, if they are a sucess perhaps we can begin to se more of that at the Ziegfield and
possiblly Radio City as well. Wouldn't THAT be sweet.

The 35mm prints of West Side Story that MGM distributed until last year were on LPP stock from the mid-90s and had Dolby SR soundtracks. Now that Sony distributes West Side Story, they've struck even newer 35mm prints with Dolby SR and DTS digital tracks. I don't know if they've struck any new 70mm prints but I doubt it. The My Fair Lady prints that currently circulate via the company Hollywood Classics are all 35mm Dolby (Type "A", if I recall correctly) from the 1994 restoration. I don't know that any of the 70mm prints from 1994 survive. Most likely that every film in the series will be shown on 35mm.

At the very least, I plan on making it to the Ziegfeld to see "Ben Hur" and "West Side Story" - and might also take the kids in to see "Raiders of the Lost Ark" on the big screen. I've accepted that these will likely all be 35mm prints; I only continue to hope that they are pristine shape and are well cared for while in Clearview's care.

Thanks for that Peter, I was not aware of the Dolby SR prints of WSS
I suppose if all the movies are shown with either Dolby encoded SR, Type A, or DTS tracks, although I am not sure the Ziegfield has a DTS processor, it won't be bad. In fact some of the older 70mm tracks I listened to a few years back did not sound all that good, lots of hiss, and a deficiency in high frequencey, which of course is the result of too many runs thru the mag reader. You are certainly correct about the 70mm prints and I am sure no new prints will be struck, with the execption of IMAX, 70mm seems dead. I thought there would be a resurgence of 70mm with DTS after "Vertigo" and "Hamlet", there was talk of doing "Rear Window" but I don't believe it ever happened. It was very promising for a while since the expence for both the studios and the theatre owners was not very high. The studios cost would be the large 70mm prints (3x the cost of 35mm) but no mag-stiping costs, which because it was done reel to reel would up the cost to 12x that of a 35mm print.All that would be required in theatres already equipt with DTS was a 70mm reader for the time code. Alas it never came to pass.

I don't know if any of you noticed my post above but I already stated on the info given to me by Clearview that My Fair Lady will be in 35mm. When a theater known for its 70mm capability shows a film with which it had an enormous success for its 70mm presentation of said film it is especially frustrating that nobody went the extra yard to insure a print for this showing. Otherwise it is just like seeing it in any other theater and a great opportunity is lost. I know that the MOMA has a print and don't museums always lend works of art to other museums? How often do they show this film?
Very, very, rarely. Besides as I noted above their screen is too small to do 70mm justice. Clearview could have advertised that the print was from the MOMA.
Well I'll be there for Ben Hur and WSS, which I have never seen in 70mm as they have not been shown as such in Manhattan since their Palace and Rivoli engagments in the 60's.

When is the Ziegeld supposed to show MFL? Not that I can get there to see it.
Also I posted this on the posting from Jan 10 on the DVD No More Joy which is a documentary about New Orleans theaters that closed. It is wonderful. I only wish we could get one on all the wonderful theaters Phila and NYC lost. It is well worth the $15.00 and is a benefit for hurricane Katrina victims. Any movie buff will really enjoy this even if you never have been to New Orelans.

One problem in getting special prints from museums and university collections is that the prints can only be played reel to reel. They state in their contracts that the film can't be plattered, no matter what. Because of the state of the world of film projection, there are too many poorly operated venues.

William, the Ziegfeld has reel to reel capabilities. They just choose to run platters most of the time. I will be happy to know the prints are going to be shown reel to reel and not mounted on a platter.

Yes, I know the Ziegfeld is two projector equipped. It's up to the owner of the special print to where and how it is played. Because special collection prints can not been loaned out to platter type theatres. If the theatre makes a cut to mount it for platter use the theatre will have to pay a large fee for the damage. It may not be damage to some people but, it is damage to the prints owner.
Another problem in getting 70MM prints from say west coast storage, is the very large cost in shipping to and from the theatre.

In regards to "My Fair Lady," I mistakenly used the word "faded." Let me just say that the print was in horrible shape all around.

I saw the 1994 re-issue at the Century Plaza and it was spectacular. The opening credits and the scene at the races were simply beautiful on the big screen in 70mm. I had caught bits and pieces of this film on television and never liked it. But seeing it properly made me really like this film.

The last time I saw MFL in 70mm was during a special screening at the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood. It was James C. Katz's personal print and looked very good. I think it can help to have a professional projectionist, like Paul Rayton, who babies the print and makes sure the presentation is nearly perfect.

This Ziegfeld film festival has a very good line-up, despite the lack of 70mm prints. "Raiders Of The Lost Ark" had a brand-new 35mm print struck in 2001, and it was one of the best 35mm presentations I've ever seen. (This was an instance when Cal State Long Beach's film dept. started getting better prints.) With any luck, the Ziegfeld will so happen to get this print (provided it's still in great shape).

Bill
www.fromscripttodvd.com

Here's a direct link to the film festival:

http://www.clearviewcinemas.com/ziegfeld-classics/index.html

I've seen all the features on the big screen, except Ben-Hur, which I have deliberately avoided on TV and video, just for an occasion like this. I hope it's not a faded print. Beat-up I could stand, but faded would be hard to watch.

Is there going to be any films shown in 70mm? It didn't look like it from the ad.

I think the consensus here was that the likelihood of a 70mm presentation during this series was just about nil. However, Vincent only reported that he confirmed with Clearview that "My Fair Lady" would be a 35mm print. I'm with saps, here... While I'd be thrilled with a 70mm "Ben Hur" or "West Side Story," all I really ask for are crisp and well cared for prints. Oh yes, and the more series like this one in the Ziegfeld's future ("2001", "Spartacus", "The Wild Bunch" and "Apocalypse Now" all would be high on my wish list).

Sorry for the typo... the word "the" does not belong in that last sentence.

I think it's wonderful that Clearview is putting together this festival. We MUST do our best to promote and support this type of presentation. I know I'll be there. Off topic, is it true that film labs are no longer capable of magnetic striping? Is that the final nail in the 70MM coffin?

As DavidM posted "We MUST do our best to promote and support this type of presentation." Because this will give Clearview the testing grounds for future film series at this theatre or even maybe Radio City. The 35mm prints are only a start, because prints are much easier to get and ship. So that keeps their cost down from the start. Remember shipping many of those Roadshow 70MM type titles are anywhere from 10-14 reels long, the shipping to the theatre and later from back into storage will cost alot of money per print. And remember many of those titles may have somewhat new 35mm prints, they have been used many operators. And many of those 70MM titles are no longer available in that format. (Many have been junked for space)

Yes, the magstriping has to be done elsewhere because of EPA guidelines now. The good news is that 20th Century-Fox in the last few years has been restriking from 65mm negs new prints of many of their Roadshow films in 70MM DTS sound. So if this series has the support of many of you on this site, Clearview may find this could be an annual event during slow times of the year. And spend more money to get those red carpet Roadshow movies shown.

I am completely baffled that somebody like Scorsese who as one of the most esteemed and powerful men in the film industry and who has a passionate interest in classic films and 70mm has shown no interest and done absolutely nothing to promote its proper presentation in the New York City area.

Won't digital restore the experience without having to restore actual 70mm prints? It seems to make IMAX redundant as well, since it can blow the film up as much as you like without losing clarity and the sound is as good as your theatre system.

I think this is the reason why no one is too concerned.

But as of right now, "digital" isn't even close to 35mm quality. It's certainly not an ideal archiving medium, either.

I question whether digital technology is at a point where it can faithfully recreate the color saturation of a pristine vintage Technicolor print.

Many of the 35mm films that are in theatres today use digital technology to create the finished print from a digital intermediate. Its not that the film is being shown in digital, it's being shown just like any other regular 35mm print.

The AFI Silver Spring (in MD) theater near me recently showed "My Fair Lady" in glorious 70mm just last week. Unfortunately, I couldn't attend it. With the high quality projection standards that they have there, I'm sure the showing was a decent one, so perhaps Clearview could secure that print for their classic movies festival.

Thank you, William for quoting me. For one, I feel it's time for me to put my money where my mouth (or in this case, my keyboard) is. For years I have hoped to see this kind of Classic Film Presentation in NYC on a regular basis. Perhaps our patronage during this festival will send a clear message to Clearview and Cablevision that this type of moviegoing will be welcomed and supported. Over the next few days, I will be writing to Clearview to give them a hearty congratulations for putting this together. I also invite William and others in the NYC area who post here regularly to contact me so that we may be able to coordinate support for the Classic Series at the Ziegfeld. My contact info appears on my member page. Now, if Bob Endres is in the booth and the curtains will be in use, it'll be the best!

This festival is great for US (all in this room) but what about the public. Will there be a great turnout for every show for some of these films that are too recent and are popular on video?? Chicago...Gladiator...Rings...even Godfathers?? How popular will they be?? After this festival....if it tanks...it'll take more than us in the chatroom to get another.

BTW...if I'm not mistaken, does Ziegfeld have the projection equipment for 70MM?? I beliebve they don't...just digital.

The Ziegfeld showed "Vertigo" in 70mm in the fall of 1996. Even though that was almost ten years ago, I'll bet the projectors are still up there. "Rent" and "The Producers" were not shown digitally at the Ziegfeld.

I've seen almost all of these movies on large movie screens, most in reissue, the newer ones when issued, but I haven't seen The Godfather II on a movie screen and have been eager to catch it immediately after The Godfather I. So, I am looking forward to enjoying The Godfather I and II on the large screen. I think II was issued in 35, not 75, so I won't be worrying about format. And, I am grateful that we are getting so many great films in 35 MM. Of course, I'd love to see a 75 MM film festival at the Ziegfeld and at Radio City. If many attend this event, then with credibility we could make such a request.

They usually (though not always) use a curtain, but if a projectionist doesn't, people should tell them that classic film fans NEED a curtain!

I saw Chicago when it was issued at the Ziegfeld, and doubt it was a wise choice, but maybe there are fans who will see it.

Everybody should spread the word, because Rhett is right on the money. The Ziegfeld needs way more people attending than the usual suspects on this site in order to be interested in hosting more classics.

I would love to see a 75mm film festival anywhere!

We know we will see you, Vince, at our 70 MM film shows at Philadelphia's Boyd, www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org, which we are working to have after the movie palace reopens.

There aren't very many theaters that can still 70 MM since so many have closed. There are others in NYC that would be wonderful venues that likely still have their 70 MM projectors such as the Paris theater.

Howard that sounds wonderful.
Unfortunately I couldn't open your page.
When will this be?

We don't have dates or films scheduled yet. We are working towards this goal.
Most likely our films will be during the summer.
I don't understand why the link doesn't work, but I tried it and you are correct. No problem directly going onto our website.
In the meantime, our 1980's Philadelphia themed film will be at International House in Philadelphia on Friday eve May 12, in 35 MM, Brian DePalma's Blow Out.

Howard I thought your comment about Chicago was interesting. I find movie musicals of today unwatchable due to the loss of any skill in staging, photographing, and editing musical sequences(don't like the music much either.) Yet Chicago is considered a great success for today's audiences. So you I guess you didn't like it?

I am not a huge fan of movie musicals. I didn't like Chicago. I was charmed by Moulin Rouge, which I also saw at the Ziegfeld. I skipped seeing anywhere Rent and The Producers. I would have seen The Producers, but the critics said it looked like they just filmed the play raher than making a movie, much like what you are saying.

To comment further on Rhett's remarks, I think the Rings might have an audience, especially for people who want to see them all at once on the very large screen. Gladiator is also a movie that plays much better on the large screen than on a TV, but I'm not sure if it reached any legendary status among filmgoers. We all know Ben Hur reached that status.

Frankly, I'd doubt there is going to be a huge success during weekday screenings of the same movies playing during the weekends. I hope many attend the weekend shows.

Its interesting that a lot of people today are not fans of movie musicals as when the talkies started in was the movie musical that pretty much launched them like a rocket. I've always found music and great camerawork exhilarating(think Lubitsch and The Merry Widow) or just sit it down and record Astaire and Rogers/Charisse.

Unfortunately, you put a comma right after your .org which is causing the issue with the direct link

Folks can visit the Friends of the Boyd at
http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org

I'm looking forward to the upcoming schedule announcement and actually doing something to help bring back a great old theatre and just not pontiificate about it and expect merchants to preform magic tricks.

Although I am sure you are referring to someone else who posts on certain Philadelphia theaters, rather than me, that might not be clear to readers on this theater page. The Friends of the Boyd and Committee to Save the Sameric have already done much to save the Boyd and advance an excellent restoration and program. We are now working with the new theater owner, Live Nation, to accomplish our mission. Of course, we have never requested merchants, Hollywood, or the City to carry the burden by themselves, as the other gentleman has suggested. Fortunately, Live Nation is making a tremendous investment, and we will assist in any way we can. Other thoughts about the Boyd should probably be directed to that page rather than this one.

The Theatre better start advertising the festival No one I know has heard of it yet!

We'll probably see something in the Movies sections of this Sunday's New York papers.

Ahem. Speaking as "the other gentleman," presuming that I'm the one who's being referred to above, in no instance have I ever requested that merchants, Hollywood, or the City carry the burden themselves. To quote a former U.S. president -- who the above correspondant greatly admires -- "There ya go again."

But to give the full benefit of the doubt, I believe it's far more a misunderstanding rather than an intentional misinterpretation. So to return things to accuracy, let me state here and now that my consistent argument all along is that if a theater is run well that all parties involved benefit. And I've only tried to say that if those who should benefit refuse to cooperate, it becomes very hard, if not impossible, for the theater to be of great benefit to those other parties. When Marie Antonette was told the peasants outside Versailles were starving because they were out of bread, she allegedly replied, "Let them eat cake." In other words, she didn't understand that those peasants whom she seemingly had no concern for were the very people who enabled she and others inside the palace to survive. And right now I see a very similar if not an identical disconnect between theater operators and the cities in which they operate, between the theaters and Hollywood, etc.

It is not my aim to see theaters run as though they are charities, but rather, as good, sound, solid investments. For without well-run theaters, Hollywood's days are numbered. And I see time and time again where theaters are either shut down or not being run properly, the communities around these theaters looking very ghetto-like. And it does appear to be because the theaters are not getting their rightful share. To try to survive in the face of this, theater operators have no choice but to charge high ticket and concession stand prices, exhibit commercials in addition to movies, split themselves up into many smaller theaters, forego such things as curtains, underpay their staff and so on. And this, in turn, turns off otherwise avid theater patrons, making the dilemma all that much worse. And is that good for Hollywood? No, as it forces Hollywood to look to alternative means of marketing its product, such as cable and DVD release, which, of course, will be shortlived -- at least profitability-wise -- due to piracy. Also, when theaters sag, it makes the consumer business districts where they exist undesireable places to venture to. And that, in turn, hurts rather than benefits, the city.

See, in my case, I'm thinking of Hollywood, I'm thinking of the City, and thus I'm thinking how theaters -- when run right -- can be of great benefit to both. And also how much both lose out when they're not run properly or are forced to fold completely. So why shouldn't Hollywood, and the City, be strongly motivated to invest in them therefore? This seems to be where the big disconnect is going on right now. In my assessment -- and keep in mind I'm an investor -- it's shades of Marie Antoinette's "Let them eat cake" all over again...

After hdtv267 referred above, yesterday, wrote
"I'm looking forward to the upcoming schedule announcement and actually doing something to help bring back a great old theatre and just not pontiificate about it and expect merchants to perform magic tricks."

I wrote above "we have never requested merchants, Hollywood, or the City to carry the burden by themselves, as the other gentleman has suggested."

I'm am a very precise attorney so as TheaterBuff1 says that's not his expectation, I copied below his quotes from the 3 theater pages on this website at which he proposes that merchants, Hollywood, and the City carry the burden, and I urge everybody visit those theater pages and read more. Of course, merchants, the city, and Hollywood, are not going to save the Orleans from demolition or reopen the long closed Mayfair or Holme theaters.

Now whether it's to be a Wal*Mart or a Target store that's to be taking over that site, whoever it's to be could foot the entire bill of restoring and covering its day-to-day operations in such a way so that on their behalf it could serve as a major showroom for their products, ranging from carpeting to tile to curtains to toilets to DVDs they sell of movies being exhibited there and so on and so forth. 1-27-06 AMC Orleans 8, Philadelphia
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/3328/

Thus I would suggest the city should foot the cost of its full restoration and day-to-day operational expenses rather than any private benefactors or corporate sponsors assuming this cost. 1-17-06 Mayfair Theatre, Philadelphia http://cinematreasures.org/theater/8257/

And it wouldn't be a case of Hollywood's getting behind restoring this building as a theater as an act of charity, mind you, but rather, in full recognition of its tremendous money-making potential, and in terms of creating the perfect prototype of the neighborhood theater of the future. 12-15-05 Holme Theatre
http://cinematreasures.com/theater/9141/

Also, my political views have never been expressed on the Internet or the media. My political views are not the business of cinema treasures. Considering how he manages to relay his own views, TheaterBuff1 should not be attempting to relay or interpret my views of historic figures that he may gleam off site in any way including replies to emails. Nor should he be extracting such comments from direct email correspondence. I am not going to comment on this website or any other on which historic figues I admire or don't.

Theaterbuff1 is used to putting down people as "Taliban" and the like (see the Holme theater pages above), since they don't have views as he does, but this website is supposed to celebrate our movie palace and movie theater heritage, not comment on people's politics.

Please excuse my third comment in a row, but I have just seen this posting by Theaterbuff1 at http://cinematreasures.org/theater/7096/

"Actually what I really should've said in my earlier commentary above was that after the federal government moved its Northeast Philadelphia headquarters into the former GCC Northeast 4 building -- along with all Philadelphia attorneys who practice Social Security Disability law -- at that point it would make perfectly good sense to bring out the wrecking ball and go ahead and knock the whole building to the ground."

My question is whether Theaterbuff1 is saying he would use a wrecking ball or other means of destruction like a bomb to attack a federal building and kill people inside. After Oklahoma City and 9-11, we should all be on the alert for such threats, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other government agencies would be interested in knowing of such threats or intentions of death and destruction.

As New York City pages including the Ziegfeld page seem to be the pages most heavily used, it seems appropriate given his comments above, to enter this here. Like all Americans, Philadelphians were shocked at 9-11, and we don't need these kinds of postings.

I don't find the post amusing, especially he knows that I am among the lawyers he is referring to. And, before I hear his reply, I will say that I've never advocated for the destruction of any theater building. I've volunteered since 2002 to save movie palaces and theaters and other buildings, not destroy them.

BORING! lets get back to movie talk!

The Ziegfeld history has always been straddled with the legacy
of being an off-the-beaten path pseudo movie palace that opened
at just the wrong time.

It was the last choice run for many distributors and has survived thanks to the creative programming and massive efforts over the years of the Walter Reade Organisation followed by equal support from Clearview and, yes, even Cineplex Odeon who insisted on always keeping it open.

Contrary to popular opinion, New Yorkers have never truly supported the Ziegfeld, preferring to see their movies elsewhere when possible. The theatre was often out-grossed when playing day and date with a Broadway house or the upper east side.

It is ironic that the demise of the Broadway palaces is what allowed the Ziegfeld to survive, mostly thanks to exclusive engagements for which it would never have been first choice.

Straddled in its early days by huge overhead including three projectionists on 70mm and a full time stagehand (there is no stage), the theatre often closed between movies rather than incur losses.

That glorious curtain so many of you love was often the source of grief. Many a sold out show was refunded over the years when the damn thing simply wouldn't rise. Due to its weight, it was practically impossible to run manually. Hence, it is often left open at all times.

The choice location for many movie premieres, the promoters were forced to hire extras to form the crowd of gawking fans outside when not enough celebrity hunters bothered to find their way to 54th Street.

Between the opening weeks of big film exclusives the Ziegfeld had several weeks of tumbleweeds going through its now seemingly massive seating.

Ziegfeld Filmography. Dates are within a week.
12/18/69 MAROONED
02/25/70 GONE WITH THE WIND
03/04/70 DOCTOR ZHIVAGO
03/11/70 THE BIBLE…IN THE BEGINNING
03/18/70 THE SOUND OF MUSIC
03/25/70 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY
05/06/70 WAR AND PEACE (USSR)
06/03/70 THE GREAT ZIEGFELD/ZIEGFELD GIRL/ ZIEGFELD FOLLIES
06/17/70 THE SAND PEBBLES
07/01/70 GONE WITH THE WIND
07/08/70 THE BOATNIKS
08/05/70 AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS/WEST SIDE STORY
08/19/70 SOLDIER BLUE
10/14/70 A HARD DAY'S NIGHT/ HELP!/ YELLOW SUBMARINE/ LET IT BE
10/28/70 A NIGHT AT THE OPERA/ AT THE CIRCUS/ A DAY AT THE RACES/ THE BIG STORE
11/11/70 closed
11/18/70 RYAN'S DAUGHTER
07/07/71 PETER RABBIT AND THE TALES OF BEATRIX POTTER
08/04/71 CLEOPATRA
08/18/71 KLUTE
08/25/71 THE ANDERSON TAPES
09/01/71 BANANAS
09/08/71 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY/ YELLOW SUBMARINE
09/15/71 closed
12/22/71 STAR SPANGLED GIRL
02/02/72 closed
02/16/72 CABARET
08/16/72 WOODSTOCK
08/23/72 WAR AND PEACE (USSR)
08/30/72 closed
09/20/72 BLACKBOARD JUNGLE/ ROCK ROCK ROCK/ THE THING/ THE WILD ONE/ JAILHOUSE ROCK
09/27/72 closed
10/18/72 FELLINI'S ROMA
12/13/72 SLEUTH
03/28/73 I AM A DANCER
05/16/73 THIS IS CINERAMA
08/22/73 ROMEO AND JULIET (1968)
10/24/73 FROM THE MIXED UP FILES OF MRS. BASIL E. FRANKWEILER
11/07/73 closed
12/19/73 THE DAY OF THE DOLPHIN
04/17/74 LADIES AND GENTLEMEN THE ROLLING STONES
05/01/74 closed
05/29/74 THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT
10/02/74 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY
11/20/74 EARTHQUAKE
03/26/75 TOMMY
07/02/75 ROLLERBALL
08/27/75 THE JOLSON STORY
09/10/75 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY
10/01/75 GIVE 'EM HELL, HARRY!
10/15/75 LISZTOMANIA
11/12/75 CONDUCT UNBECOMING
11/26/75 THE TEN COMMANDMENTS
12/10/75 closed
12/24/75 BARRY LYNDON
03/31/76 MOSES
05/19/76 THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT PART 2
07/28/76 THE RETURN OF A MAN CALLED HORSE
09/22/76 closed
10/13/76 SOLARIS
11/10/76 closed
12/29/76 A STAR IS BORN
02/23/77 closed
06/01/77 THE GRATEFUL DEAD
06/22/77 NEW YORK, NEW YORK
08/31/77 closed
10/12/77 TOMMY
11/16/77 CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND
05/03/78 THE LAST WALTZ
07/26/78 REVENGE OF THE PINK PANTHER
10/11/78 THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL
11/15/78 THE LORD OF THE RINGS
02/14/79 MURDER BY DECREE
03/21/79 HAIR
05/23/79 THE PRISONER OF ZENDA
06/27/79 THE MUPPET MOVIE
07/18/79 DRACULA
08/15/79 APOCALYPSE NOW
11/14/79 THE ROSE
02/20/80 SATURN 3
03/26/80 APOCALYPSE NOW
04/23/80 THE WATCHER IN THE WOODS
05/07/80 FANTASIA
05/21/80 FAME
06/25/80 CAN'T STOP THE MUSIC
08/06/80 RAISE THE TITANIC
10/22/80 TIMES SQUARE
11/26/80 PAUL McCARTNEY & WINGS ROCKSHOW
12/24/80 THE JAZZ SINGER
02/18/81 CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (Special Edition)
03/18/81 FANTASIA
04/22/81 LION OF THE DESERT
06/10/81 closed
07/01/81 THE GREAT MUPPET CAPER
08/12/81 BEATLEMANIA
08/26/81 HONKY TONK FREEWAY
10/14/81 closed
12/16/81 PENNIES FROM HEAVEN
02/17/82 QUEST FOR FIRE
03/24/82 VICTOR/ VICTORIA
05/26/82 AC/DC LET THERE BE ROCK
06/16/82 GREASE 2
07/21/82 RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK
08/11/82 PINK FLOYD THE WALL
09/29/82 YES, GIORGIO
11/03/82 TESS
11/10/82 FANTASIA
12/08/82 GANDHI
07/20/83 STAYING ALIVE
10/05/83 BRAINSTORM
11/23/83 YENTL
02/22/84 FANTASIA
03/21/84 A STAR IS BORN
04/04/84 ANTARCTICA
05/02/84 closed
06/27/84 THE KARATE KID
09/19/84 LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
10/03/84 closed
10/24/84 THE RAZOR'S EDGE
12/19/84 A PASSAGE TO INDIA
04/03/85 KING DAVID
05/01/85 closed
07/03/85 ST. ELMO'S FIRE
07/17/85 SILVERADO
08/28/85 GHOSTBUSTERS
10/16/85 FANTASIA
11/27/85 WHITE NIGHTS
02/05/86 DOWN AND OUT IN BEVERLY HILLS
03/26/86 JUST BETWEEN FRIENDS
04/23/86 ABSOLUTE BEGINNERS
06/04/86 closed
07/02/86 AMERICAN ANTHEM
07/23/86 PIRATES
08/06/86 FLIGHT OF THE NAVIGATOR
09/10/86 closed
09/24/86 PATHS OF GLORY/ FROM HERE TO ETERNITY
09/27/86 BIRMAN OF ALCATRAZ/ I WALK ALONE
10/01/86 ELMER GANTRY/ ALONG THE GREAT DIVIDE
10/08/86 TOUGH GUYS
11/19/86 closed
12/03/86 NUTCRACKER
12/31/86 WISDOM
01/28/87 closed
02/04/87 OUTRAGEOUS FORTUNE
03/18/87 HEAT
04/08/87 closed
04/15/87 THREE FOR THE ROAD
04/22/87 closed
05/20/87 ISHTAR
06/24/87 ROXANNE
08/12/87 WHO'S THAT GIRL
09/02/87 THE FOURTH PROTOCOL
10/14/87 HAIL! HAIL! ROCK N' ROLL
11/04/87 closed
11/11/87 CRY FREEDOM
01/20/88 GOOD MORNING, VIETNAM
03/23/88 D.O.A.
04/20/88 APPOINTMENT WITH DEATH
05/04/88 POWAQQATSI
06/29/88 WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT?
08/17/88 THE LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST
11/30/88 COCOON: THE RETURN
01/11/89 TALK RADIO
02/15/89 LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
07/05/89 THE KARATE KID PART III
08/09/89 THE ABYSS
09/20/89 SEA OF LOVE
11/01/89 THE BEAR
12/20/89 BORN ON THE FOURTH OF JULY

Al: Wow - another one of your fantastic lists. Thanks for it. I'd like to make two additions, though. In 1978, between REVENGE OF THE PINK PANTHER and THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL, I saw GREASE at the Ziegfeld. And in 1986 I saw a Kirk Douglas/Burt Lancaster double feature of LUST FOR LIFE and THE PROFESSIONALS. LUST FOR LIFE had turned completely pink, but it was still in CinemaScope on the big Ziegfeld screen.

Just about a week before its DVD release, I'd like to salute David Lean's RYAN'S DAUGHTER for being the long-run champ of the Ziegfeld.

Bill, you are probably right. I have a small gap in THE BOYS FROM BRAZIL period (newspaper strike, I think) and those 1986 double features were a Kirk Douglas/Burt Lancaster prelude to TOUGH GUYS that may have included even more titles for a day or two.

GREASE was a moveover from either the Loew's Astor Plaza or the Loew's State where it originally opened. But of course it was better at the Ziegfeld.

Another great list, Al... Thanks for the stroll down memory lane. I know my parents made the trip in from Queens with me to see "That's Entertainment" here. It's possible I saw "Earthquake" here as well, but I think that might have been elsewhere in Manhattan on the upper East Side where my Mom's freind Lilliana - who accompanied us - lived. Saw "The Grateful Dead", "Hair" (my first trip into the city on my own - St. Patty's Day '79) and "Apocalypse Now" to round out the '70's. The following decade my pals and I came in to see "Pink Floyd's The Wall" and I saw "Fantasia" here a couple of times during the '80's. The only other film I can be certain of seeing here on the list is "Yentl", though I might have also seen "Tough Guys" here in '86. I look forward to a '90's list, Al... I believe on Christmas Day 1990 I was sitting in the Ziegfeld anxiously watching (and being ultimately disappointed by) "The Godfather, Part Three."

And P.S.... Still looking for advertisements for the upcoming series. There was no mention of it in the Sunday Times Arts & Leisure section. Are they waiting for the Friday Weekend section to spread the word? Or are they looking only to pull in passersby and visitors to Clearview Cinemas website and the folks on Cinema Treasures?!?

"The Boatniks" and "From The Mixed Up Files Of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler" were both move overs from Radio City. "The Anderson Tapes" and "Grease" like BH said were move overs from Loew's State. "Bananas" was from the upper East Side. As for AlAlvarez statement "Contrary to popular opinion, "New Yorkers have never truly supported the Ziegfeld, preferring to see their movies elsewhere when possible.", I don't know but having seen a good chunk of those bookings he posted and having stood in line for a sold out show on almost all those occasions, I would say I don't agree. But if you look at some of the bookings, like their '71 Christmas show, "The Star Spangled Girl", a movie based on a bad Neil Simon play that Simon himself probably never saw, or pictures that seemed perfect "Ziegfeld" bookings like "Flight Of The Navigator or Polanski's big budget "Pirates" that turn out to be dogs. You can't blame a theatre if there is no product or the owner doesn't book it properly.

There is an ad for series in the current TimeOut Magazine.

Time Out is sponsoring the series - or is otherwise involved - so that makes sense. But shouldn't the advertising be just a bit more widespread?

Bob, my comment referred to the fact that if the same film played with the tiny Coronet, the Coronet always outgrossed the Ziegfeld. If a film moved to the National or Warner, it picked up. It was always a battle to book the Ziegfeld unless an exclusive was on offer by a distributor trying to establish a film.

The website says "Check Local Newspaper Listings". Maybe Thursday or Friday?

This reminds me of when "2001: A Space Odyssey" played the Loew's Astor Plaza in December 2001. The New York Times ad in the Friday paper was so small it could easily be overlooked, and no other papers ran any ads at all. Hundreds of people still managed to find out about it and showed up for the Friday night show.

"Movies...the way they were meant to be seen!"

Gee, it seems that I've heard that somewhere before...

Pacific's Cinerama Dome ad line for their display ads was "Where Movie Going is an Event".

Still no print ads anywhere in the local papers, but there is {url=]this New York Post article[/url] from Lou Lumenick about the series. I submitted a news item to Cinema Treasures today to try and spread the word beyond this particular page. In any event, I have plans with my gal to see "West Side Story" next weekend and "Ben-Hur" the weekend after that. Plus, the kids are all excited to see "Raiders of the Lost Ark" on the big screen in March. I hope word of mouth and the Post article can generate enough interest to make this program a great success and encourage Clearview to try it again somewhere down the line.

Sorry... forgot the link!

http://www.nypost.com/entertainment/62811.htm

The Boatniks was a Ziegfeld premiere exclusive. It never played at Radio City Music Hall. After an excellent run, Walter Reade dropped the admission to The Boatniks at Ziegfeld to $1 admission for kids.

Just got back from "The Godfather Part II". The print was in very good condition. Some scenes were very dark, but I'm sure that's the way it was supposed to look. And the sound was great - when Pacino screamed at Michael V. Gazzo, "In my HOME!", it shook the Ziegfeld to its core.

It wasn't a full house by any means, but it was a good-sized crowd considering it was Super Bowl Sunday. Here's something that gave me hope for more classic movies at the Ziegfeld: all patrons were given a card where they could list what classics they'd most like to see at the theater in the future. I asked for "2001" and "Ryan's Daughter".

Attended Godfather I and Part II today. Both were great prints. I had excellent sound, including side and/or back sound in the auditorium. I had a 1997 re-release in DTS, so probably digital sound.

II sounded loud and very good as Bill said, but not quite the same as I. So, I asked an usher, who walked up to the projection booth and returned, telling me "SR" which I take to mean SR Dolby.

For first run movies, the curtain is open before you enter the auditorium, there are slides, then they close the curtain briefly before the pre-show. For the classic series today, the curtain was closed when you entered the auditorium and stayed that way until it opened for commercials, then the classic movie. It was nice to sit there and look at the curtain.

When I entered, I asked the ticket taker and she said about 800 per day, not good, but not bad. That would have been Friday, Saturday. As Bill says, a good sized house considering Superbowl Sunday. I've attended various first run movies there with far less people attending.

They had the curtain open to scope, but as these films are flat, the black matting was seen. That shouldn't keep anybody away, but the right way is to see curtain and film, not matting.

All things considered, an excellent experience with great prints, great sound, and fantastic movies.

Howard is right - it felt great to walk in and see the curtain closed, just like the old days.

Did anybody catch Chinatown in the last few days, and if so, how was the print and sound?

The wonderful long list of movies above (we'd love one for the Boyd in Philadelphia!) lists in 1973, This is Cinerama, which played before my time in 3 strip Cinerama at the Boyd in its original run. How did it play at the Ziegfeld? 35 MM or 70 MM? Surely not with 3 projectors and a special wide screen? What is the experience of seeing this movie in a theater that isn't set up for 3 strip Cinerama?

Howard see above posts about Cinerama at the Ziegfeld in '73.
Also look up Vincent Canby's '73 article in the Times.
It was a case of why did they bother.

The 1973 reissue of "This is Cinerama" was optically converted from the 3-strip original to 70MM. And in many cases for this reissue a special curved screen was installed in front of the regular screen for theatres that did not have a curved screen.

I'm sure I've said this before, but the Ziegfeld is not a good place to see a movie. Most people don't realize how bad the sound is in there. There were plenty of things in Chinatown that were barely audible (and I don't think the movie was mixed that way).

The other odd thing about the Ziegfeld is that everybody thinks it's some kind of movie palace with a great history, since it houses all those theatrical artifacts in the lobby. It is NOT the original Ziegfeld theater where Show Boat premiered, nor is it built on that site (it's down the block from the original site).

It is a barn, and not particularly beautifully done -- very 60s rococco (SIC), if you ask me.

There is an old movie palace in Manhattan that is worth preserving -- the Beacon at 76th street. Also, the old Mark Hellinger theater, now Times Square Church, was built as a movie palace.

Thanks for replying to my Chinatown question. If the sound wasn't heard as it was originally supposed to be, I'd bet that it isn't the fault of the Ziegfeld, but that of the print that was shipped there. As I wrote, the sound of first Godfather yesterday was flawless. And, though we didn't meet, both Bill H. and I agree that the sound for Godfather II was very good. And, I've not had any problems with hearing the sound of the many 1st run movies and reissues that I've attended there.

Your clarification as to the history of the Ziegfeld is also very worthwhile. There's a photo in the current theater of the original, dated 1927. It was a masterpiece of design by Joseph Urban, but was torn down. The artifacts are wonderful, but they are just that, artifacts. Nevertheless, many of us have commented on this site on how much we like the existing Ziegfeld. And as vintage movie palaces don't show movies in Manhattan, the Ziegfeld is a great choice. That said, I've never thought there will be a battle to declare the current theater a historic landmark. Like so many others that have fallen recently, it too will fall.

I've seen many movies at the Ziegfeld, including some first-run movies in the 70s like A Star is Born, and the Lawrence of Arabia restoration from 1988, and the My Fair Lady restoration from 1994, and many others. I've never had a good experience there.

I know why people extol it, though, because they are trying to hold onto the experience of a large audience at a movie palace. As such, the Ziegfeld is close to the last remaining place in NYC to experience such a thing.

So, premieres are exactly what should be showing there.

But for watching the actual movie the way it's meant to be seen? I think the Loews theater (the biggest one inside the Loews 68th Street multiplex) is the best theater in town to see a widescreen, 70mm, DTS kind of movie, particularly when you sit in the balcony. The sound is superb. The screen itself is bigger than at the Ziegfeld, and the number of seats is actually smaller.

The problem with the Ziegfeld isn't the sound system -- it's the theater itself, its shape (a horizontal box that's too deep), and the design makes the bathroom and refreshment areas seem like a mile away from the seats, and they're too small.

Since there are no other movie palaces, the Ziegfeld must suffice, but overall, it's a bad choice.

My opinion, of course. And of course, I don't even go to the movies anymore -- now it's home theater.

I agree that the Ziegfeld is too deep to make seating in the raised section at the rear an enjoyable experience for my tastes. Typically, I like to sit about 10-12 rows back and dead center in most theaters. From this vantage point, I think the Ziegfeld makes for an awesome movie going experience. A tip of the cap to the Loews auditorium at the Lincoln Square, as Deester correctly points out - that is a superb place to see a movie.

Are they running an intermission for "The Godfather, Part II" at the Ziegfeld? That film is well over 3 hours and I was curious if they planned on having intermission with some of the longer films - particularly "Ben Hur" which has entr'acte music in its restored version. I'm sure that "Braveheart" and "Gladiator" where presented without intermission during their initial theatrical release, but I wonder if that's a purely American development. Do intermissions survive in foreign markets? If so, do filmmakers still keep a spot in mind for the break when assembling prints for overseas distribution? I imagine they'd have to insert an "intermission" card wherever the film is projected from a platter. Or is this a completely antiquated concept that now exists only in the memories of aging film enthusiasts like myself?

No intermission for either first Godfather or Part II at the Ziegfeld.

I saw Braveheart at the Ziegfeld, and Gladiator at the Boyd (main auditorium of what was then Sameric 4) and like every long movie in recent decades, there was no intermission.

Why doesn't somebody ask the management, and projectionists, at the Ziegfeld if they plan intermissions in those particular films that originally had them? And, write down the request on the white cards they distribute which ask for future film choices?

In the 1990's, in Portugal, I observed every single film getting an intermission. I loved the practice, and most would truly welcome it for those that last 2 hours or more. It would also increase concession sales.

I've been only a couple times to what was built as the "Loews" theater of the Sony Lincoln Square, mentioned above. It seemed a great place to see a film, from the balcony. I wish they would put in newspaper and online just which movie is playing in that ornate auditorium, as we can't always guess corrrectly.

I meant to say that I would truly welcome intermission, not to imply everybody else would.

Also, no intermissions in other nations I've seen movies in: Canada, England, France, Spain, Holland, Belgium, Denmark.

Is that simply room 1? So that if you saw the movie title next to 1 in the listing you would know that was the film playing in that large Lamb imitation auditorium?

No, I don't think it is auditorium 1 or at least wasn't years ago when I gave up. If they want to adopt that as a custom- of always playing in the ornate movie palace auditorium the movie listed at # 1, then, yes, that would help.

Haha, that IS a problem with the Loewe's. I would always try to choose that theater based on the times it presented. If the movie had a 7 PM showing, and an 8 PM showing, I would choose the latter, because that 8:00 timeslot seemed more likely to be in the bigger Loewes. I know, it's a crazy system of guessing, but it worked quite a few times.

Just a note about sound at the Ziegfeld. It has been one of the best sounding houses in the city, and to this day Dolby techs still check out the sound (and in the case of the last "Star Wars" the picture since it was played on a Dolby cinema server) regularly. "Chinatown" was issued before Dolby tracks became common. It is mono, unencoded optical sound that you're hearing. Not even a Dolby "A" noise reduction system was used. Those tracks are also susceptible to scratching and wear, much the same way as vinyl record tracks were. Try listening again when they do a contemporary print or a digital cinema presentation. I always admired the sound there when I was running 70mm prints, even though I agree with the statement that the house is too long to have a really impressive wide screen image.

As I've said, it isn't the sound system -- it's the house that's the problem. The shape of the theater itself. There's a lot of natural echo, which is great for music, and very bad for speaking. Our modern movies have very complex soundscapes, but to take advantage of them properly, you'd have to have a very dry room.

The Loewe's is simply better suited to movies, in my opinion. I even think it's nicer-looking. But it's got a problem too -- the bathroom is a mile away down a long narrow corridor.

I've also seen movies at Radio City Music Hall (the early 70s -- saw Bedknobs and Broomsticks and many others there) and I think it's actually a better place to see a movie than the Ziegfeld, even though monstrously huge.

And I went to the Rivoli too, though unfortunately, my recollection of it was that it was practically a ruin.

I always thought "The Godfather Part II" was planned with an intermission in mind, but they changed their minds about it before release. There's a long fadeout and a great Nino Rota musical crescendo right after the Little Italy stoop scene ("Michael, your father loves you very much") which follows the killing of Don Fanucci. When I saw the film in 1975 I was all set to get up and use the men's room at this point, a bathroom break I needed badly. Then, a few seconds later, we faded back in to Al Pacino as Michael coming home to his snowy Lake Tahoe house, and I stuck it out for another hour or so. A movie like that is too good to walk out on, unless it's the most serious emergency. But that's one more reason why intermissions are a good thing.

When I saw "Schindler's List" in Italy in 1994 it had an intermission after the ghetto purge sequence, with a title card in the same font as the film's credits saying "Intervallo". There was no intermission for the film's US release, though. It ran about 3 hours 20 minutes, same as "Godfather II".

Vertigo, is an example of a movie with a very "dry" soundtrack, very little reverb built into the soundtrack. The recent restoration of the movie had re-recorded foleys (sound effects) to take advantage of the recovered stereo recordings of the music.

When I saw the movie at the Ziegfeld, I was surprised at how bad I thought the presentation was. The movie was shown in 70mm, with beautiful stereo surround music. But the picture wasn't bright enough (the theater is too deep), and the dialogue was echo-y, reverberant, and wet, and because of that, it was hard to understand. This is a movie I know very well, and I was disappointed seeing it in all its glory at the Ziegfeld. I went again to it at another theater in town, and the experience was much better -- the movie looked and sounded great. The problem wasn't the movie, it was the Ziegfeld theater itself.

Here's the HUGE problem with the LOEWS @ Lincoln Square: If just ONE person complains that the movie is too loud, down the volume goes. And down it stays. In fact, most of the time, the volume is kept low anyway so that they don't have to deal with complaints. This applies to ALL the auditoriums there. Talk about inaudible. This WAS a great thaeter when it opened, but sadly it no longer is. My very last visit was for WALK THE LINE (my friend lives across the street and didn't want to travel.) In addition to the volume being too low, the sound was muffled and distorted. It didn't concern the nearly soldout house or the management. We got refunds. Eventually saw the movie at the Union Square where it was loud and crystal clear (as it usually is there.) As for the ZIEGFELD, they have really done a tremendous job over the past couple years. As for CHINATOWN, you can't hold an old optical mono track to the same standard as a new release or a freshly struck print. Yeah, they probably coulda cranked up the volume but those old worn out optical mono tracks tend to sound harsh and shrill at high volumes. The Ziegfeld DID indeed have sound and projection problems for a while. From Jurrasic Park until up to and including Moulin Rouge no matter how loud they made it, dialogue was mostly unintelligible. Including the VERTIGO rerelease after their renovation - it was BARELY audible. Also, many times, they couldn't even manage to get the picture on the screen properly. Now however, it's in the top 3 moviegoing experiences in the city. In a good way ;-)

This is of course, the truth about moviegoing in general, now. The presentations at nearly every theater are simply not what they were, even 10 years ago, let alone in the late 60s. Movie theaters can't afford big staffs, or upgraded equipment.

Movies in the theater, I think, are doomed to be a niche part of the movie grosses -- not dissimilar to the "hardback" edition of newly published books. Most people will wait for the paperback.

It's true that Chinatown isn't exactly a movie that needs to be seen at the Ziegfeld. The best experience I ever had at the Ziegfeld was seeing A Star is Born, in 1976, there. Both movies are now available for home viewing, and in 1080i high-definition. I suspect once high-definition broadcasts are the norm, a movie like Chinatown will never be seen in the movie theater again.

The Union Square UA multiplex has mice. I saw one there myself.

They ALL have mice. Do you remember the PLAZA on 58 St? It was CRAWLING with roaches.

EdSolero asked about placement of intermissions in Foreign markets. There is one major problem with the placement, it is sometimes limited to equipment and it become a judgment call of the projectionist as to where to make place it. Not every theatre in the world runs on platters type systems. Some theatres run using whats called towers, which are around 12,000 foot reels on one projector. In running Towers (12,000 reels) they are limited to around 130-140 minutes of film. So they have to split the film on to two reels for longer releases. With some of the longer newer releases that do not have built-in intermissions by the film maker the projectionist has to make the decision of on the placement of the intermission slug.

Everybody is so amazed that the Ziegfeld is using its curtain. After attending all the classic films at the Lafayette Theater in Suffern New York over these past several years, I've gotten used to seeing movies presented with curtains, pre-show organ music, and all the other bells and whistles which constitute good showmanship. I guess the Lafayette has gotten me spoiled for a true movie palace experience.

And the Lafayette doesn't run commercials, unless it's a vintage trailer for one of their upcoming classics. Friends, f you think the Ziegfeld is doing a good job, you don't know what you're missing!

When I was managing theatres we always added an intermission for long films. I never had a complaint. I would screen the movie the night before to find a suitable spot. We then spliced in an intermission snipe. Speaking of sound issues I was in Roosevelt Field one night and the house was pretty full. One whacko complained that the sound was too loud so they lowered itn and it stayed that way, despite many people going out and complaining that you could not hear the film.

I must contradict a previous poster. Having seen THE ABYSS at Radio City Music Hall for a premiere and then a few days later at the Ziegfeld (I am not a sadist, my office was at the Zieg), I assure you the sound at the Ziegfeld was far superior.

Having said that, Loews Lincoln Square is probably better and the only draw back is that most movies today record the music sound track too loud compared to the dialogue. When audiences complain, you lose the dialogue. This is common almost everywhere on blockbusters and is a print problem, not a theatre problem. I dare anyone to sit through EVITA at the recommended sound levels. The audiences would run for the nearest exit.

I saw a notoriously bad digital version of THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA at Lincoln Square and that soundtrack was embarrassingly bad so I think the theatres sound better when things are exploding.

Due to the premieres, the Ziegfeld is constantly tested for sound quality. Admittedly, many sound technicians over the years have expressed their displeasure with the acoustics.

By the way, here in the UK we only insert intermissions on Bollywood films. Hollywood intermissions are forbidden unless it is already there on an older film. If you get caught, you could lose the run.

I'd probably run from the theater regardless of the sound quality if I had to sit through the movie OR stage versions of either "Evita" or "Phantom".

I'm sorry if my above comment upsets and Lloyd Webber fans out there. I just consider him such a hack compared to the old greats. I'm somewhat glad to see his last few offerings being quickly dispatched here in NY.

But to the discussion regarding intermissions: weren't some films shot with an intermission clearly in mind? For example, "The Sound of Music" seems to have a hand made intermission at the scene where Maria leaves the children's house after The Countess has "talked" to her. And "Gone With The Wind" seems to have the intermission built into the scene with Scarlett declaring she'll never go hungry again. Right? Or does it just seem that way?

A couple of comments about AlAlvarez's post. I was Head Projectionist at the Music Hall and a relief projectionist at the Ziegfeld at the time of the "Abyss" premiere. That premiere at the Hall had a surround system brought in by an outside contractor for the screening. It was huge and not particularly good considering it took a week to take out seats to install it. Nonetheless, the sound at the Ziegfeld would have been better at the time. There was a classic echo at the Hall because of its sheer size. Acousticians had tried to solve them from the time the Hall opened, including Tom Holman of THX. When I would screen new prints I would sit in the middle of the orchestra at the producer's table, and if I turned my head in the empty auditorium I would hear two soundtracks, one from the screen and one from the backwall. If you sat in the Mezzanines there wasn't a problem, since you weren't hearing the slap from the area above the 3rd Mezz. Thus the Zieg had comparatively better acoustics. When we did the "Lion King" premiere, we installed a completely new film sound system with adequate speakers behind the screen and a plethora of surround speakers (I think its up over 100 now). Disney was extremely happy with the sound, and we added more speakers both for the stage system and the surround system for later premieres. Since then, the house has added acoustic treatment installed during the 1999 remodel. For all of the romanticism about the movie palaces, we tend to forget that many of them had enormous acoustic problems because of their sheer size. One of the acomplishments of the Dolby system was to include house eqalization to try to iron out the acoustic differences. Now we are used to E.Q. and digital reproduction and would probably be shocked if we actually had to hear the sound in a Paramount or Roxy as it played when those theatres reigned.

Yes, CConnolly, those two films have built-in intermission, as many of the 3-hour films of the past did. Regarding newer films, adding an intermission to a movie not specifically edited to accomodate one is a bad idea, IMO, as it will disrupt the carefully constructed flow of the film.

With the exception of the "Lord of the Rings" films which practically begged for an intermission, I agree that an inappropriately placed intermission can be a killer.

I remember seeing Apocolypse Now at a third run house in Massapequa (even then with curtains!) and the intermission seemed to pop out of nowehere.

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't there these different kinds of intermission "logos"? I remember the one they had for "The Sound of Music" seemed to write the word Intermission in script across the screen. There must've been others.

One movie that didn't seem to have an obvious intermission part is "My Fair Lady". The plays' first act ended after the ball with Act II beginning upon their return home. Where was it in the roadshow version? And how about "Doctor Zhivago"? Again, I can never quite tell where an intermission should be. I saw it at a couple of revival houses in NYC and like my experience with "Apocolypse Now" the intermission seemed to pop out of no where.

Often times - in revival houses - they would just place an intermission at the end of a reel, whether it belonged there or not. I saw many revivals of 1950's 3-D films with the intermission incorrectly presented that way.

The Roadshow intermission on "My Fair Lady" happens just after Eliza comes down the staircase and her and Professor Higgins & Colonel Pickering go off to the ball. Act II Begins at the ball.

The stage version comes after the ball which makes the first half too long. The movie got it right. It helps that the always radiant Audrey is heart stoppingly beautiful at that moment. How lucky the world is that she got the role.

"Doctor Zhivago"'s intermission is right after the red train carrying Strelnikov speeds past the big train carrying Zhivago and the others, which has been sidelined. It does come out of nowhere but it's intentional - a direct cut to the Intermission title card - no fadeout or dissolve - accompanied by a big crash of cymbals. It's very effective, I think.

If Joe Masher is still a division manager for Clearview, this is for him:
I was totally disappointed when I went into the Ziegfeld page at the Clearview web and saw the "classics" revival schedule. Gladiator a classic? Chicago a classic? Who's the idiot who programmed this series, a 19 year old? The 7 year old daughter of the programmer that, like Amy Carter, advised her father, president Jimmy Carter, on nuclear weapons? (Remember that?) Well, I sent the program of the series to a friend in LA -- where they have Cinerama and have REAL series and retrospectives, and he sent me his comments -- which follow. Incidentally, it is a shame that in the "capital of the world", we don't have a Cinerama theater or have REAL retrospectives and REAL CASSIC FILM series.

Here are his suggestions:

1) "Epics Week": Remove "Gladiator" and "Braveheart", and replace with the restored 70 mm prints of "Lawrence of Arabia", "Spartacus", and/or "El Cid".

2) Eliminate the "Indiana Jones" week, replace with Western week. (High Noon, Shane, The Searchers, Gunfight at OK Corral, The Big Country, Magnificent Seven, and so on). Ok, maybe have an Indiana Jones day, ( a weekend if you must) but please not an entire week at the expense of John Ford & company!

3) Eliminate "Lord of the Rings" week, replace with war epics: "Bridge on the River Kwai", "Guns of Navarone", "The Longest Day", "The Great Escape", "Tora!, Tora!, Tora!", "Dirty Dozen"

4) Remove "Chicago" and replace with "The Sound of Music", "Hello Dolly" , "Oklahoma!" or "Singing in the Rain". Any of those will do.

4) Put all those removed films ("Lord of the Rings", "Gladiator", "Chicago" etc.) in a "Contemporary Award Winners" week.

5) I would have a "Cop/Tough Guy" week: "The French Connection", "Dirty Harry", "Bullitt", "Point Blank"

6) Comedy week. Lots to choose there!

Idiot maybe but I imagine that the week that the 3 Lord of the Rings films play will be the highest grossing of the whole series.

I think the programmers at the Ziegfeld are trying to balance showing "truly" classic films with booking newer (yet still worthy) films to attract a wider audience. They have 1100 seats to fill and this is, after all, a sort of trial run here. The admissions are seperate so the bean counters should be able to see whether the older fare or newer films drew the largest audiences. If showing the Rings movies and Gladiator brings in crowds and helps subsidize showings of "Ben-Hur" and "West Side Story" then I welcome it wholeheartedly.

All of your suggestions are good, andreco, so I hope you jot them down (or print your post out) and drop them off with theater management - who are evidently looking for ideas for future retrospectives. I for one am ecstatic at the opportunity to see "Raiders of the Lost Ark" on the big screen again.

As for intermissions... thanks for all the info and history from everyone. There wasn't one at the original Ziegfeld engagement for "Apocalypse Now" in '79. I remember one that definitely seemed arbitrarily spliced in for "The Towering Inferno" where the screen literally just went dark prattically in mid-dialogue. I really wish they'd reinstate the practice for all films over 2 and 1/2 hours.

A few reasons they might have chosen the "Indiana Jones" series and "Lord of the Rings" series, is that they are almost a sure thing to make money at the box office for the classic series. These fans love to see these films on a big screen and they come rain or shine. Back in the day the studios did release the "Back to the Future", "Star Trek" series and the almighty "Star Wars" original trilogy. And the print of these titles are easy and cheap to rent. I think the rent on most titles is $350 vs. 35% of the gate per picture plus shipping to and from storage. And with "Gladiator", "Chicago", they did very well the in first run. Hopefully the print of "Gladiator" will be runable. The one they sent to me for a Academy screening was a piece of crap from the first reel to the last.

Andreco, Joe Masher left for an arthouse circuit in New England.

One thing that is evident is that all the films in the classic series are post 1953, flat and scope, not 1.33.

It would be wonderful to get 70 MM, including the restored Doctor Zhivago along with the 70 MM titles you mention, and others! And, if they wanted to raise the prices for 70 MM to $10, I'm sure many would pay.

I may attend one of the Indiana Jones series, since I've saw two on big screens but haven't seen one of them on a movie screen.

How about a James Bond series?

Andreco - 40 minutes out of Manhattan and most of your wishes have been coming true for the past three years. If I may say so myself, the Lafayette Theatre in Suffern, NY has been consistently showing the best and most comprehensive series of classic films in the New York metro area. No, we don't have Cinerama, but we do have double-system polarized 3-D, a silver screen, a pipe organ, and just about anything else you'd want in a renovated 1000 seat 1924 neighborhood movie palace. I welcome you to check out our spring season of events and I hope to see you at a show.

I'm glad the Ziegfeld is running this current series - the more opportunities audiences get to see classic films in a proper theatrical setting means that they will continue to seek them out at other venues.

Pete Apruzzese
Director of Film Programming
Big Screen Classics at the Lafayette Theatre

All I can say is "thank Heaven." I'm thrilled to see so much discussion about the Ziegfeld series. This means that we're going and supporting it. I hope Clearview will see the results and continue this policy. I was planning a trip to Bradford, England for their Widescreen Weekend but between the Ziegfeld and the Lafayette, I'm staying home. It's great to have this type of programming in the NYC area. And organ concerts, too!

Thank you all for the above responses to my comments on the Ziegfeld classic series. See your point EdSolero, and Peter, I'll do my best to go to Suffern. By the way, remember the programming ideas came from a friend in LA, he should get the credit for the titles for an ideal classic series.

I would like to add my two cents on the intermission policies. back in the day, starting in the mid 50s, all roadshow 70mm films were presented with built in intermissions, the 35mm continuous performance realeases to the local movie houses also carried the intermissions. I was working at the Cinerama theatre in Hawaii at the time we say the end of the roadshow, the last one to play there was the 70mm re-issue of "This is Cinerama" in the mid 70s. After that, the big movies that had in the past been presented as roadshows were simply played on a continuous performance schedule and they rarely had built in intermissions. Like some have posted, many of the theatres began adding their own intermissions and I gather not in a very good way, the idea was mainly to enhance concession sales. At the Cinerama, one of the first movies we did this with was "Mame" and "Funny Lady", both of which was played in 35mm with 4 track mag sound, we would screen the movie and find the absolute best place to slug the intermission, since the movies no longer carried additional intermission music or overture, I would purchase the soundtrack album and use a track from the album to use as overture, and entr'act music for the second half. As Laurel said to Hardy "no one was ever the wiser". For me, it kept the spirt of the roadshow alive, we had fun, and I think the audience appreciated it.

Regarding the intermission for "The Towering Inferno", I saw this at The Fantasy in Rockville Centre and the intermission was inserted at the most ridiculous time. It was the scene where Richard Chamberlin is running down the stairs. The intermission was so abrupt it looked like the film broke. My Mom was pissed because I made her get popcorn earlier and she missed the whole scene with Jennifer Jones getting spilled out of the elevator.

For all of you talking about a 70mm Zhivago or Ben Hur. See above comments. Clearview was too lazy(or too dim?) to get a Lady print in 70mm which is the entire point of seeing it in a large theater!

Outside of that I think the programmer did an intelligent job of choosing what we think of as classics and what younger people think of as classics.

And yeah I'd love to see Sound of Music and Oklahoma again in Todd AO but it doesn't look like it will happen again in my lifetime in New York.(and Magnificent Men and South Pacific...)
And if they did maybe me and another 10 people would care. That would be about it.

Yes, CConnolly! The intermission for "The Towering Inferno" that I saw came at that point as well... Chamberlin is running down the stairwell and a blast of fire erupts from somewhere? I didn't see the film at the Fantasy, but interestingly the intermission (clearly not intended by the filmmakers) came at the same point in the film. I wonder if it was just a convenient point in the film where there was a change in reels and the time seemed roughly half-way.

I'm trying to think of the last time I saw an intermission during a film presentation... I know when I saw "2001" in the '80's (I can't recall the theater) it was exhibited with intermission using a print that had the overture (more like mood music), entr'acte and exit music. I think it may have been the 8th Street Playhouse. There was also a showing of Sergio Leone's complete "Once Upon a Time in America" at the Metro, which was presented with an intermission. I think these are the last two intermissions I can recall during a movie that I attended... and neither one was first run. As for first run, I'm trying to remember if Warren Beatty's "Reds" was shown with intermission. I saw "Tess" and "Lion of the Desert" at the Century's Green Acres Theater on their first runs. Both films were around the 3 hour mark and might have had intermissions. We're talking about 1981 or '82. My memory is a bit fuzzy.

Vincent... Do I take it that no theater currently in NYC is equipped to show 30fps Todd AO? That's sad, because, "Oklahoma!" would have made my suggestion list. As it stands, when I attend "West Side Story" this weekend, I will be listing the following films: "2001", "Apocalypse Now", "The Wild Bunch", "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" (if they can get a hold of the print MGM struck for its showing in Seattle a couple of years back - with phony police radio calls during intermission), "Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Spartacus" and the complete "Heaven's Gate."

Ed: "Reds" had a real intermission and so did "Gandhi" a year later. After that, the only first-runs I can think of that had intermissions were the Ted Turner 4-hour Civil War epics, "Gettysburg" and "Gods and Generals".

Vincent, if I am not mistaken, Radio City can run 30fps, I believe that speed is used for the 70mm 3-D opening scene for the Christmas show? As I recall runing Todd-AO, it was just a matter of switching drive motors. Perhaps REndres will respond. By the way Bill, you are correct about the Zhivago intermission, as a matter of fact part two begins with the train rushing towards the light at the end of the tunnel as we begin to see what's on the other end of the tunnel the
imagine gets wider and wider untill the train clears the tunnel and we are oudorrs again, quite a sight to see that on a huge 70mm screen. REndres tells a great story of trying to match the opening of the travelor curtain to the spectacular opening shot outside the tunnel. Another point to add to what Bob wrote regarding the intermission in 3-D films, all of the features released in 3-D had built in intermisions, because in those days the movie cam mounted on 6000 foot reels, and was shown using two projectors, after the first half which ran 45-60 minutes, we had to have an intermission to change reels. The Paramount in NY was able to run 3-D without intermission because it was a four projector booth and could make a changeover.

Ed: I will list "Mad Mad World" also, along with "Apocalypse Now", "Close Encounters" and "Spartacus" - all three of which were previously shown at the Ziegfeld in a most spectacular way. This also applies to the two films I listed on Sunday, "2001" and the Ziegfeld's long-run record holder, "Ryan's Daughter".

Vito, you said: "The Paramount in NY was able to run 3-D without intermission because it was a four projector booth and could make a changeover." So did the Randolph in Philadelphia. During 3-D engagements there, the print ads always stated prominently "No Intermission!".

I will list "STAR!","SWEET CHARITY","FINIANS RAINBOW","HALF A SIXPENCE" and "GOODBYE MR> CHIP"!

I will list "STAR!","SWEET CHARITY","FINIANS RAINBOW","HALF A SIXPENCE" and "GOODBYE MR> CHIP"!

I will list "STAR!","SWEET CHARITY","FINIANS RAINBOW","HALF A SIXPENCE" and "GOODBYE MR> CHIP"!All had intermissions!

veyoung, I don't know about Philadelphia, but it they had no intermission, in the pre platter days, then I would guess they had 4 projectors. Perhaps someone else knows

Saw "The Towering Inferno" in it's original premiere engagement at the UA Syosset and more than once to the aggravation of my Mother. The intermission at Syosset came after Jennifer Jones, the kids and Paul Newman finally get to the ballroom floor and find the exit door was blocked by cement. As firemen blow the door, at the moment of the explosion, they had the intermission, with them running into the ballroom as the film began again. Since intermissions are as rare as 70MM today, I guess my last one will be "Funny Girl" right here at The Ziegfeld, a few summers ago when they played the restored print.

Forrest136... are you poking some fun at us here? Those 5 titles don't exactly represent the cream of the roadshow musical crop! They might have their unique charms, I suppose (Julie Andrews' performance, Bob Fosse's choreography, Astaire's graceful presence) and one or two of them might have been unfairly maligned upon their initial release. Are you saying we give them another chance some 37 or 38 years later? Ha ha... Where's "Paint Your Wagon" or "Hello Dolly" on the list? "Song of Norway" anyone? How about the attempted post-modern take on Cole Porter sophistication "At Long Last Love" that pretty much sank Peter Bogdonavich's reputation?

BobT: Did a big groan go up from the audience when that "Towering Inferno" intermission came on? That was worse than a network TV commercial break.

Well Bill, I remember that the first time it was so unexpected. It was like huh? Although audiences were familiar with intermissions at The Syosset as well as The Zeig. It didn't seem to be the kind of film that would need one. It seemed really rough too, with the explosion and then wham the lights were on. Funny I just watched it a few months ago letterboxed on TCM and I still remember exactly where they cut it. Last time I saw it theatrically at the Deer Park Theatre months after and there was no intermission at all.(told ya I saw it alot!).

Sounds to me as if theatres runing "Towering Inferno" with an intermission, simply took the easy way out and spliced an intermission snipe at the end of one of the reels. When we did it, we selected a proper spot which in many cases meant cutting into the middle of a reel. Keep in mind many non roadshow movies did not need an intermission, it may have just been just put there to increase concession sales.

The Ziegfeld in the 90's...
02/23/90 MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON
04/27/90 CHATTAHOOCHEE
05/18/90 BIRD ON A WIRE
06/29/90 DAYS OF THUNDER
08/10/90 FLATLINERS
09/14/90 POSTCARDS FROM THE EDGE
10/19/90 WHITE PALACE
11/23/90 HOME ALONE
12/07/90 EDWARD SCISSORHANDS
02/08/91 SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY
03/01/91 THE DOORS
04/26/91 SPARTACUS
05/31/91 BACKDRAFT
06/21/91 DYING YOUNG
07/12/91 CITY SLICKERS
08/09/91 PURE LUCK
08/30/91 THE COMMITMENTS
11/22/91 FOR THE BOYS
12/27/91 THE PRINCE OF TIDES
01/31/92 SHINING THROUGH
02/21/92 RADIO FLYER
03/06/92 THE LAWNMOWER MAN
04/03/92 THUNDERHEART
04/17/92 CITY OF JOY
05/22/92 FAR AND AWAY
07/03/92 A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN
07/31/92 DEATH BECOMES HER
09/25/92 MR. SATURDAY NIGHT
12/25/92 HOFFA
02/05/93 A FEW GOOD MEN
02/12/93 GROUNDHOG DAY
03/19/93 TEENAGE MUTANT NINJA TURTLES
04/30/93 BENNY & JOON
05/14/93 LOST IN YONKERS
06/11/93 JURRASIC PARK
09/17/93 THE AGE OF INNOCENCE
11/12/93 CARLITO'S WAY
12/31/93 HEAVEN & EARTH
02/04/94 I'LL DO ANYTHING
03/25/94 THE PAPER
05/06/94 THAT'S ENTERTAINMENT III
06/17/94 WOLF
07/15/94 TRUE LIES
09/23/94 MY FAIR LADY
09/30/94 THE RIVER WILD
11/11/94 INTERVIEW WITH THE VAMPIRE
01/13/95 LEGENDS OF THE FALL
03/24/95 THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION
04/07/95 ROB ROY
05/19/95 BRAVEHEART
06/30/95 APOLLO 13
10/06/95 STRANGE DAYS
11/10/95 TO DIE FOR
11/17/95 CASINO
01/05/96 12 MONKEYS
02/16/96 CITY HALL
03/22/96 DIABOLIQUE
04/12/96 FEAR
05/17/96 JANE EYRE
05/31/96 DRAGONHEART
06/14/96 MOLL FLANDERS
07/05/96 INDEPENDENCE DAY
09/13/96 closed for remodelling
10/04/96 VERTIGO
11/15/96 THE MIRROR HAS TWO FACES
12/20/96 GHOSTS OF MISSISSIPPI
01/24/97 STAR WARS
02/21/97 THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK
03/14/97 RETURN OF THE JEDI
04/25/97 VOLCANO
05/23/97 THE LOST WORLD: JURASSIC PARK
08/15/97 COP LAND
09/26/97 THE PEACEMAKER
10/31/97 RED CORNER
11/14/97 ANASTASIA
12/26/97 THE POSTMAN
01/16/98 HARD RAIN
01/30/98 GREAT EXPECTATIONS
03/20/98 PRIMARY COLORS
05/15/98 BULWORTH
06/19/98 THE X FILES
07/24/98 SAVING PRIVATE RYAN
09/18/98 ONE TRUE THING
10/02/98 WHAT DREAMS MAY COME
10/23/98 PLEASANTVILLE
11/13/98 MEET JOE BLACK
12/25/98 THE THIN RED LINE
03/19/99 RAVENOUS
03/26/99 SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE
04/23/99 PUSHING TIN
05/21/99 THE PHANTOM MENACE
09/24/99 JAKOB THE LIAR
10/15/99 THE STORY OF US
11/26/99 END OF DAYS
12/17/99 ANNA AND THE KING

I saw "Towering Inferno" twice in it's original theatrical run. The first showing had no intermission, but the second screening had an intermission as poorly placed as many have already mentioned here. The last film I saw with a proper intermission was the original 242 minute version of "Hamlet" at the Paris.

"Whatever Happened to Aunt Alice?" had an intermission at the Park Lane Theater in Palisades Park, NJ in 1969. It was definitely put in to increase concession sales like Vito said - the movie only ran 1 hour and 41 minutes.

And thanks again Al, for the 90's at the Ziegfeld.

Thanks Al... I thought I saw "The Godfather, Part III" here on Christmas Day, 1990... but I was obviously mistaken. It must have been at the Loew's Astor Plaza. I definitely saw "City Slickers", "Interview with the Vampire", "The Empire Strikes Back" (which was the special edition with re-vamped SFX) and "The Thin Red Line" here. Can't be positive about anything else, but it is possible that this pretty much wraps it up for me and the Ziegfeld in the '90's. I do believe I saw more films over at the Astor Plaza over the years than I did at the Ziegfeld, though it wasn't until seeing this list that it occured to me. Al... I'd love to see an Astor Plaza list for the '70's, '80's and '90's if you have it in you one of these days.

That's some doggish lineup at the Ziegfeld in the 90's. The wind must have been whistling across the empty seats. It's a wonder it's still open.

Saps has a good point. In going down the list, my choices for the best movies to play the Ziegfeld in the 90's are "Spartacus", "My Fair Lady", "Vertigo" and the original "Star Wars" trilogy.

Does anyone know how the weekday attendance has been?

Ed Sweet Charity is sensational and I saw Paint Your Wagon at the Warner Cinerama in 70mm in the late 70's and I loved. Some of them properly present are not as bad as the critics made them out to be. Remember when they opened cinema critics had to prove how hip they were and how old-fashioned the roadshow concept seemed to them. I thought they were and continue to think they were pretentious idiots. One of their crew(albeit on Broadway) is still around and thriving-Clive Barnes.
You should read Ethan Morden's comments in his book One Last Kiss on Renata Adler's New York Times review of Half a Sixpence at the Criterion. He skewers the mind set of the New York intellectuals of the period in just a few words.

Vincent... I never saw "Half a Sixpence" and I would say that "Sweet Charity" was definitely one of the better musicals of the late '60's - a time when the big budget Hollywood musical started to wane - but I'd much rather see the original "Nights of Cabiria" by Fellini. But, overall, if I were to select a run of lavish musicals for a retrospective at the Ziegfeld, I don't think I'd start with any of the films on Forrest136's list! I don't think "not as bad" is a good enough endorsement to make a case for booking (and then filling) a big 1,131-seat theater. What might be a better idea - although quite hard on the arse - would be to pair one of these underdogs with a more widely accepted classic on a single admission. Pair up "Wagon" behind, say, "Oklahoma!" and you might fill enough seats to make it worthwhile. "Sweet Charity" may be good enough to top a double bill, but the recent revival didn't fare so well on Broadway. "Oliver!" would be a good choice to represent the late '60's as would "Funny Girl."

Clive Barnes has completely gone in the other direction, by the way - his critical teeth having been dulled by years of alcohol abuse. He just seems interested in seeing his name quoted on marquees and in newspaper ads these days, so he more often than not seems daffily delighted by every bit of nonsense they wheel him out to review. One Times critic that I do miss is the very even handed Janet Maslin, who wrote intelligently and thoughtfully about every film she ever reviewed, but never seemed to look down her nose at even the most formulaic of cinematic fodder. She wasn't above giving a positive review of a Cheech and Chong film, for instance, which I would find shocking were it to appear in the Times today. I didn't always agree with her opinions, but she always seemed to give a fair an honest appraisal - without affectation - no matter how common or complex the film in question was.

I am a big Fellini fan but I have to say I think Charity is better(no bricks ok?) The Pompei club and the whole movie star bit is so wonderful in the Fosse, Oscar in the Fellini is just too hateful and I have little tolerance for Giulietta and her cute waif routine(now Giulietta in Fred and Ginger and Spirits for me is a pretty wonderful actress.)
The revival had a young woman as Charity which makes no sense and then they replace Bob Fosse with Wayne Cilento.
They worked very hard to have a failure.
Anyway off to the Ziegfeld for multiple viewings of WSS next week.

As to the above wonderful list of 1990's movies (thanks!) there are many blockbusters and many Oscar winners. I attended some, including the East Coast exclusive of The Thin Red Line which filled the house. Sure, there may be some clunkers, but many great movies. Of course, the best classics of all time are even better, but that doesn't diminish the experience of enjoying the movies they showed.

As to the Godfathers, they are Paramount releases, and I was under impression that Paramount favored the Astor Plaza.

Jane Eyre, which I saw there, I recall being a moveover from the Paris when it closed for awhile. The Paris ceased being a Pathe operation, then later ceased being a Loews aka Sony house.

The Ziegfeld thrived the best as an exclusive venue for New York runs. It survived with movies opening elsewhere until the two 42nd Street megaplexes. Now it is a wander they get any first runs, but I'm glad they do. Problem is people get in the habit of going to 42nd Street, where the blockbusters start every half hour.

w

I am going tonight to see "My Fair Lady". Do the 35mm prints have the walk in music and intermission?

Robert - If I remember correctly, MFL does not have an overture. Similar to West Side Story, the "overture" plays over images of the flowers for a few moments before the titles start.

The last deluxe edition DVD box of "West Side Story" contains a booklet that includes reproductions of the instructions to roadshow projectionists as to how the film's overture was to be presented. I recall reading detailed specifications as to exactly when during that opening montage of colors the curtains were to be open and how far the house lights should be brought down with each change of color.

I wonder if the Ziegfeld projectionist will be following these instructions this week. I'm planning on attending Sunday's matinee, so I'm hoping the predicted snow storm doesn't upset my plans. If not, I'll take in an evening showing during the week.

Ed, unless the projectionist did this before, for say one of the major re-releases in recent years, they may not even know.

Do you have an extra copy of the instructions? Bring it to the Ziegfeld. Write a nice, short, simple, legible, note as to the "good old times of movie presentations including overture music" (better to rely on implicit suggestion than telling them how to do their jobs) and give it to an usher in the auditorium or concession area. Ask him or her to please give it to the projectionist in the booth, that it might interest them. And, then, maybe, you will get your wish!

I attended tonight’s MFL screening for about an hour before giving up. The 35MM print is in poor condition. Numerous scratches, faded colors and tinny sound. During one reel, the dialogue and music were accompanied by a considerable amount of audio interference that sounded like static. The rest of my group decided to stick it out, but they were also dismayed by the condition of the print. I noticed several other walkouts before I departed. Very disappointing, especially after seeing the restored 70MM print of MFL at the Ziegfeld in the 90s.

The film was preceded by commercials (no trailers) that were hard to see due to insufficient projection lighting. When I asked one of the ushers about the problem, I was told that the lighting problem would be resolved when the film started (it was).

I would like to comment on the projectionist role in a proper roardshow presentaion. We often received suggestions from the studio regarding light cues, as a matter of fact WSS came with a lovely letter from the man himself, Robert Wise, which basically pointed out how hard everyone worked on the movie and how proud they all were of the final product, "it's in your hands now" the letter went on to say, "we ask that you give my movie the same love and attention I have" (or words to that effect). As all of you recall, The WSS overture was a series of changing colors coordinated with the music, my job was to lower the two sets of lights to match the changing musical pieces, which was very effective and a hoot to do.
This is pretty much how we handled all roadshow engaements, although we did not always get advice from the studios, most of the boys would develop their own special presentation to the overtures,
entr'acte and exit music. It's what we did, it was part of putting on a show. Someone asked about the 35mm releases of a 70mm roadshow, the answer is yes, in almost every case the 35mm version was the same as the 70mm version with respect to intermission. During my days as a projectionist we were bombarded with new and exciting ways to project movies, from Cinerama and 3-D to my final position with IMAX, it was a fun and fabulous way to make a living. I must say it breaks my heart to see the way movies are presented in some theatres today and especially sad to hear the comments about MFL presentation at the Ziegfeld. What a shame!

If Clearview is going to do this, why not do it right? I have attended many of their CHELSEA CLASSIC SERIES and the prints are bad and sloppily shown too!

Here's an excerpt from the Robert Wise memo Vito talked about. It was reprinted in the book which came with the "West Side Story" DVD. I am so looking forward to seeing it tonight at the Ziegfeld, even though a blizzard is approaching New York.

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/billhuelbig/wss.jpg

Yes Bill, I remember that memo, it was not uncommon to receive such instructions regarding the presentation of a movie, we also recieved a personnel letter from Mr wise as described in my earlier post.
It was not only roadshow movies that would be accompanied by letters or memos from studios and directors, I recall getting one from Woody Allen (Manhatten) and Warren Beatty (Reds) amoung others. In the case of Mr Allen and Mr Beatty, they were very specific about the proper aspect ratio and framing of those two films.
As a personnel note to REndres: Rob,I would appreciate your finding out exactally how the films being shown now at the Ziegfeld.
The comment about the MFL presentaion was disturbing, are we to understand that not only was it in 35mm, but non Dolby as well?
I Can't wait for Bill and others to review the WSS screenings.

Re Roadshow instructions, I guess most of you may have seen it, but in case you haven't, go to American Widescreen Museum web and click on Roadshow in the Lobby page. They have the instructions for WSS, 10 Commandmets, El Cid and others. Incidentally, though WSS does noy have an intermission, when I saw it in San Juan they put an intermission right before I Feel Pretty. No intermission title, no entre'act music. They just closed the curtain when the previous secene faded out and opened the curtain after 15 minutes with I Feel Pretty. I think it worked, and in the recent DVD, in Special Features, they have an optional intermission music, an instrumental I feel Pretty in a lovely arrangement.

Just got in from the 1 pm screeening of "My Fair Lady". There was about 30 people attending. The print was awful scratchy, faded, and discolored. Itr also seemed out of sinc at times. The stereo sound was non existant. I remember it 42 years ago as such a wide SUPER PANAVISION 70 fim. The sould and picture then was breathtaking! Oh the good old days!

I was also at today's sparsely attended 1PM "MFL" screening. It was a really beat-up print, with starts/ends of each reel in poor condition (scratches, jumpy, discolored, bad audio), the first half of reel one had some kind of synch problem, there was no intermission (just an abrupt cut/fade where the intermission title card used to be) and no walk out music. The series is billed as "Movies...The Way They Were Meant To be Seen!" Sorry, I don't think so. What's the point of promoting a special series like this and then you kill the experience by showing a crappy print? I'm hoping the "WSS" and "Ben-Hur" prints are in decent shape.

While walking uptown from the Port Authority after taking the bus in from Weehawken, NJ, I made believe it was a snowy night in 1961 and I was going to the Rivoli to see "West Side Story". I passed the Caroline's Comedy Club where the Rivoli once stood, then headed over to the Ziegfeld. It turned out to be a good omen. My one-word capsule review of "West Side Story" at the Ziegfeld: WOW.

I sat in the front row, center seat. The print was in beautiful condition and the sound was perfect, with lots of deep bass tones. There were several hundred people there, who came out in a blizzard. The audience broke into applause about 5 times during the actual movie, and several more times during the credits. And, for the first time in over 40 years (and thanks to my front row seat and the size of the Ziegfeld's screen), I finally got to read the title of the book in Gladhand/John Astin's pocket at the dance: "Existentialism".

All the people who are complaining about the "My Fair Lady" shows should try not to miss "West Side Story". It will restore their faith in the Ziegfeld.

I was also at the screening of WSS at The Ziegfeld tonight and everything that Bill has just written above is true. Great night. It's great to see films on that big Ziegfeld screen that were shot by cinematographers that really made use of the wide screen format. Some of the shots compositionally were just beautiful. I was hoping that the Ziegfeld was going to follow Robert Wise's instructions at the beginning of the film, but they didn't. No big deal it was still a great experience. Thank god this kind of thing still happens in New York City. It's sad that it doesn't happen as often as it did 20 or 30 years ago, but at least it's happening. I hope the box office receipts for this festival are showing good numbers. There was a good crowd there tonight, way more people than the last time I was there to see the god-awful Cameron Crowe disaster 'Elizabethtown'. Can't wait to see Ben Hur and hopefully this kind of thing will continue to happen at the Ziegfeld, the last great movie palace in New York City.

Ben Hur is the one I want to see; I hope it's a good print like West Side Story and not a bad one like My Fair Lady.

I had to postpone my "West Side Story" screening until Tuesday night. While it's dissapointing to read the negative reports on the MFL print, I'm delighted and encouraged to learn that the WSS print is a sparkler. I look forward to Tuesday night's screening and will keep my fingers crossed for next weekend's "Ben-Hur" screening. Did they have anyone introduce the print on Saturday night? Glimpsing at the schedule, it appears they had some folks there to introduce the Godfather films and "Chinatown" last weekend.

On Sunday, a Time Out film critic tried to speak before both The Godfather and Part II, both of which I attended. Each time within a few minutes into his remarks, the audience yelled out that they just wanted the movie, not to hear him! I've never seen an audience do that in Philadelphia or elsewhere, but I guess New Yorkers can be tough.

Also, although when he was Clearview District Manager, Joe Masher replied on ths site, I don't know if anybody from Clearview is reading it. So, I'd encourage anybody with a complaint about film quality to write a letter to Clearview corporate HQ (you can Internet search or ask the Ziegfeld staff)about the quality of My Fair Lady print or any other print problems. Promise them more audience if they advertize "restored" or "new" print. Don't assume they know anything, maybe they are new managers. They do care about bottom line, so if they think they will get more audience by getting the right print, they may try.

If they show the Ben Hur print that they ran at Loew's Jersey last year it was a good one.

Hi,

Yes, we are reading your comments and they are invaluable to us. We will again communicate with our partners in distribution so that they assure us that the prints are in decent condition. However, with these older titles, sometimes there are a few bad apples out there, but we will do our best to provide a good presentation...

Since this is a new program, there will be some "bumps" along the way, but we are VERY happy to see that this program is being embraced by loyal cinema lovers in and around NYC.

Please keep the comments and suggestions coming! Together we will make The Ziegfeld's Hollywood Classics a success for all of us!

Craig O'Connor
Marketing Manager
Clearview Cinemas

Glad to hear from you, Craig! Knowing that you care and are proactively interested in our opinions brings a big smile to my face. I wish nothing by success with the program and look forward to future series... See you guys on Tuesday night!

All very well and good Craig, however you missed the boat here, more effort should have been made to present WSS and MFL in their original 70mm roadshow granduer. As you can see by reading posts here, it was expected and would have been more appreciated. Having said that, I will say, myself and many others apppeciate the effort.

Regarding the condition of the MFL print, I would like to know why that print was accepted for this very important engagement. Did the projection staff not notice the condition of the print and report same condition to management? If there was any question as to the quality of the print, it should have been screened in advance and rejected, then demands should have been made for a better quality print. Clearview had no right to present this masterpiece in the condition outlined in this forum.

My compliments to Clearview for doing their best!...and to Craig for listening. It is easy to criticize, but putting this type of program together requires some serious hard work.

Clearview can only play the prints that are available so save your grief for distributor Warner Bros who really did this

Cheers to Clearview for bothering with MY FAIR LADY instead of some better print of RENT.

Perhaps when clearview made the decsion to have the festival, the film buyer should have had a discussion with the studio regarding print availabilily. If the studio could not promise a good quality print of MFL, the picture should not have been booked at all. I still believe the poor presentation of MFL was the fault of Clearview dropping the ball here and not the studio. As ALAvarez pointed out, Clearview can only play the prints that are available.
I just feel, under the circumstances, MFL should not have been played. I promise not to vent about this any longer. I only hope Clearview will pay more attention to print quality next time.

Caught the 1PM "WSS" screening today and, despite the blizzard, there was a good turnout. It was a beautiful print with wonderful sound, a huge improvement over the poor "MFL" print. Even the 5 minutes of commercials before the start of the movie looked better (much brighter than at yesterday's 1PM screening). That's the good news. The bad news: The movie stopped dead TWICE during the opening minutes -- once during the overhead aerial shot of Manhattan and again just before the camera comes in on the Jets in the playground. I wonder what the problem was?

Hey all,

I'm just so thrilled that someone is doing SOMETHING with the theatre... I'd love to see a pristine 70mm 6 Track Dolby print of RAIDERS but am going to take what I can get! I go to EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF CRAP MOVIE that they throw up on that screen whether I'm interested in seeing it or not, just to support the theatre - which is, for all practical purposes, our last single screen in the city.
I have ZERO tolerance for sloppy presentation of NEW movies, but guys - you gotta cut them some slack with the revivals!

I forgot to ask Erik H if he demanded a refund after walking out on the poor print of MFL only an hour into the screening... And, if so, how was that demand met?

Movieguy718.... the Paris and the Loew's 72nd are both single screen houses - though admittedly not as large and plush as the Ziegfeld.

I agree...cut the Ziegfeld some slack on the prints. Some of the older ones may have some problems. If they're are not in the best of shape, what can you do, THEY'RE OLD MOVIES! Just be glad that something like this is happening. I'm not saying that it's great to sit through a crappy print of a film, but c'mon. I'd rather go see a not so great print of an old film at a place like the Ziegfeld than see a boring stupid new film somewhere else. Quit the whining. Support the Ziegfeld and support film revival in this area. WE NEED IT!

Hey Ed,

Yeah, but they both have smallish screens. The Paris is really a niche market sort of place - they don't show movies people actually see - and the Tower East (72nd St) likes to run movies at the "barely audible" setting (which is probably due to the neighborhood it is in - those sensitive UES ears!!) There's also the crappy UA East which is probably THE worst national chain theatre in the city. So really, it's only The Ziegfeld.
(Why was there no huge outcry over the Astor Plaza's demise?? It was a better theatre.)

I did not ask for a refund for MFL on Friday night. I was tempted to do so, but as I wanted to support the revival concept (and in the hope that MFL was an anomaly), I decided not to. When an usher in the lobby asked why I was leaving early, I told her and she apologized.

I completely agree with cutting Clearview/the Ziegfeld some slack. I had no expectation that the MFL print would come close to the restored 70MM print that I saw at the Ziegfeld in the early 90s.

On the other hand, when the quality of the print is this bad, there is no point in exhibiting it for a paying audience.

To Craig of Clearview:
Why doesn't Clearview convert the Ziegfeld into a Cinerama 3-strip theatre? I said this before and I am saying it again: I think Cinerama should be brought back to New York City. Triple projection Cinerama and its huge curved screen debuted right here in New York City at the Broadway Theatre on September 1952. Yet, while Seattle and Los Angeles have Cinerama theatres, New York, "The Capital of the World," does not. I am sure a Cinerama theater in New York City would be a terrific tourist attraction and would bring movie loving visitors and money to the city, and Clearview. Besides triple projection Cinerama, the theater could show 70mm spectaculars like "Lawrence of Arabia" as they were intended to be seen. Also, the venue could be used for other movie attractions such as a 3D festival like they had last summer at the Egyptian Theatre in Los Angeles. Except for the occasional double projection 3D film at the Film Forum, most contemporary New Yorkers have not seen double projection 3D, just as they have not seen Cinerama. Last summer both the American Museum of the Moving Image in Queens and the Walter Reade Theater at Lincoln Center celebrated 50 years of wide screen movies. It's ironic that it was Cinerama that started it all right here in New York City and we don't have a Cinerama theater. Bring Cinerama back to NYC, THE CAPITAL OF THE WORLD! As for "classics" programming, see my Feb. 7 post above.

Andreco is right about the drawing power of Cinerama. I've gone to see it in Los Angeles twice, and Dayton, OH once. It sure would be nice to get on the subway and see it right here on 54th St., in the city where it was born.

Having a real Cinerama theater in NYC would be a dream come true. There has been some talk about this on the page for the old Mayfair/Demille/Embassy 2,3,4 site. There was also a recent news item here about someone looking to revive the vacant Embassy 2,3,4 as a 4-room complex for live performance and independent film where many CT folks implored a restoration to single screen and perhaps install 3-strip capabilities. The only problem I see with renovating the Ziegfeld for that purpose is that the theater (as has been discussed above) might be that the auditorium is too deep and narrow for maximum effectiveness as a Cinerama showcase. Configuring a new booth (or booths) may also pose a challenge, should the current booth location be inadequate for Cinerama projection within that space.

Still, It would be better than what NYC has now... which is NOTHING!!!

The Uptown in Washington DC still runs movies. Its two side Cinerama booths have been closed, but still exist. It no longer has a Cinerama screen, but one could be put in. That may be the best East Coast possibility for Cinerama.

I don't know if there's room for a massive Cinerama screen in the Ziegfeld and as Ed says, projection capacity may or may not be possible.

"Independent films" don't sound like a recipe for success at the Mayfair. I'd love to see that house (which I haven't been in) become a theater and host some films, though given NYC prices, it may more likely be demolished for real estate.

Now as to classic films at the Ziegfeld, whatever is available in 70 MM and 35 MM prints is possible and realistic (if enough audience shows up) and that should make all of our hearts warm!

To Craig,

I sincerely hope that your “classics” series is the beginning of a positive trend for New York City. In the spirit of constructive suggestions, I have a few brief comments. First, you may want to reconsider associating the term “classics” with films like “Chicago”, “Lord of the Rings”, “Gladiator” and so on. This is not to be taken as a negative comment on neither the movies themselves, nor on the management at the Ziegfeld. Those films do have a proper place in contemporary American popular culture, and no doubt they help bring around the “bottom line”. Having said that, “Braveheart” is not in the same class as “Ben-Hur”, and “Chicago” is no “West Side Story”. They have not passed that “oh so subjective” test of time. Some of the Cinema Treasures’ members have given very good suggestions as to what constitutes a “classic motion picture”, so I will not repeat them. Hopefully your next revival festival will include proper 35 and 70 mm presentations of those true “classics”.

And finally, someone with the resources, connections and vision may just notice someday that Cinerama is alive, well, and doing business in Seattle and Los Angeles. I’m not sure if the logistics will allow the Ziegfeld to go in that direction. But for New York, it may just be a matter of “when” it will happen, and not "if". The clock is ticking…

Regards,

JSA

I attended the 4:30 screening of West Side Story on 2/13. It was the most enjoyable experience I had in a movie theater in quite some time. The print looked and sounded great. The theater staff was informative and helpful. What struck me most is that there seemed to be a lovely change in the air at the Ziegfeld. I will address more specific comments in a separate letter to Clearview.

I sincerely hope series such as this one will become part of the regular schedule. Congratulations to all at Clearview who are coordinating the series.

David: I know what you mean about the atmosphere at the Ziegfeld. It seemed to me like I was attending a show in the '70's for some reason. Maybe it was because the first movie I ever saw at the Ziegfeld was "West Side Story" 36 years ago, but I was noticing things I hadn't seen in years, like the engraved plaque in the lobby directing patrons to the numbered seats (odd and even). I'm going back tonight.

Bill... I'll be there tonight. I'll be the one with the small silver digital camera snapping some photos of the theater. I'm very much looking forward to this.

I've put a few of my own photos from last month here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/howardbhaas/99853569/

I took photos of details like ornate exit signs, small sconces, etc. but would rather post items less likely to walk out of the theater during slow times.

I wasn't able to photo nicely the ornate chair end. Perhaps somebody else could.

Another great "West Side Story" show at the Ziegfeld, with an even bigger crowd. It was so big, I had to change my seat during the opening sequence to get away from people talking! It looks like classic movies might be here to stay at the Ziegfeld. I was talking to one of the employees and she said they haven't had crowds like this for months, not even for the exclusive showing of "The Producers". She said "Tristan & Isolde" often played to an empty house.

Looking forward to "Ben-Hur" next week.

So why doesn't Clearview just cancel the Lady showings and replace them with WSS?

I do have a question for you guys at Clearview. Why do a very rare theatrical showing of one of the most beautiful Hollywood films ever made and make no effort to show a 70mm print and then not even make sure the 35mm print is pristine. Obviously a lot of time and planning went into this and all you did was put in an order to the distributor and not make sure the condition of the product you were getting was top notch?

I saw the restoration at the Ziegfeld 3 times in '93. Whoever was in charge back then did the film proud with no commercials and the use of the curtain. Every performance I saw was sold out. I mean that literally. Then after nine days it was pulled for a Meryl Streep action flick.
I am on my knees. Please repeat this great success.
I can't believe these guys did the restoration only to have the film disintegrate all over again after only 10 years.

Vincent; MFF was restored and preserved, and the current copyright holder has all of the preservation materials. However they have allowed their release prints to fall apart, and have been booking the same worn out prints for years. They are too cheap to strike new ones. But, they have preservation printing elements if they should ever decide to do so.

For this type of high profile booking in New York City, the distributor should have struck a new print, and the exhibitor should have checked the print they received prior to showing it.

To present this beat up version to a paying audience is poor showmanship and a reel shame.

They read the above comments about the old My Fair Lady print they received, and about our wanting 70 mm prints.

They did use the curtain as I wrote above for The Godfathers. Did they not keep using it for My Fair Lady & West Side Story?

As to commericials, I expect few among us relish them but most will gladly accept them if that's the price to pay to keep the Ziegfeld open.

Bill, was this additional West Side Story yesterday that you attended? A Valentine Day crowd? Except for the part about people talking, how neat!

It was the 8:15 show last night (2/14). A very good choice for Valentine's Day, except for all the tragedy at the end. I only wish there was another show after work today or tomorrow - I'd go again. If I were old enough to go to New York alone in 1961-62, I'd probably be going to see it at the Rivoli about once every two weeks.

Since it's been so successful, maybe Clearview will bring it back to the Ziegfeld once a year?

Question to those who, unlike me, stayed until the end of the "MFL" screening. In the restored version of the film, there is a series of end credits listing the individuals behind the restoration (the accompanying music track is, I believe, the exit music from the original road show version). Were those end credits included on the Ziegfeld print? If not, then I wonder if the print shown at the Ziegfeld was the restored version.

I was there with my lady last night for a wonderful Valentine's Day... er, evening, that is. As Bill reports, a very crowded house, though not packed to the gills. The center orchestra section was densely filled (if not to capacity) and there were a fair number of folks in either of the side orchestra sections as well. We got there very early and the place was empty (only one other couple was seated) but the theater filled up rapidly as we approached 8 o’clock (showtime was 8:15 PM). I didn't get a good look at the rear "balcony" just before the show started, but I imagine it was pretty full as well, judging from seeing the many folks who remained through the very end of the credits as they exited down the stairs.

The curtain was closed upon entering the auditorium, with none of the usual commercial slide presentations. When it opened, we were subjected to quite a number of filmed commercials - but as someone stated previously, I'll put up with these if they subsidize the theater's existence. The print itself was in pretty good shape, but I wouldn't call it pristine. There were noticeable scratches and signs of wear and tear during the Overture and there were stretches where the print was a bit muddy-looking, particularly early on. Most noticeably, the beginning of the dance at the gym sequence looked very murky and faded, although once Tony showed up, the image improved noticeably. I also remember thinking how some of the skin tones (particularly the dark makeup jobs on Bernardo and The Sharks) would vary in hue, seemingly from reel to reel. However, the quality definitely got better as the film progressed and the last 1/3 of the movie in particular looked razor sharp and pretty incredible.

All of the sound seemed to be coming from the speakers behind the screen - I didn't really pick up on any stereo effect at all. And some of the soundtrack - while good and loud - sounded a bit tinny or brash. Too bad we couldn't get a print with surround tracks.

The movie was very well received, with the audience breaking out into applause after the Overture and many of the numbers throughout. There was even a round of applause to welcome Rita Moreno's first screen appearance as well as some "curtain call" applause during the credits (one person started clapping at the "Panavision 70" credit, which I found amusing – and quite understandable!) In fairness, there were also certain aspects of the film that met with titters from the audience, mostly with respect to the miscast Richard Beymer's performance as Tony. His "Maria" number was met enthusiastically, but much of his action during the balcony sequence evoked snickers.

The powerful final sequence of the movie was quite effective, however, with sterling work from ALL hands. You could hear a pin drop as Tony and Maria see each other for the last time in the playground and run towards each other, only to have Tony meet with a bullet from Chino's gun. And during Maria's meltdown and angry outburst over Tony's body, any snickering heard previously had been replaced with the sniffling sounds of a captivated audience moved to tears.

A wonderful evening at the movies, despite my own minor reservations over the quality of the print and lack of stereo surround sound. Believe me, I would be very happy if the print of "Ben-Hur" is as good as this, but I'm still hoping for an even better quality presentation.

I snapped a few photos, but I a couple of them did not quite come out as I wanted. I plan on re-taking some of these over the weekend and I’ll post them thereafter, for anyone who is interested.

As Bob Furmanek pointed out about prints. On popular films like "My Fair Lady" and many other titles there are newer prints available, but the booker and the depot are the ones that have to work on finding out the condition of the film. Many times films are run and returned to the depot with damage and the next person/theatre gets it. Depots only inspect the first few feet of film. They will inspect the entire film only if the studio requests it and PAYS for it. So that is why many of you are seeing poor prints in many shows.
And with the lack of true projectionists in the booths (not a union vs. non-union statement), but a projectionist that has handled special prints. The cost for a 70MM print of a film like "My Fair Lady" runs around $40-50,000 a print vs. around $3000 for a 35mm. Back in the mid 90's I was at a film depot near Los Angeles, California. The studio had them pull a few prints but they dumped 100's of reels of 70MM tobe trashed. Because the studio did not want to pay storage on those worn prints. That is the same thing that happens with all those 35mm prints too after their release.
Last year the Castro Theatre had a series that featured 70MM films. On their booking for "Hello Dolly" they got a 70MM 6-Track Mag print that was worn-out and they had to replace that showing with another title. The 70MM DTS version was in Europe.

I don't believe this film has ever had a 70mm 6 track stereo presentation in New York since its first run at the Rivoli.

Now if only Clearview would install a larger curved screen(65 to 75ft) in front of the proscenium,install a curtain and show occassional PRISTINE roadshow prints with much publicity they would send the New York cinema going public for a loop and put an end to the constantly empty houses.

Vincent
Hello Dolly had a 70MM release I saw in 78 at the Cinerama. It was great seeing it on that great huge curved screen they had. The sound was great too.

Mike I was refering to WSS but I saw Dolly as well at the Cinerama and though it is not a film I am crazy about I would be there in a shot to see a Todd AO print of it for the production design alone.

The reference to "Hello Dolly" reminmded me of the technical rehersal (dry run) we had at the Rivoli, the fox guys were there and insisted on putting in their two cents. For the intermission we cued the curtain to close in time with the speed of the Rivoli's curtain, which meant the curtain started to close before the words Intermission appeared. Well the Fox guys did not like that and told the UA tech, Joe Kelly, and I to start the curtain only after the words Intermission appeared. With protest we complied, the result was a white screen for about 20 seconds as the words Intermission
faded out. While Joe and I cringed, we heard one of the Fox guys cry "perfect". "Yeah sure" said Joe, "that aint gonna happen"
The opening night audience saw the intermission with the two curtain panels kissing as the Intermission faded out. There was to be no white sheet (screen) showing at the Rivoli. P.S. We got our way and never heard anymore about it.

I was lucky enough to see the recently struck 70mm/DTS print of HELLO DOLLY at the AFI Silver last month and I can attest to the incredible visual and aural quality. As another comment said, not a great movie, but in this format... well worth your time.

Agreed re: "Dolly." In October 2002, I attended a screening of the new 70MM print at The American Cinematheque/Egyptian in L.A. (promoted as the first public showing of the new print). A silly movie, but tuneful and quite a visual feast in 70MM. If Clearview decides to continue the revival program at the Ziegfeld, "Dolly" would be a fine addition, provided that Clearview can obtain the right print.

Saw MFL on Monday and was expecting a horrible experience based on comments from here. Let me tell you, it wasn't a bad print at all (a couple of scratches, some dropped frames) - I have seen worse prints of movies that have been in release for 4 DAYS.

According the WSS listing on imdb.com, there was a planned intermission for the film's roadshow engagements that was to have occcured after the fade-out just before "I Feel Pretty." The filmmakers decided to scrap the idea, so that the rising tension within the story could be maintained up to the climactic rumble. When the movie first aired on network television in the early 1970's, it was broadcast over two consecutive nights with the break occuring in this exact spot. The intermission is restored in the Limited Edition DVD that MGM released in 2003.

Is it possible they were able to get another print of "My Fair Lady". We cancelled our plans for the Saturday show after reading about the bad condition the print was in. Stayed home and watched the dvd instead. I had seen a bad print years ago, before the restored version and never wanted to experience that again.

Recently a screening of the restored "South Pacific" was screened at the old Hollywood Pacific (Pacific 1,2,3) theatre in Digital Cinema. So this may be the answer from the studios of how old titles will be made available to Digital Cinema Theatres. So the cost of new prints will be a thing of the past. All they will have to do is load the feature into the server of the system and project it like all the new films on the DCinema bandwagon.

The question about the restoration credits remains unanswered: Did the My Fair Lady print now running have the restoration credits at the end?

Hello,

Thanks again for all the comments and suggestions about the series. I have some good news for you! Hollywood Classics is being extended for 3 weeks!

We in the process of lining up some good product (& good prints). I should have some of the programming information to share with you by tomorrow.

One title I can confirm at this time is "Lawrence of Arabia" presented in 70 mm beginning on March 24th.

Once again, thanks for supporting The Ziegfeld!

Craig O'Connor
Clearview Cinemas

Craig are you going to be trying for other 70mm prints? Maybe Clearview could spring for a My Fair Lady print and tour it like a stage musical?
We've been begging you guys to do this forever and now that you've taken the hint and its a success please take our other suggestion to heart.
Vince

Hey Saps,

No, MFL did NOT have any credits at the end.

So then it wasn't the restored print.

Mr. O'Connor, that's great news! I didn't turn in my white card asking for more films, because I was going to think about it and turn in if I attend later.

I'd like to see the film MASH, having not seen it on the big screen.

And, whereas I've already seen the first three James Bond films from the early 1960's, I would like to see the others from the 1960's and early 1970's.

And, like many others on this page, I am a fan of 70 mm and would especially like to see the restored Dr. Zhivago, and the restored Spartacus prints in 70 mm. I would consider seeing many other titles in 70 mm, and expect you will see more mentioned below.

THANK YOU for all your good work. I also want to say that the staff at the Ziegfeld is especially nice to customers.

Craig: Thanks for the beautiful print of "West Side Story", and thanks in advance for what I'm sure will be a fantastic 70mm print of "Lawrence of Arabia". If the Ziegfeld were alive, it would be proud at being put to the best possible use.

Craig, you've done a great job at Chelsea Classics and it looks like you're a success here as well. Bravo!

Howard, from what I have read on the Uptown in DC on its page here, it gives me the impression it still has the Cinerama screen. I have been at the Uptown, the last time about 8 years ago and it had the huge curved screen. What a magnificent moviegoing experience!
Ed, Rita Moreno's first screen appearance was in "Singin' In The Rain" (Zelda). She had done several movies before WSS, "The King and I" was one of them.
Best, Andres.

The Uptown still has the huge curved screen and has the potential of offering patrons a great cinematic experience and have done so with previous 70mm shows, but they don't have regular projectionists. I was there this past summer and had a horrible experience watching the last Star Wars movie that was slightly off the screen with sound that was turned down, with little to no noticeable surround sound. The manager acknowledged that they did not have a FT projectionist and didn't seem to care about it or know what to do to fix it. If I could speak Hindi, maybe I could've conveyed my sentiments a bit better ;)

The Ziegfeld's digital projection and sound system was the best place to see it as far as I am concerned, but their screen is rather small. The ideal set up would be the Uptown's wide screen and the Ziegfeld's sound system. Just my 2c.

I've spoken at length with the projectionist in the Uptown booth. Cinerama requires a special screen. of thin strips if I recall correctly. It has been replaced. The current screen may be Cinerama sized, but that's different. Of course, putting up a Cinerama screen would be relatively easy in the space that had it before, as opposed to at the Ziegfeld.

Last I knew, Uptown's best projection over the Friday to Sunday period, with professional projectionist. They were having a controversy over a platter that had arrived- and that's long after
platters arrived in most other movie theaters.

The sound has some surround from the back, but overall is usually loud enough. I've never seen poor projection there or found the sound wasn't loud enough. The Uptown is a magnificient movie going experience. Restored or new prints, I've seen there the 70 mm epics people want at the Ziegfeld: Lawrence of Arabia, Ben Hur, Dr. Zhivago, 2001, and more. Truly incredible on the huge screen!

The Ziegfeld's screen probably isn't small, but somehow it is the original design of the house that makes it look that way. It is almost certainly bigger than the old KB Cinema on Wisconsin Avenue in DC, but that one was set better and always seemed bigger. However, the Ziegfeld is a neat venue because of its decoration. It has excellent sound, but the Astor Plaza had even better.

To clarify, the true Cinerama screen is gone from the Uptown. However, as I said, the Uptown offers the best possibility for Cinerama in the east coast. LA & Seattle venues are in daily moviehouses, which I doubt the Mayfair-Demille-Embassy 2-3-4 will become again. Cinerama is only presented for a few weeks at most in those W. Coast cities. The Uptown could put the screen back, open up the A & C booths again, bring back projectors & sound. No other daily moviehouse has the infrastructure of 3 booths.

The KB Cinema's 35-70 mm projectors are at the Loew's Jersey.

To HowardBHaas (and all those interested in Cinerama):

Regarding the screen required for Cinerama, check out the recent comment posted by haineshisway on the Cinerama Dome section. Technically he's correct. However, I have seen "How The West Was Won" at the Dome, and it is a truly spectacular experience.

JSA

TO CRAIG O'CONNOR/CLEARVIEW CINEMAS:

So glad to hear the great news about extending the classics festival! It's great to know that A) there will be more classic films and more reasons for me to go to The Ziegfeld, a place I really love and B) that Clearview and the management of the Ziegfeld have found this a worthwhile endeavor. Obviously the numbers are good and people are filling the seats. Contrary to popular opinion, there IS an audience for this type of entertainment that goes beyond film geeks like us here on Cinema Treasures. It just goes to show that if you present something and you do it with class you can't lose. I hope the classics series continues well beyond March and we see this as a regular attraction at the Ziegfeld. Film revival is something that was always one of the great aspects with living in the New York City area. It has been gone for far too long and hopefully with this classics series we will be seeing it's long overdue renaissance.

Re the quality of prints -- specially My Fair Lady at the Ziegfeld: How come the Film Forum, a small -- very small -- independent non-profit cinema here in NYC can get new struck prints in scope and double projection 3D for their revivals and Clearview, a giant exhibitor, can't? Any answers, Craig?

Re the quality of prints -- specially My Fair Lady at the Ziegfeld: How come the Film Forum, a small -- very small -- independent non-profit cinema here in NYC can get new struck prints in scope and double projection 3D for their revivals and Clearview, a giant exhibitor, can't? Any answers, Craig?

PS to my previous comment: To JSA of LA, thanks for your comments and support.

andreco-

Film Forum is sponsored and run by individuals that come from more of a film 'fellowship' if you will than the Ziegfeld. Not to take anything away from the mangement of the Ziegfeld, but the people at Film Forum, because of their backgrounds might pay more attention to issues like having new prints, etc. Once again, not dissing or taking away anything from the Ziegfeld. Did you see the print of 'The Gang's All Here' at Film Forum? I know that not many of those prints exist, but the one that Film Forum had last summer was not in the best of shape by any means. Scratchy, frames missing. Parts of it were a real mess. Why didn't Film Forum decide NOT to run that film at all because of it's condition? Did they exaust all of THEIR resources, from their illustrious board of directors or trustees, or whatever they call it to have a new print made if a good negative of that film even exists?

The point is, is that these films are OLD, and in all the years that I was going to revival houses when there were still alot of them in the city, you always ran into a bad print here and there. I remember seeing 'Easy Rider' at Theater 80-Saint Mark's about 15 years ago and they screened the made for TV print! It was hilarious. Parts of the film were totally cut out including the part where Dennis Hopper flips off the truck drivers at the end. Snipped right out!

What more do you want? They just held over the classics series at the Ziegfeld and you have one of the people involved in management looking at this board, responding directly to us, and trying to accomodate our very specific film viewing needs. Cut 'em some slack! I don't think you need to pressure anybody about what has already happened addressed.

andreco-

Film Forum is sponsored and run by individuals that come from more of a film 'fellowship' if you will than the Ziegfeld. Not to take anything away from the mangement of the Ziegfeld, but the people at Film Forum, because of their backgrounds might pay more attention to issues like having new prints, etc. Once again, not dissing or taking away anything from the Ziegfeld. Did you see the print of 'The Gang's All Here' at Film Forum? I know that not many of those prints exist, but the one that Film Forum had last summer was not in the best of shape by any means. Scratchy, frames missing. Parts of it were a real mess. Why didn't Film Forum decide NOT to run that film at all because of it's condition? Did they exaust all of THEIR resources, from their illustrious board of directors or trustees, or whatever they call it to have a new print made if a good negative of that film even exists?

The point is, is that these films are OLD, and in all the years that I was going to revival houses when there were still alot of them in the city, you always ran into a bad print here and there. I remember seeing 'Easy Rider' at Theater 80-Saint Mark's about 15 years ago and they screened the made for TV print! It was hilarious. Parts of the film were totally cut out including the part where Dennis Hopper flips off the truck drivers at the end. Snipped right out!

What more do you want? They just held over the classics series at the Ziegfeld and you have one of the people involved in management looking at this board, responding directly to us, and trying to accomodate our very specific film viewing needs. Cut 'em some slack! I don't think you need to pressure anybody about what has already happened and been addressed.

I'm at my wits end! I keep getting e-mail notifications when someone replies despite the fact that I don't have the box at the bottom checked off. I've written to Cinemtreasures but it's not stopping. I'm betting tons of these.

Anyone know what to do?

Would sure be nice to see that new 70mm print which was recently struck of IT'S A MAD, MAD, MAD, MAD WORLD.

When I was programming classic film at Loew's Jersey, I played an original 35mm dye-transfer Technicolor print, and recreated the overture, intermission and police radio calls. We played it on a Saturday night back in 2001 and had over 700 people! This film hasn't played in the New York area since, and I think would do quite well.

I have to smile at the folks responding as if no other theater in the Metro area has been doing classic film on a regular basis. Ever hear of the Lafayette in Suffern, or the Loew's Jersey in Jersey City?

Sorry, but classic film on a big screen in a movie palace is not a new concept folks. Check the Loew's Jersey thread and see what I was doing there 5 years ago.

Bob: I think nostalgia has a lot to do with it, in my case anyway. I'd only been to the Loew's Jersey once before it was closed and re-opened, for "Ben-Hur" in 1961. And I'd never been to or even heard of the Lafayette until the Big Screen Classics series started. But the Ziegfeld was like a home to me. I must have seen "2001" there more than 20 times. Also "Lawrence of Arabia", "Spartacus", "Vertigo" - all in 70mm and multiple repeat viewings. Having the classics playing successfully there now makes me feel like the Ziegfeld has come back from the dead.

Bob nobody appreciates what you did at the Loew's more than I. If only you had the Ziegfeld to run!(Just install a larger screen.)

Bob... I think it's a matter of pride amongst us New Yorkers. Yes, it's true that classic movie presentation in a true movie palace is happening in Jersey City and in Suffern, but there is none of that going on in New York City. To some extent, it's still NOT happening in New York City because the Ziegfeld is not a bona fide old fashion movie palace (we seem to have razed just about every last one of them, thank you very much). But having these films exhibited in our last remaining premiere-style big single screen house is certainly noteworthy.

Craig - let me join in on commending the friendly and courteous staff at the Ziegfeld who have certainly made the series an even more enjoyable experience. They are certainly the finest crew of any theater I currently attend on a regular basis. I am also very pleased to hear that the series has been extended and I'm thrilled at the prospect of a 70mm presentation of "Lawrence of Arabia." I hope that a nice 70mm print of "2001" can make its way into your theater before long!

The screen at the Ziegfled - while not immense as I recall the one at the old Rivoli - is nice and big, particularly from my favorite vantage point at 10th row center. I think the "proscenium" makes the screen look smaller than it is. I'm sure they could install a floor to ceiling screen, but that would take some serious remodeling and would likely spell doom for the curtain. A curve would be nice, but again, that would require considerable renovations to the front of the house (and the loss of some seats, I would imagine).

Andreco - Yup, I'm aware that WSS was not Rita Moreno's first motion picture. What I meant to say was that the audience applauded her first appearance in the MOVIE on Tuesday night - like audiences sometimes do when a major star makes their first stage entrance in a Broadway production.

Hi there...

OK, here is the lineup:

"Most Requested Films Week" - March 10 - 16th:
Singin in the Rain
Doctor Zhivago
North By Northwest

"Out of this World Week" - March 17 - 23rd:
2001- A Space Odyssey
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Alien

"Lawrence of Arabia" in 70MM - March 24th - March 30th.

Thanks for your continued support and suggestions.

And....please continue to spread the word about the series!

These are all true classics and excellent choices!

Craig: You've outdone yourself. I'll be going to ALL of them - some of them more than once. Thanks!

Craig... Outstanding! I'll see a 35mm "2001" with the hope that it will be an appetizer for a future 70mm screening. Please, please, please do whatever you can to see if there is a good 70mm around for a future booking!

Also, you should consider discount "series" tickets for folks like Bill who want to take in the entire schedule.

Singin in the Rain should be on a double bill with like maybe Funny Face. Gene and Fred and Audrey! All directed by Stanley.

I stand corrected Ed. I should have read more carefully. Best, Andres.

Re Andreco's Feb. 15 comment:

You are quite welcome! I only wish the best to all back East!


JSA

Craig-

Great news! So glad to hear once again that the classics series is working out for Clearview and the Ziegfeld. I am totally excited about all of the new films you have announced today. I think the largest screen I've ever seen '2001' was at the Loews Astor Plaza a few years ago. I'm sure it will be great seeing it at the Ziegfeld. I haven't seen 'Close Encounters' on the big screen since it's first release back in 1978. I've never seen 'Singin inthe Rain', 'Doctor Zhivago' or 'Alien' at all so I'll be at the Ziegfeld alot in the next few weeks. Thanks for responding to the board and keeping your eyes and ears open.

P.S. just a little New York City revival house trivia: Back in the summer of '90 or '91 Radio City did a very limited run of 'Blade Runner'. I think it may have been one or two nights only. The screening that I went to completely SOLD OUT. Every seat in Radio City that night was filled to see that movie. Amazing! Some of the live acts at Radio City can't even sell out the house at times! I'm predicting that at least one of the films you're showing in this line up will do the same at the Ziegfeld. Wouldn't be surprised if it happened with all of the 'Lord of the Rings' and 'Indiana Jones' movies as well. A few of the last times I can remember being at the Ziegfeld when the house was full/sold out was at 'Edward Scissorhands' and a midnight screening on opening night of the lame Oliver Stone biopic 'The Doors'. The crowd was alot of fun at that one and they did crank the music. Alot of drunk and stoned rock fans in there that night. Got pretty wild. It was almost like going to an actual rock show.

A fond Ziegfeld memory: in October 1974 a Sunday night showing of "2001" sold out, and a whole bunch of people wound up sitting on the large expanse of carpeting between the front row and the screen. At a different show later in that engagement I tried it myself, getting down on the floor for the climactic Jupiter sequence. It wasn't really the best angle to see the screen from, but it's still a fun memory.

“Lawrence of Arabia”… 70 mm… March 24… Director’s cut , I presume…humm… Jetblue has $ 119 each-way fare to JFK from Burbank… I wonder how I’m going to explain this one to the wife…

Craig: Good choices! Wish I could make it for the “Out of this World” week!

Regards,

JSA

Bill, there is a rather funny Variety article from 1968 reporting that young audiences at the Capitol often sat on the floor instead of in their seats for 2001 and that the film was doing well although advance sales were poor and most sales occured just before the performance. It also alluded to the smoking of a certain substance by a large portion of the crowd, an nostalgia element the Ziegfeld will not be able to legally recreate.

Let me second Bob Furmanek's request for Its a Mad Mad Mad Mad World. Especially a 70mm print to see him go sailing right out there. Did you see how he went sailing right out there?

Al: at that same sold-out 1974 show, the people in our row were passing around a large bottle of cough syrup with codeine and taking swigs from it. I and my 11-year-old brother passed on that. Hey, you don't need any help from substances to get high from "2001".

Craig... What are the physical dimensions of the Ziegfeld screen - or does anyone else know for sure? I would love to see "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" in 70mm also. I can't recall... was the 70mm version that played in Seattle (on a Cinerama screen) the same 154 minute version that is currently available on DVD (plus overture, entr'acte and radio calls)? I know Robert Harris was working on a restoration of the original 192 minute version (and had about 188 minutes of original elements) but with no one to finance the project, the elements he's been able to find are (or have) deteriorated beyond salvageabilty). Anyone have info on this?

Ed: I saw "Mad Mad World" at the Cinerama Dome in 2003. It was a spectacular new 70mm print. The running time of the actual movie was 154 minutes, but it had the opening title song, the police calls intermission (which played over the speakers in the men's room) and the exit music. I think I read somewhere that Karen Sharpe Kramer, Stanley's widow, said he always considered the 154-minute version to be his final director's cut. She was a guest speaker at the Dome that night.

Hmmm. I thought I read somewhere where she said something to the effect that "if you didn't see the original 192 minute version, then you haven't seen Stanley's film." I think she further commented that the 188 minutes that Harris had been able to find was probably the best they could hope for and was as close to Kramer's vision as can be assembled today. I also think Kramer went on record as lamenting that the edited general release version was all that remained of his epic. Folks had problems with the "extended" VHS version from a few years back that inserted many of the trims from print that was "rectified" for projection on a Cinerama screen, including at least one scene (involving Jonathan Winters' character explaining what he'd do with the money) that Kramer never intended to make the final "roadshow" cut. The VHS version is certainly interesting to watch, but the "rectified" trims appear distorted and can be quite jarring as they editing between this footage and the non-rectified material is often done shot-to-shot within a scene.

With so many celebrities citing this film as an inspiration or one of their all-time favorites, I wish someone would get together the resources to fund Harris' restoration project - that is, if it isn't too late for some of those lost-and-found elements.

I may have gotten the idea about Kramer and the shorter cut from this article:

http://povonline.com/notes/Notes110203.htm

It says Kramer was sometimes quoted as saying he preferred the 154-minute version.

Interesting, Bill. I happen to have an old and not-so-mint condition souvenir booklet for "Mad Mad World" that my Mom has had since she first saw the movie on Broadway in 1963. Since my scanner is on the fritz (and the booklet is not exactly in scan-ready condition), I snapped a few photos of the cover and a few pages within:

Cover
Fold-out illustration
Actor Key to illustration
Single Lens Cinerama
Facts & Figures

That last image states that the runtime of the movie was 210 minutes (including intermission - and presumably overture).

I must admit that I am to blame for the booklet's shoddy condition as I can recall reading it over and over when I was a kid - usually spread out on the living room floor in my house in Elmhurst when I was 6 or 7 when CBS or ABC aired it in prime time back in the early '70's. I remember I used an audio tape recorder once during a mid-70's network broadcast to capture the entire soundtrack, which I then memorized while listening to it over and over.

Truly one of my favorite all time films.

Please post reports about the condition of this week's features -- Ben Hur, Gladiator and Braveheart -- but especially about Ben Hur.

Do they run trailers of upcoming features in this festival?

Also, the three week extension is not yet on the website, so we here have an exclusive.

Thanks for the Mad World posts, Ed. I like the way they tried to fool the public about single-lens Cinerama being a vast improvement over the 3-strip version, which of course it wasn't. I too used to make audio tapes of entire movies and play them over and over. I think the one I played the most was Psycho.

Saps: the schedule for the first week of the extension is now posted on the website (Doctor Zhivago, Singin' in the Rain, North by Northwest).

Would love to see the classic "Bye Bye Birdie" on the Zigfeld Screen Especially the opening and closing scene with Ann Margret!

There are no trailers running during the series - at least none so far. I plan on seeing "Ben-Hur" today at 4:30 and would love to know the condition of the print before I attend. I'm going to call the theater as soon as they're open in hopes that the manager there will give me an honest appraisal. So far it has only screened once - at 12:30 in the afternoon during business hours yesterday. I wonder if Craig works at the theater, or somewhere else in the City.

Glad you liked the "Mad Mad World" booklet, Bill. I also have some images from the "How the West Was Won" booklet that I will post on the Capitol Theater site - since that is where the film played its roadshow engagement and where my Mom purchased the souvenir back in 1962. I did the same with a Radio City souvenir booklet from 1978 that I have from the last movie I ever saw there ("Crossed Swords") which was advertised as the final attraction at the Hall (although that turned out not to be the case). I will post those images on the RCMH site. Our freind Bob Endres (REndres here on CT) is mentioned and photographed in the program - and I hope it'll bring back memories for some of the RCMH veterans who contribute to CT.

Called the theater and neither the manager nor projectionist who was on duty yesterday were around. However, Monique - the manager today - said that she heard the print for "Ben-Hur" is superior to the one for MFL and more along the lines of the quality we saw for WSS. Hopefully, this is the case as I'd much rather enjoy the presentation today than use a free pass in the future if I'm not satisfied. I'll report tonight.

Just saw the 4:30 screening of 'Ben Hur'. I have never seen this film before and I can't imagine ever seeing it on television after seeing it on the big screen like this. This film was JAW DROPPINGLY amazing. One of the best films I have ever seen. Story, acting, cinematography, and last but not least action, were 5 star all around.It's amazing that a film that was made nearly 50 years ago can be as powerful as this. Just in terms of action I don't think any of these explosion films that are made today could hold a candle to this film. 'Ben Hur' has style AND substance, or as the say in film school 'form and content'. It was a really profound experience. As far as print quality I would give this a 4 out of a possible 5. While there were some inconsistencies in contrast and color from reel to reel, some parts of the film were as colorful and sharp as I have ever seen. Particulary the part when Quintus Arrius announces his adoption of Judah (Charles Heston). My only other minor grievance is the way the overture was presented. Tell me if I am wrong, but should the lights in the theater not be completely lowered during that time? My impression, especially from Robert Wise's memo for 'West Side Story' is that the lights should only be partially lowered for the overture, otherwise you are sitting in the dark looking at a dark screen for 10 or more minutes like we did this afternoon. Totally nitpicking here, but what the hell.

Once again great job by the theater staff. Hail Ziegfeld!! New York seems like New York again when you go to something like this. Amazing film in a really amazing theater. My mind was truly blown to pieces. This is one for the books.

Somebody will tell me if I am wrong, but my understanding is you should never have a screen to look at unless the movie or another image (previews, etc.) are on it. The curtain should remain closed during the overture. That's more important to me than the amount of light. No blank curtain ever.

Of course, I meant to say "no blank screen ever."
Regardless, more classics!

I believe you are right, Howard. If you ask veteran projectionists, I'm sure they'll all tell you that having the curtains open on a blank screen is anathema. I remember seeing movies where the opposite problem existed and the curtains were closed during the closing credits - which you then had to read across the undulating pattern of the curtain fabric.

The overture should have definitely been played with the curtain drawn and the house lights only partially dimmed. I was at the 4:30 "Ben-Hur" this afternoon as well and pretty much agree with Irv's assessment. I remember once seeing "2001" in the '80's at a theater in Manhattan (the exact theater eludes me) and this was the first time I can recall seeing the movie with overture and entr'acte music intact - and there too the music was played with the lights down and curtain (if there was one) open. To my embarrassment, during the overture to "Ben-Hur" today, I was explaining this all to my girlfreind when a gentlemen a couple of rows in front of us turned around and "shsssh'd me! My apologies to that person, if he's online here. I guess I've forgotten my overture etiquette!

Anyway... I have seen "Ben-Hur" before a number times, including the pristine restored DVD and the hack-edit jobs that passed for network TV showings in the '70's (another film that I taped on audio cassette back then). But tonight I feel almost as though I have just seen the movie for the very first time and ... Wow! My own fair lady, who had never seen the movie before in any form, was completely blown away. As for my assessment of the print, it was pretty good. As Irv said, there were some points where the color timing seemed off and definite signs of wear and tear at the back and front ends of each reel, but for the most part, the color was deep and crisp and very comparable to the WSS print that was screened last week. Better still, the print was in mutli-channel surround sound - something I desperately missed in the WSS screening - although there were one or two points where the soundtrack wobbled off pitch just a bit.

Here's my biggest gripe (despite the lack of a 70mm print): there was no intermission! And worse yet, the edit to remove the intermission was rather abrupt and obvious. I asked the manager - Monique - about this and she claims that the print arrived this way. I wonder if it had more to do with the fact that the three movies in rotation this week add up to a combined running time of over 9 hours per day and there was but a 15 minute margin between the end of "Ben-Hur" and the 8:30 showing of "Braveheart"? In either event, I strongly urge Craig and the programmers for these series at the Ziegfeld to champion prints that come complete with intermission and entr'acte music - and that the films be presented with the intermission break (don't just run through the intermission card and entr'acte music directly into the 2nd half of the movie)! Remember the slogan of the program; "Movies they way they were meant to be seen!" "Ben-Hur" and "My Fair Lady" were "meant to be seen" with an intermission!

Sadly the intermission is a thing of the past for most chain cinemas. Here in CT National Amusements does the exact same thing with Indian movies which is stupid. If people have a 5 minute break they may use it to go buy some snacks......right? Beside the point the whole idea of presenting classic movies that have ovatures and intermissions at a single screen theater as part of a program should be to perserve the big screen experience. By the way how is the expermient going for Clearview? Have the showings attracted a crowd?

Well.. I suppose I knew the presentations of these old roadshow movies would not be the same as they were when I ran them back in the day. I would ask REndres if the Ziegfeld uses automation to run the show these days, If so , that would somewhat explain the lights down and curtain open problem. Of course if they wanted to do it right,the simple solution would be to just not use the automation and do everything manualy, I would be happy to teach them how :)
Thanks Clearview for the promise to pay paying closer attention to
print condition. Now one last thing before "Lawrence", lets present the movies in the true roadshow format. Try it, you'll like it.

There was a projectionist on duty the night I saw WSS, vito... I recall seeing a tall and thin grey-haired gentlemen walking up to the projection booth sometime before the show last Tuesday. And when I called the theater on Saturday before going to see "Ben-Hur" to find out about the print, the manager advised that a different projectionist was on duty and had not seen the print when it played the previous day. The abrupt cut as the music started to swell to a crescendo into the intermission card was jarring and unforgivable! I hold no hope for a complete intermission with "2001" (particularly since there is no musical cue in the movie and the scenes on either side of the intermission spot transition smoothly), but I am really hoping that they pull out the stops for the 70mm "Lawrence" presentation! Are you Clearview guys listening??? PLEASE!!! If for nothing more than the sake of my bladder!!!

I agree, it would be nice to have an intermission during the long films (for the bathroom) and the right cues for the overtures and things like that, but c'mon, enough of the hair splitting. As long as I can see any of these films on the screen at the Ziegfeld from beginning to end, in focus with decent audio and hopefully no frames missing, than that's fine with me. The other details are icing on the cake! Just be happy this kind of thing is happening. Hopefully film revival in New York City will be making a comeback and we will have schedules like this one all through the year.

The print of Ben Hur had to be the same one the Loew's Jersey ran last year. The Jersey presented it with the intermission.

The concept of roadshow intermissions isn't entirely foreign to the Ziegfeld. The hugely successful 70MM re-release of "Lawrence" in 1989 had an intermission, as did the 70MM engagements of "My Fair Lady" and "Spartacus" in the early 1990s.

Also, in 2002 or 2003 the Ziegfeld brought back "Lawrence" in 70MM for a run of several weeks; a friend of mine saw it then and said there was an intermission (and the print shown was in great shape).

Interesting to note the number of 70MM engagements of "Lawrence" in NYC in recent years---far more than any other film that I can think of. In addition to the three 70MM engagements at the Ziegfeld (1989, 2002/3 and 2006), "Lawrence" was also screened in 70MM for a few weeks at the Paris, probably in the mid to late 1990s.

Good point Erik, unfortunatly what I believe is happing here is the projectionist are doing a simple "cookie cutter" presentaion, thread the film, push a button and that's it. If they wanted to put on a show they could, but it seems they don't. If I were the projectionist at the Ziegfeld I waould be choppin at the bit to present the classic films as close to the original presentation as possible. Case in point is Ben Hur, instead of allowing the overture to run with the lights down and the curtain open, it would be a simple matter to do it properly, heaven only knows why they chose to run it the way they did, there simply is no excuse for it, even if the Zigfeld is running thru some sort of automation it couild easily be by-passed and the overture run manually. Come on guys, admit it, your just being lazy! Show us a little showmanship for heavens sake.

Another ROADSHOW that has not been mentioned is "HAWAII" witrh Jule Andrews and Max Von Sydow! An absolutely beautiful film! How I would love to see it again on the big screen with Intermission and Entr'Act!

Another ROADSHOW that has not been mentioned is "HAWAII" with Jule Andrews and Max Von Sydow! An absolutely beautiful film! How I would love to see it again on the big screen with Intermission and Entr'Act!

Another ROADSHOW that has not been mentioned is "HAWAII" with Jule Andrews and Max Von Sydow! An absolutely beautiful film! How I would love to see it again on the big screen with Intermission and Entr'Act!

I remember when I saw the restored Lawrence and other 70mm roadshows here, they played the overture and entre'act with lights dimmed, main curtain open and the traveler closed. When the Columbia logo or whatever logo came up, then they turned the lights copletely off and opened the traveler. Do they still have a traveler at the Ziegfeld?

Vito... you're points about laziness and lack of showmanship are exactly what I'm talking about. Irv, you may well consider it splitting hairs, but for a theater as high profile as the Ziegfeld to undertake an ambitious series of movies "the way they were meant to be seen", why stop short of the very best presentation possible? Make no mistake about it, I was thrilled to see WSS as I was to see "Ben-Hur" and I'm thankful to Clearview for the program. But, if they are listening to our suggestions and interested in making this series a success, then why not offer our honest and constructive criticism along with our genuine appreciation for the effort? Perhaps the ideas and opinions expressed here will result in higher quality prints in the future and presentations closer to the filmmakers' original intentions. Clearview has an opportunity to do something very special here in NYC and I for one would like to see them make the very most of it.

Adreco, there's a red curtain, and a transparent white curtain. The prior operator, Cineplex Odeon, would open the red curtain first, and then would open the white curtain while the film title came on. I liked that practice. I suppose they probably had closed them both after the trailers, but I don't recall exactly.

Clearview opens them at the same time, with the white one seen separately, but not really separately used.

If they have time for intermissions and still have the number of showings they wish to present for intermissions, then they should do the intermissions. These epic films had them originally. That's the right presentation, would help with restroom breaks, and increase concession stands. \

Adreco, there's a red curtain, and a transparent white curtain. The prior operator, Cineplex Odeon, would open the red curtain first, and then would open the white curtain while the film title came on. I liked that practice. I suppose they probably had closed them both after the trailers, but I don't recall exactly.

Clearview opens them at the same time, with the white one seen separately, but not really separately used.

If they have time for intermissions and still have the number of showings they wish to present for intermissions, then they should do the intermissions. These epic films had them originally. That's the right presentation, would help with restroom breaks, and increase concession stands. \

Andres, the traveler curtain is in use at the Ziegfeld during this series. There is a red contour curtain that is perpetually fully drawn into the proscenium, but I can't recall from days of old if this is merely a decorative bit of drapery or if it was ever a functioning curtain. Anyway. the thick gold traveler is accompanied by another transparent traveler on an inside track that - if operated independently - could remain closed and act as a scrim while the overture plays. Here are some photos I took over the last couple of visits to the Zeigfeld. The last picture shows the traveler as it was closing after the credits rolled for WSS last Tuesday night.

Exterior day
Exterior night
Rear signage (W. 55th)
Ticket lobby chandelier
Lower Foyer statue
Lower Foyer Gallery
Stairway from Lower Foyer
Upper Foyer landing
Stairway from Upper Foyer
Upper Foyer lounge area
Upper Foyer lounge area alternate view
Men's room signage
Ladies' Room signage
Rest Room entrance cove mirror
Auditorium from rear orchestra
Projection booth portholes
Side wall ornamentation
Seat row end-cap
Rear stadium seating
Side wall motif
Exit sign
Proscenium decorative panel
Traveler curtain in action

I wanted to re-take a few of those shots that are a bit blurry or off center (the ladies' room signage and the end-cap for example), but when I went back the 2nd time, my camera battery expired and I forgot the spare!

The Ziegfeld's house curtain is gold and always has been.

The seats and interior used to be gold too!

ok, red curtain is a cliche. yes, gold, yes, my mistake.

Ed-can't argue with your comments about 'crossing all the T's and dotting all the I's' when it comes to presenting the films. However, when I see the Ziegfeld advertising "films the way they were meant to be seen" as far as I'm concerned that means 'seeing them on the big screen and NOT seeing them on TV', and in fact they are presenting these films the way they were meant to be seen. "Ben-Hur" is a stellar example of that. That film should only be seen on the big screen.

Yeah, it would be great if the Ziegfeld would do all the curtain and light cues, but it would also be great if we could see these films at the Rivoli, or the Capitol, or even the original Ziegfeld. It would also be great if we could go back to 1959 and see 'Ben-Hur' in it's first run, but that obviously isn't going to happen. I don't have much to complain about with this series. I'm am more than pleased that it is happening, and 'Ben-Hur' for example was one of the best movie-going experiences I've had in a while, so I'm not gonna sweat the curtain and light cues. If they do them great, if they don't well....they don't.

It would've been nice to have the intermission at "Ben-Hur" today, but at least a theater manager spoke to the audience about it before the show started so it wasn't an abrupt shock. It must have been removed to make sure the 4:30 showing of "Braveheart" started on time, but starting "Ben-Hur" at 12 noon instead of 12:30 would've solved that problem.

Anyway, that and the curtains being open during the overture were the only disappointments in the whole show. The color was beautiful, no frames were missing, and the sound and score were especially powerful. The sea battle and chariot race were seen and heard to maximum effect in a theater like the Ziegfeld, but the big screen also lent a special dimension to the quieter moments. Ben-Hur's reunion with his mother and sister in the leper's cave was never more moving to me than it was today.

I was at the screenings of "Ben-Hur" and "Braveheart" yesterday.

While I absolutely agree with all the "nitpicking" about the intermission, curtain cues, film stock etc (as the people in this site are old school movie going lovers as myself), I was absolutely overjoyed at the print of Ben - Hur. The stereo sound was outstandingbut seeing the film on a large screen was awesome. I had seen it in 2005 at the AMC 25 on 42nd st...they played it on their smallest screen and the people who worked there kept screwing up (lights were on, film lost frame etc) ...but seeing it on a small screen was criminal...although i was glad just to see it in the movies...BUT..yesterday topped them all....also, no mention has been made of "Braveheart"...absolutely great print, clean, great sound (OK...a nitpick...a jump cut at the end...but I can live with it)...I talked with Monique (the theater manager) she was extremely nice and I told her what a good thing this festival is..

So....look, they get the prints they get...yes, it would be great if they were checked...but maybe that's the print they got...I doubt there are many new prints struck of Ben-Hur etc. After being on this site for a couple of years now, on all the theaters...it always seemed that our dream of a film festival at the Ziegfeld was just a "pipedream"...but now....we got it...it seems that someone has listened to us..and this could be the start of something big....so, let's not sweat the small stuff guys (sorry, don't mean to preach) but, there I was sitting in the Ziegfeld yesterday, watching a double feature of "Ben-Hur' and "Braveheart"...whod've thought

When I worked in film distribution and exhibition some years ago, we always checked the prints and if it was a roadshow film we always had a rehearsal the day before opening the film. From what I have read here from Vito, I am sure he always checked the print before throwing the switch.

Yes andreco, during the roadshow heyday we always ran a technical rehersal of both the show print and the back up. I am not sure what goes on today in most theatres, but I can tell you National Amusements, which was the last company I worked for before I retired, has an excellent company policy which states all prints must be screened the night before they open. I spent many a night running prints till three or four in the morning. Since we were running platters, the main purpose of the screenings was to be sure there were no mistakes in continuity or misframes, but if there was a print problem we had an 800# to call to get a replacement
reel/print. In the old days we would get pre inspected prints from a film exchange, now however, it is not out of the ordinary to get the prints straight from the lab. Although it was rare, I did have a couple of times when I recived two reel 3s and no reel 4 etc. The worst case was when I called to tell the exchange I was missing the 5th reel of a movie and had recived two reel 4s, so guess what they sent me, yup... another reel four.

Went to the 4:30 screening of "Braveheart" yesterday. No trailers and the print looked great. Hope this series continues. There was a survey card given out where you could list the movies you would want to see at the Ziegfeld. Hopefully this means there are plans to continue this series.

It kind of seems penny wise and pound foolish not to schedule an intermission. Theatres make the bulk of their money (or at least they get to keep it all) from concessions. These long films give them an opportunity to sell more popcorn.

Hardbop is right - I would have bought some candy for sure if "Ben-Hur" had an intermission, but like I said before they had very little time to get the audience turned over for the next show.

The manager who told us there would be no intermission also said the Ziegfeld will be showing classics whenever there was a downtime in their schedule for new releases. I think she mentioned September and October. I figure the classics will outgross most of the new releases anyway, even at the reduced admission price.

Having attended the Ziegfeld four times in two weeks reminds me of something Carly Simon sang: These ARE the good old days.

If the good folks at Clearview want to see how a classic film should be presented (i.e. showmanship) I suggest they make the trip out to Suffern, New York.

The Lafayette Theatre kicks off their annual Big Screen Classics series this Saturday, February 25, with THE BAND WAGON. You'll learn how to use entrance music; when to dim the lights; when to open a curtain before the vintage shorts/trailers as opposed to the main feature, etc. You'll also see that modern commercials and coming attractions are most certainly NOT part of the classic movie going experience.

If you can't make it on Saturday mornings, they have an excellent Movie Musicals weekend on March 10-11-12 with loads of rare prints, including KISS ME KATE in dual-strip Polaroid 3-D with stereophonic sound, and LOVING YOU in an archival dye-transfer Technicolor print!

Visit http://www.bigscreenclassics.com/indexlafayette.htm

Memo to Clearview: Hire Bob Furmanek

Bob, I ran "Kiss Me Kate" in that 3-D format with Prespecta sound,
Wait till they all see that! it will knock their socks off.
As Ann Miller sings
"it's too darn hot"!

Vito, thanks for the compliment!

However, I should point out that KISS ME KATE was never presented in Perspecta. It was originally shown in stereophonic sound with an interlocked full coat 35mm magnetic track which had the left, center and right channels. KATE opened at Radio City Music Hall (flat only) in November, 1953 and then played wide (in 3-D) on the New York Loew's circuit for Christmas, 1953.

MGM's first Perspecta release in the U.S. was BETRAYED with Clark Gable, which opened in September, 1954.

I recall running "Charge at Feather River" and "House of Wax" with the left eye print print having 3 mag tracks (left, center, right) along with a composite optical back up track, and the right eye print with a surround (optical) track, it was a loooooong time ago so I could be a little off here, but it's as best as I can recall. As for "Kate" I never ran the sound on a seperate interlock so unless the print was either Prespecta or 4 track mag, it must have been optical mono.

All of this talk about the proper way to present a movie reminds me of a time (1973) years before my projectionist days. I was working as an usher at the ATLANTA, which was Walter Reade's only theatre in Atlanta Ga. Two Reade bigshots, the directors of advertising / promotions and public relations were at the theatre preparing for the Atlanta premiere of "Man of La Mancha." They were interrupted by a call from HQ in New Jersey because during the afternoon showing of "Sleuth" at the Ziegfeld, the picture had slipped out of focus. This had also happened the night before and both times a call had to be made to the booth to alert the projectionists to the problem.

At the time, the Reade organization was involved in a dispute with the projectionist local regarding the terms of the contract involving the Ziegfeld's very expensive and cutting edge (for the time) automated equipment. Since "Sleuth" was a roadshow it seems that two projectionists had to be on duty at all times. Reade's position was that since the booth was completely automated, one should suffice. And since it seemed obvious that even with two on duty no one was actually paying attention to the screen there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth in the office that day. (Of course I only got the management side of this story.)

It is a sad commentary that the "push a button and forget it" style of booth operation so common today is even in the houses of the great Times Square that I so much wished to be a part of in those days. Even sadder is that most of the movie going public would not even notice the difference in a good presentation and a bad one unless the bad one was upside down. I am afraid that by the time I became a projectionist, showmanship was mostly a thing of the past and very seldom have I been able to enjoy the privilege of presenting a movie where film, masking, curtain, and light cues were coordinated.

For the record, this is how I did it, as learned from the professionals at "The ATLANTA, A Walter Reade Theatre": When previews were shown first, we opened the show the usual way. Just before the overture the curtain would close and the curtain floods would go to bright. As the overture ended, the floods would dim out and the curtain would open on the film company logo. No white screen! If there was no preshow, the overture would start and then the house would go to half. Near the end of the overture the house would go out and the curtain floods would dim. Curtain open on the logo. There have been a few times when I have recreated the overture, intermission, and exit music using the CD player in the booth. "West Side Story", missing its opening footage, and "Sound of Music" were the titles. It seems that on "Ben-Hur", the lights went out and the curtain opened and then the audience sat there in the dark while the black film of the overture showed on the screen.

Not a very satisfactory way to set the mood or open the show. But, as others have pointed out, be thankful you at least have this. My beloved ATLANTA is now a parking lot. I was planning to fly to New York for "West Side Story" but the blizzard took care of that. Maybe it will return. I wish I had the chance to work with Vito. I will bet we could have kept "Sleuth" in focus! Hopefully I will make it up for "Lawrence" where I can enjoy it with some of my fellow Cinema Treasures posters who still appreciate a good presentation and movie when they see it.

Another point about all this is, we were overwelmed with all the new sound and picture formats we were hit with in the early 50s. It's a little difficult to remember what we ran and how we presented it, I had enough trouble remembering what the heck we were doing at the time, plus I'm an old man :) Bless you Bob for keeping it all straight.

Vito; those 2 Warnerphonic titles were originally presented with full coat magnetic interlock as well. The full coat had the left, center, right channels, and the right print only had the surround mono optical track. The left print had a mono optical composite of the 4 tracks which served as an emergency back-up in case the interlock went out of sync.

None of the dual-strip 3-D films from that period had magnetic stereo tracks on the actual print. By the time mag/optical prints were introduced (late 1954) 3-D was dead. If you did play KISS ME KATE in stereo, it would certainly have been via mag/full coat interlock.

And you wouldnt actually see or hear - multichannel mag striping on the actual projection prints until "The Robe," for which Hazard Reeves (by that time supervising the technical activities at Cinerama, Inc.) won a technical Oscar.
However, there were a slew of 2-D features before the introduction of CinemaScope's 4-track-mag-on-film that did incorporate interlocked 4-track: "From Here to Eternity," "The 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T," "Gilbert and Sullivan", "Julius Caesar," "Mogambo," "Shane," quite a few others including a reissue of "GWTW." It wasn't always a welcome event, according to some critics. In the NYTimes review of "From Here to Eternity" on 8/5/53, it was reported "...is being shown on a wide screen and Stereophonic Sound. It does not need these enhancements. It has scope, power and impact without them." Earlier in April of that year, the Times, equally disappointed in Warner Bros.' 4-channel-interlocked "WarnerPhonic Sound" introduced with the 3-D "House of Wax" sighed "Dimly we forsee movie audiences embalmed in three-dimensional wax and sound."

Yes Bob, it's coming back to me now, in fact I seem to recall having a sound tech, I think from WB, who ran the sound tracks, it was a bit busy because in some locations the unions insisted on two projectionists for 3-D projection.
I very much enjoyed Stan's post, we would have made a good team Stan, I would also use soundtrack albums to replicate overtures when there was none. As to the two projectionist rule, we alwys had em for 3-D and 70mm, in fact, for Cinerama there were as many as 5 guys in the booth. Later in the early 70s some of the circuts cut the second man and one man ran the show with an increase of salary for the engagement. Then when so many roadshows were 35mm, the theatre owners baulked and insisted on the elimination of both the two men and premium pay scale. The last 35mm roadshow I ran with a premium rate was "Fiddler on the Roof" I also recall the automation installation at the Ziegeld, I think it was for the 70mm roadshow of "Marooned". They had some clown in a little booth in the rear of the orchestra seats with a bunch of buttons like "The Wizard od Oz" doing God knows what. He made a comment something to the effect that "we really don't need those guys in the booth" Upon hearing of this I gave the little jack**s a piece of my mind. I was youger then and pretty full of myself, not to mention very proud of what I did for a living.

Only 5 boothmen for Cinerama? The former biz mgr for the now defunct Philly local told me recently there were 6 at the Boyd; and story goes that the reason the Chicago premiere at the Palace was delayed was because the union insisted on 12 operators. As for the Philly setup I can only imagine - because the last known C'rama operator in the area is now either dead or is unlocatable - 1 man for each of the A/B/C projectors, possibly one for audio and/or picture control, one for the 35mm operation upstairs (prologues and breakdown reels), and one who who go behind the screen and start the curtain motor. (This guy was recognizable in that he could easily be seen walking down the side aisle to the edge of the screen curtain, and disappearing, and then reappearing before and after each of the two acts.
As for the 2-man rule for 70mm presentations, I always thought it was something like that for here whenever a 70mm roadshow began to fail, the feature would go off roadshow policy and go grind, but a 35mm print would be substituted. "Fall of the Roman Empire" at the Stanley comes immediately to mind, but with some thought I can recall others.

The 10-12 man Cinerama rule represented the total number of men assigned to the theatre, with five or six, depending on the location, per performance. Generally there would be one man in A booth, three men in B booth, and one man in C booth. Again depending on the set up you might have a man in the upstairs booth handling the 35mm "Opps" reel and possibly lightining and curtain, however in some locations that was controlled by an electrician. Basically it varied from location to location.

I've enjoyed the 2 movies I've seen in this series (Chinatown, Ben-Hur). But I do wish the presentations were better, the prints in better condition, and I wish never to hear that young reviewer speak again -- he didn't know what he was saying. (He spoke about Chinatown.)

I needed the intermission in Ben-Hur to go to the bathroom, but since it had been removed, I had to go anyway during the scene when Heston talks to the horses in the tent, and I planned to buy some snacks, but the concession stand was closed at this point, of course. Overall, I'd give the experience about a B-.

Better presentations, please.

Veyoung; many of the 3-D features released in 1953 had interlocked magnetic stereo tracks, so you had 3 film elements running in (hopefully) perfect sync! Stereo titles include Fort Ti, Stranger Wore a Gun, Miss Sadie Thompson, The Maze, Second Chance, It Came from Outer Space, Wings of the Hawk, Devil's Canyon, Cease Fire, and many more.

Vito; if you don't mind my asking, where did you project 3-D in NYC? I'd love to hear any stories you could share of those days.

Deester; the Ziegfeld will not get the same pristine and archival 35mm prints as the Lafayette or the Loew's Jersey. The reason is because they are not running reel to reel, and studios will not send their pristine prints to a platter house. That's why they can't get many of the 70mm prints as well. In most cases, there is only one available 70mm print and it's reserved for archival screenings and special venues.

Bob, my 3-d days were as an apprentace (reel boy) on Staten Island.
I worked the Paramount, St. George, Ritz, and latter on Lane
I can't remember titles to well but I do remember The Paramount with "Man in the Dark" and a movie I can't recall the title of but I do remember the opening shot of a girl on a swing, I recall that one because it was my first time with a major screw up, the images were out of sync, so to our horror we watched the swing go once on the left eye and then again on the right eye, yikes!
"House of Wax" was at the St.George and Ritz, we started out with a 3-D print of "French Line" at the Ritz but had to go to flat (too many problems) The glases were always a problem, people seemed to hate them. Improvements came with the new "Scoop" plastic frame glasses, which were more popular. 3-D projection was plagued with problems, I think it was one of the reasons exibitors started to shy away from it, in addition the novelty soon wore off and the public became disinterested. An other thing I hated weas when we had a film break, in those days it was all safety film which is not as strong as the mylar we use today. If let's say the left eye print broke and you had to remove any frames, you would have to slug the print with black leader to make up for the lost frames in order to keep the two prints in sync. We NEVER cut the same number of frames lost in the left print out of the right print to even it out. So if you ever remember watching a 3-D movie and suddenly saw your right or left eye go black for a second, that's what happened.
You are quitw right about the studios not allowing pristine prints run on a platter, however I understood the Ziegfeld had two projectors but were using only one with a platter. If so they could get the prints and run reel to reel, has that situation changed? I never understood running a platter in a single screen when you have two projectors.

Deester... I agree with you 100%. And that scene is precisely where I went to the men's room during "Ben-Hur" as well. The concession stand was still open as there was an 8:30 "Braveheart" screening to follow the show I saw, but I just raced back and forth from my seat so as to miss as little of the movie as possible.

Bob... thanks for that insight. I suppose that it would be far too much to expect the Ziegfeld to run reel-to-reel for this series (assuming they still have that capability) so that we could get grade A prints and more 70mm - Craig??? Shouldn't the Ziegfeld Theater be a "special venue"?

Did anyone see the gentleman who came to the 8:30 Saturday night "Braveheart" screening in full William Wallace regalia and face paint? I caught him coming into the lounge area as I was leaving the auditorium. He was among a handful of people who were upstairs already, even though a considerable ticket-holders' line had already formed and been courdoned off from the stairs in the lower foyer. Too bad my camera batteries had died or I'd have taken a portrait - only after obtaining permission, of course (armed as he was with a set of bagpipes)!

I thought the Ziegfeld did have reel to reel capability (REndres' post on 1/18/06). Maybe this is why they got the 70mm print of "Lawrence of Arabia".

Vito... Could that film at the Paramount with the girl in the swing been "The Maze", a 1953 Allied Artists release filmed in 3-D and starring '50's sci-fi stalwart Richard Carlson. The film took place on a Scottish estate, as I recall. Fifty-three was also the year "Man in the Dark" was released by Columbia.

This is pretty disappointing to read but not surprising. The Loew's Jersey presented Ben Hur beautifully.

The Ziegfeld should be the top of the line.
Clearview you should not be presenting a film just because somebody wants to see it. You should be getting the best prints and presenting them as they should be shown reel to reel. You are not a college film society which orders up a print willy nilly.
A pristine print of a 70mm Zhivago was just shown in LA.
Why are YOU showing it in 35mm?
There is absolutely no excuse but laziness and sloppiness.
You are professionals. BE PROFESSIONAL!
Get Bob Furmenek as a consultant.
It took you long enough to listen to our pleas.
Now do it right!
And don't get all defensinve on us and say screw you buddy.
You are not doing your job as it should be done and somebody has to tell you.
The suburbs have been doing this 10 times better than you for years now and you are just waking up. Well good morning!

Vincent: I agree with you about "Ben-Hur" at the Loew's, but if you check the Loew's Jersey page you'll find some people still had some complaints to make. There's always going to be some people finding fault with anything. Eveything you said is valid and true, but I can't bring myself to complain about the shows at the Ziegfeld. Four times now, I've left the theater happy and impressed and feeling 30 years younger. But if Clearview does make any changes based on your suggestions and those other CT members have made, that would be even more wonderful.

The three theaters showing classics in the New York area all have their own special characteristics that set them apart from each other. For perfection of presentation, showmanship and diversity of genres and subject matter, the Lafayette wins hands down. For the sheer spectacle of a 1920's cathedral of cinema that is somehow still standing and still showing movies, it's the Loew's Jersey. For screen size and sound power, it's the Ziegfeld. I'm only grateful that I live near enough to patronize all three whenever I want.

Singing In The Rain... that's in 1.33 isn't it? Now THERE'S a possibility for catastrophe...

Let's be constructive! Dear CLEARVIEW: Singin in the Rain has different dimensions than new films. New films are scope, so 2.35 wide as high, or flat which is 1.85 wide as high. Movies before 1953 are 1.33, like television sets before new wide screen ones. That means a different lens for the movie projectors.

One of my greatest pleasures of moviegoing was enjoying the restored 1927 Metropolis at the Ziegfeld in 2002, so I know it has been done before. If Clearview is presenting classics at the Chelsea, presumably they are projecting them in the right dimensions there.

A few years I enjoyed a double bill of Signin in the Rain and An American in Paris at the Paris theater.

ok, now what I'd like to know is whether there has been a big turnout for Braveheart and Gladiator.

Kudos again to Clearview for the classics! Do try to accomodate intermissions, and try to get 70 MM prints in the future, but know we love the Ziegfeld and thank you for keep presenting movies, new and vintage, there!

Bravo Howard, that needed to be said, I am as guilty as anyone here for Clearview bashing, however they have been listining to our comments and appear to be trying, quite frankly I do not think they simply thought,the heck with it just show the darn movies. I am willing to bet Clearview has a better understanding of what they should be doing to present these films properly, and will in the future do the classics justice. As for "Singing in the Rain", I suggest Clearview contact their equipment vendor with the screen size and projection throw to optain proper prime lenses for 1.33 projection. Once that is done it will be a simple matter of masking the screen accordingly. National Amusements has a classic film day once a month in many locations and have purchased lenses to ensure movies are presented in the proper 1.33 ratio.
Clearview should do the same.

Technically, it is actually 1.37:1 . Many of the First Run special theatres like the Cinerama Dome, Chinese, Egyptian, Hollywood Pacific, Century Plaza and the art house circuits in Los Angeles, all had a full set of lens to play all 35mm formats in their booths. (1.37 , 1.66 , 1.85 , 2.40). Or if it was something special we would just call the home office and talk to our circuit's head projectionist, to find the right lens. And since the Ziegfeld is part of a circuit their home office would have other lens in stock.
Remember the operator in the booth is a union projectionist, not some popcorn jockey from downstairs.

Hey Howard,

Not bashing Clearview at all - I'm happy to see the revivals! However, at Chelsea Classics, they throw 1.33 movies up on the 1.85 screen and crop the image top and bottom.
Perhaps there are prints of Singing... in which it has been optically printed ("windowboxed") onto the 1.85 frame?? As in the last releases of Gone With The Wind and Wizard of Oz...
I won't complain - either way I'm happy to see it since I have never seen it projected at all.
Gladiator on Monday night attracted perhaps 75 people.

Beautiful presentation tonight of Ben-Hur.

Joe the projectionist lowered the house lights to half and opened the main gold curtain. The sheer white curtain remained closed, and the six-minute overture played.

The most beautiful part: as the overture ended, the house lights went all the way down, and the white curtain began to part the moment the MGM logo came on screen. Perfectly timed, the curtain was fully open just as Leo let out his last roar, and a big map of Judea and vicinity burst open the screen.

Real showmanship, the way movies were meant to be seen.

And no ads or trailers of any kind.

The Ben Hur presentation sounds wonderful! Realize, though, it might be that these movies were too long to include the commercials.

Thanks for the Gladiator attendence, but I don't expect much during M to Thursday, and have nothing to compare. How's Ben Hur doing during those days?

I've learned a lot volunteering to get a film program at Philadelphia's Boyd when it reopens, and one thing is that it doesn't cost much to get a new lens cut for the projector, to show the film in the correct aspect ratio. Since they showed Metropolis correctly at the Ziegfeld in 2002, they SHOULD already have the lens sitting in a box. We found many lens at the Sameric (the Boyd's name when it closed), whole boxes full, so they likely have this at the Ziegfeld. Lens are particular to each auditorium, as Vito indicates above. Of course, "should" doesn't always happen, so we will see soon.

Congratulations to Joe the projectionist for doing it right. He is probably from the old school who enjoys "putting on a show" as much as we do seeing it done properly. Who knows, Joe may have read our comments and learned something :)
I would also like to suggest to Clearview that they invest in an
SMPTE test loop which will enable the tech/projectionist to cut the aperatures and mask the screen to the exact 1:33/1:37 ratio. I have seen too many theatres simply throw a white light on to the sheet and cut the plates to fill it. There is an exact science to presenting movies in the proper aspect ratio and all the tools needed are easily available.

The name of the test film is RP40 and can be purchased from most cinema supply houses. Theatres should have this tool to check the proper presentation of all aspect ratios, it is usually purchased in 50'lengths and can be made into a loop which can be run while cutting plates, setting masking, scope configeration and picture centering.

About 10 years ago I ran "Singing In The Rain" and if my memory is correct, it was one of those windowboxed prints mentioned above. That is, it was a 1:85 frame with the 1:33 image in the middle and black bars on each side. At this particular theatre the masking was moved manually by stagehands so we were able to bring it in to the 1:33 setting. Even if a theatre has only a flat / scope masking set up, the black bars were hardly noticable unless you were looking for them. Not the best solution perhaps, but when you remember that 99% of theatres have no 1:33 lenses, plates, or masking, or have anyone on staff that knows the difference, it is probably the best way to handle this situation.

I agree Stan, I mean it's a whole lot better than watching Gene Kelly dancing with no head or just his head and no feet :)

All this talk about projectionists. I remember seeing 2001 at the Rivoli in 76. I hadn't seen the film for years since when I was a boy and really remembered nothing about it except it was boring as hell and the kids matinee I saw it at in the suburbs practically rioted at the stupid plot turns(if you can call them that.)

When I saw it again at the Riv it was one of the greatest cinema experieces of my life and at the end of the first half just as you realize Hal is spying the huge curtains started closing in on the Rivoli's magnificent curved screen absolutely perfectly timed.
I was in shock.

The schedule is up for the 70mm Lawrence of Arabia shows: 2:30 and 7:30 every day for one week (except no late show on Wednesday). You know what that means: INTERMISSION!

The next question for Clearview is what 70MM print of "Lawrence of Arabia" have then booked and need to advertise. Because there are 70MM DTS and 70MM Magnetic prints available on this title. Remember these Director's Cut prints are used and have been around for a few years too.

From what I understand, Sony only has the newer prints that were struck a couple of years ago, which the Ziegfeld played at that time. I don't remember what sound format it was, however.

I believe Sony only has the newer prints in inventory of Lawrence that were struck just a couple of years ago, this is what the Ziegfeld showed last time they ran it. I don't remember the sound format, but I'm leaning towards it having been magnetic and not DTS.

The Ziegfeld ran "Vertigo" in 70MM and DTS sound during it's restored engagement. Sony did had dual inventories of prints on "Lawrence".

I'm not sure that's correct, William. When the Vertigo restoration was done there wasn't 70mm DTS which was introduced, IIRC, with Titanic in 1997.

I wonder if Lawrence today can have the same emotional impact it had in the late 80's early 90's consdidering what we have been through historically.
I saw it 3 times when the Ziegfeld showed the restored film and was blown away by it.
However considering our ambivilant views towards the Arab world and Islam today how can we emotially respond to it? Does it make the British actions seem all the more horrifying or do they gain in sympathy?

Peter,
70mm-DTS *was* used on "Vertigo." In fact, it had been developed earlier than that and was tested on the Harris/Katz rstoration of "My Fair Lady" a couple years prior to the "Vertigo" restoration.

Saps... I'm happy Joe the projectionist payed some respect to the presentation of "Ben-Hur" the night you saw it. When I attended a screening on Saturday at 4:30, however, they did run about 5 or 6 commercial spots before turning the lights down for the overture, so the fact that they weren't played for your screening didn't have anything to do with the length of the movie, as HowardBHaas suggests - unless theater staff just wanted to get out of there as quickly as possible that night!

Also, minor point, but I don't think the MGM lion actually roars or moves at all for "Ben-Hur"... I remember noticing that the logo appeared to be a still photo.

Looking forward to the 70mm "Lawrence" and keeping my fingers crossed for a 70mm "2001" some time down the line.

And it looks like I need to restore an "e" to "restoration"! :-)

Hello Michael, I wondered, as our 70mm resident expert, you might give your facts or opinions on what happened to 70mm/DTS. When it first came along I rhought there was real hope for the same resurgence of 70mm we had in the 80s, all the eliments were there, the huge cost of magnetic stripping the prints was eliminated and the cost to theatres, already equipt for 35mm DTS, would be only a 70mm reader, I even invisioned a reader that could accomadate both 35 and 70. So what happened? was it the Digital picture revolution, which by the way has not exactly set the movie biz on fire, when is the last time you saw a movie presented in a digital picture format.
It just seemed to make good sense, I even thought perhaps Dolby would find a way to include digital sound codeing on 70mm prints.
Alas, other than a few pictures, as you indicated, it never came to pass. What are your thoughts?

Michael:

Thanks for the correction re: Vertigo. That'll teach me to trust my memory rather than looking it up! :)

Now I'll have to start my disagreement with Robert A. Harris all over again regarding the awful stereo sound remix on Vertigo, he claimed DTS had nothing to do with it, while the DTS people I spoke to at the premiere told me specifically that DTS contributed their portion of the funding for the "restoration" only if the film had a "loud" multi-channel mix rather than the correct and proper mono mix.

Ed is right about the MGM lion. It's one of only two MGM movies I can think of where the lion doesn't roar. The other is "2001". It was lucky for them: two of MGM's finest pictures and biggest hits. Maybe someone knows if there are any more (not counting silent movies).

Pete: the original mono soundtrack was a most welcome addition to last year's "Vertigo" DVD re-release. Bernard Herrmann's music sounded great in the loud stereo mix, but the sound effects were terrible - all wrong. Very distracting.

Regarding Lawrence of Arabia’s ability to impact present-day audiences, my thoughts are that it will. By virtue of its powerful images and literate script, it will connect emotionally with anyone who's passionate about film, regardless of political or social inclination.

Ed: you’re right, the MGM lion doesn’t roar on Ben-Hur. He did roar financially however, since Ben-Hur was the top grossing picture for 1959 & 1960. And the 11 Academy Awards didn’t hurt him.

I believe that for its 40th Anniversary, some 70 MM/DTS prints of “Lawrence” were made.

From what I can gather, there are probably only two 70 MM prints of “Ben-Hur” in existence. Hopefully someone can correct me.

The last time I heard of a 70 MM print of “West Side Story” was in 1993.

Regards,

JSA

I was wondering if anyone could identify exactly when the roadshow presentation of a film began? And by that, I mean a film with overture and intermission with entr'acte, booked into an exclusive engagement with reserved seating. I caught the beginning of "Gone With the Wind" today on TMC and I noticed that there was an overture. I know there's an intermission (and assume there is entr'acte music) and was wondering if all of this was part of the original presentation or if it was added later when the film received a cropped 70mm "widescreen" re-release decades later.

Were there overtures and intermissions during the silent era? I know the roadshow hey day was in the '50's and '60's and that films of great length were few and far between in prior to that, but were there other earlier films like "GWTW" that had this sort of presentation? For example, "The Best Years of Our Lives" clocks in at nearly three hours, did it include an intermission? I'm probably asking more than one question here, but any history about the history of overture and intermission in American cinema and how that evolved into the roadshow presentations of the '50's and '60's would be greatly appreciated.

It may not be the earliest, but "Birth of a Nation" was road-shown at the NT Liberty, incidentally, the same theatre where the live play "The Klansman," on with BOAN was based, was introduced. Roadshows, in one form or another, with or without prologue/overture/intermission/entr'acte have been around for decades.

I guess I thought the lion was roaring because there was music and Leo was moving due to the gentle undulations of the sheer traveler curtain. Funny tricks the mind plays sometimes.

"The Great Ziegfeld" had an overture and that film was released in 1936. I know "The Sign Of The Cross" had an intermission but I am not sure about an overture. The original "King Kong" had an overture. It has been restored to the film in its recent DVD release.

"The Great Ziegfeld" had an overture and that film was released in 1936. I know "The Sign Of The Cross" had an intermission but I am not sure about an overture. The original "King Kong" had an overture. It has been restored to the film in its recent DVD release.

Thanks for the responses, veyoung and YankeeMike. I never knew that about "King Kong"! I wonder when that overture was discovered? I saw "King Kong" at the D.W. Griffith Theater on East 59th Street when the scenes that had been trimmed in the 1940's were restored in the '70's, but I can't recall an overture. The theater had rolled admission tickets back to 1933 vintage (10 cents) for the first few weeks of what turned out to be a very long engagement.

More overtures come to mind: Hitchcock's SPELLBOUND, DUEL IN THE SUN (both musical overture and off-screen narration), JULIUS CAESAR (1953), more recently William Friedkin's SORCERER. BTW, in my above post about BIRTH OF A NATION, that should read NY Liberty, not NT Liberty.

The "King Kong" overture must have been discovered quite recently since the current DVD release is the only version that has it.

I was told by a Kong expert that the "overture" on the DVD was not played before the film in 1933. It was recorded for a souvenir record created after the film was released.

TCM has now included the overture when they play the film.

Robert Wise's "Helen of Troy" (1956) had an overture, and quite a lengthy one, by Max Steiner.

Bob... if your Kong expert is correct, that raises an interesting debate in corrolation to this topic. By adding the "overture" to the DVD, are the producers doing the film a disservice by adding something to the presentation that was never intended by the film makers? Similar criticism was aimed at the "restored" VHS version of "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" that included some footage that Kramer never intended to see the light of day in an effort to return the film to as close an original "roadshow" length as possible.

I agree Ed. I'm seeing this gent tomorrow and I'll ask for additional details...

Do we know if the original 1933 Roxy/Music hall run included overture?
Opps, now I've started something : )

If this overture was not originally part of the film it should not have been added to the DVD. Maybe the overture was added to the film for foreign distribution and not used in the US.

For the premiere at Grauman’s Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, the program includes short subjects, a theatre orchestra overture by Al Erickson directing, and a prologue by Sid Grauman.

Any news onn the Star Wars and Indiana Jones prints?

How was the LOTR showings?

I wonder if anyone who visits this page attended any of the LOTR showings. I saw all of these in theaters on their initial runs and have enjoyed the expanded DVD's since then, so I elected to skip this series. Curious as to how well they are being attended, however, and whether the prints are good. In different times, these movies would have rightly been released (perhaps even filmed) in 70mm during their initial runs.

I don't think any of the Star Wars films are scheduled for this series. Besides, if they were, how much would you wager that Lucas even allows prints to be struck any longer, the huge proponent of digital technology that he is. Not sure I'll be able to make it to any of the Indiana Jones flicks (though I am trying to arrange for it) but I will definitely be around for "2001" and - with some luck - "Lawrence of Arabia." I hope folks post on the quality of those prints before I make the trip in.

My mistake on the Star Wars screenings, hope the Indiana Jones are crisp

My last discussion with the guys at Fox regarding "Star Wars" was, that lucas still has plans to release all of the movies in IMAX.
I don't know how far along that idea has progressed.
As for "Star Wars" at the Ziegfeld, I can only tell you based on my experiences with his movies in theatres, Lucas is a control freak, print quality and presentation is, as it should be, extremly important to him. He involves himself in many aspects of the films showings in our theatres, including dictating which size auditoriums could be used in Multiplex Cinemas, which trailers (previews) could be shown before the movie and even the types of ads or slides that could be shown.
In 1983 Lucas helped develop the THX Theatre Alignment Program (TAP) as a service to filmmakers and studios. TAP was/is the industry's most comprehensive quality assurance program whose services include reviewing release prints for image and soundtrack quality, distribution to theatres of technical facts about a film and proper equipment alignment, on-site equipment alignment
I am sure if "Star Wars" were to be presented at the Ziegfeld he would most certainly get involved.

The next re-release of the Star Wars films is scheduled for 2007 with the new "converted to digital 3-D versions" that Lucas is currently working on.

Thanks for that update Peter, it does not surprise me that Lucas has decided to to go Digital rather than IMAX, he is one of Hollwood's biggest Digital supporters. I saw the new Disney Dolby 3-D cinema format demonstrated this past fall, I was quite impressed,it is quite amasing, which is saying a lot for old die hard film guy like myself. The problem is you can't use the same Digital projectors curently in use, exhibitors will have to purchase additional servers as some did for "Chicken Little". However, with Lucas on board we will perhaps see more of the Digital format, both flat and 3-D than we currently do. Although I am in favor of film in motion picture theatres, I will support anything that helps get folks back to our theatres in force again.

Max Steiner's overture for Helen of Troy may have been one of the best characteristics of a disappointing film. The early scenes in Sparta are defintiely a snore, until the start of the battle scenes in front of Troy.

Don't know if there is a DVD version yet, but the VCR edition has a separate segment devoted exclusively to the remarkable overture.

Astyanax: "Helen of Troy" is out on DVD from Warner Home Video, and it includes the overture.

VITO,

I read about how much Lucas is concerned about where they show his movies, YET... all three new Star Wars pictures were shown in the crappiest theaters in the city (Ziegfeld excepted.) The Park and 86st, the 86st East, the Clearview 62/1, the Clearview Chelsea 9, the Murray Hill come to mind immediately. Granted, Fox had $$$ issues with Loews but if Lucas cared soooo much, he certainly would not have allowed his babies to be displayed in these places. It's all about the bottom line, not the audience (who doesn't really care cuz they went to these dumps anyway.)

Z.

Movieguy, Lucas did noy have the power to dictate which theatres played the films, those decisions were usually made by biding and other methods through the studio and film buyers. However he did play a role in how well the picture and sound were presented. If you think about it, eventually, "Star Wars" played in just about every dumb in town, there wasn't much George could have done about that.
I saw it with my own eyes and heard it with my own ears, Lucas was a pioneer in developing methods of improving picture and sound quality in theatres. Beginning with 70mm, THX and continuinmg today with Digital, I know no one who has contributed more to the enhancment the movie going experience.

By the way, Fox did not only have problems with Loews, but National Amusements and others as well. The cost(%)to exhibitors to show Fox films was just too high.

I didn't know Lucas had anything to do with the development of 70mm!

Vito,

Not be argumentative, but you say >>>he did play a role in how well the picture and sound were presented.<<< Clearly you have never been to the Chelsea 9 - there is no such thing as good picture and sound there. If you mean that he ensured a good sound mix and premium quality prints, well - that doesn't matter much if the theaters don't live up to the standard.
I agree with most of your comments about what he did for film presentation, but... 70mm is dead. THX in theatres is dead. Before it died, we had... either 3 or 5 (depending on who you ask) rooms that were THX certified. Digital Cinema is not even up to the quality of 35mm and is really about saving studios money. DLP completely underwhelms me. It is bright tho. Very bright. And usually very red also...

Sorry Bob, I did not mean to confuse you, Lucas did not develop 70mm but he was a big supporter of the process, which had all but dyed out in the late 60s. It was Lucas with "Star Wars" that started the trend of using 70mm again, coupled with the use of Dolby sound. I give credit to Lucas for the explosion of Dolby stereo with the release of "Star Wars" in 70mm mag as well as Dolby Stereo optical.

Vito must be referring to enhancements to 70mm film presentation in the '70's and '80's for, surely, he is way too young to have been involved with the development of 70mm film stock that goes back to the late 1920's!

Unfortunately, Lucas hasn't contributed much to the enhancement of the movie going experience from an ARTISTIC point of view in nearly 30 years! While technically dazzling, these last three Star Wars installments contain some of the worst dialog, most wooden performances (from the human beings) and flat direction I can remember in such big budget, high profile, major studio productions.

Movieguy, I really can't make it any clearer than I have already, of course their were exceptions, but having seen the deteriation going on in film presentation during the 60s and 70s I can tell you, Lucas helped make some impressive improvments. As to death of 70mm, we all know that, with the exception of IMAX it is no more and I have said many times in other threads I have never thought Digital Cinema was better than 35mm film because it most certainly is not. By the way I attended a few THX cerifications, they were tough, I saw a theatre lose out simply because the theatres HVAC (heat/air conditioning) systems hummed too loud. Eventually exibitors stopped buying into it.
You are right with respect to the cost when talking about Digital Cinema, only the studios gain here, there is nothing in it for the theatre owners. People don't care if a movie is shown in DLP, it does not come into play when making a descion about seeing a movie.
I will say, I suggest you check out the Dolby 3-D Cinema, it is quite amasing. I also loved IMAX but it seems to be slipping away as well, not many films being made available anymore. The same could be said for Digital Cinema, very few films being shown now, in fact none since Christmas.

Most 70mm presentations in the 70's and 80's were blow-ups from 35mm negatives. Other than IMAX, very few movies in the last 20-30 years have been photographed on wide-guage stock ("Tron" and "Far and Away" come to mind). This includes all the original Star Wars films. There were a number of films, however, that did utilize 65mm film stock for the special effects photography ("Close Encounters of the Third Kind", "Contact") but even that gave way to the use of 35mm VistaVision for optical shots.

I never sugggested that Lucas shot in 70mm, but he did spearhead the return to making prints available in 70mm, which is my point.
By the way, I played a lot of films in the 60s as well that were blow ups, "Funny Girl, Oliver, the list goes on and on, in fact few films after the 50s were shot in 70mm, but we still enjoyed presenting the 70mm blow ups, however you could certainly appreciate the difference when viewing true 70mm films like "Sound of Music" and "West Side Story" among others. By the way, I'm glad you
mentioned VistaVision, which few people may realise is still used in production today.

Ed, you mention Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I haven't seen Close Encounters of the Third Kind on a movie screen. Ziegfeld is presenting it in 35 mm. Will I miss much by not seeing a 70 mm presentation?

Probably not, Howard. The film is regular 35mm Panavision, IMO the biggest reason for 70mm on a film such as that was the six-track stereo sound. The new 35mm prints that Columbia/Sony have are in SDDS/DTS/Dolby Digital sound and will give you 95% of the impact of the 70mm sound.

Thanks, Peter. Unless you know that those are the only prints available, we have to hope the Ziegfeld actually is sent those newer (digital sound) prints rather than older 35 mm prints. This sounds like a cool surround sound experience.
I miss 70 mm, 6 track.

I agree with Peter, Howard. Only the special effects sequences were filmed in 70mm (Super Panavision 70 in this case) to reduce grain and were then reduced to 35mm to match the rest of the footage. Most folks saw the film in 35mm when it was first released, anyway. It's an awesome big screen experience in either format - provided the print is in good shape.

I wonder... in cases such as this - where some footage was shot on 70mm and the rest on 35mm - are those 70mm sequences transfered from original camera negative or are they first reduced to 35mm to match the rest of the footage and then blown back up? Does that question make sense?

I like the Chelsea 9 and have not had a bad experience there.

Yes, Peter and Ed: I recently saw a presentation of "Close Encounters..." at California State University, Long Beach. The film was introduced by none other than cinematographer Vilmos Zsigmond, and he mentioned that the special effects sequences were shot in 70 mm, while the other dramatic scenes were shot in 35 mm. It would have been interesting to ask him Ed's question! "Close Encounters..." is indeed a beautiful film, both visually and conceptually. A good 35 mm print will do justice to this important picture. But oh, that 70 mm/6-track...

JSA

Regarding 70mm/6-track, I would certainly agree it is spectalular.
Those of you who have worked in projection, I am sure, still remember the thrill when the print arrived, those massive reels and the wonderfull smell of the mag track, which is hard to describe but it hit you as soon as you opened the can. More than that, you knew you were going to have fun at work again, thrilling audiences with the granduer of 70mm and the excitement of the rich sound track. Maybe it was just me but when I had a 70mm print in the booth I seemed to care for it like a new baby, sounds kinda silly I quess but those of you who were there know what I mean. All the new sound processes we have today are excellent, but for me they can never compare to the rich full sound of a mag track.

Howard -

The print that Columbia/Sony currently offers of CE3K is the "Definitive Edition", which is a re-editing of the original 1977 release, the 1980 "Special Edition" release, with some additions and deletions from both; it was created by Spielberg in 2001. It's the version that Spielberg has said he prefers (I disagree, I think the original '77 version was the best) and is the only one they offer for theatrical play.

Oh! So, I really missed the original 70 mm 6 track version that was shown moviegoers! Well, Spielberg is still at the top of his game, and it will have digital sound, so I will try to attend. I'm going to email you, Peter, at the email you provide on this site, for more particulars as to the differences. I wouldn't want to spoil the film for anyone, and there may also be more discussion on particular films than this site would seem to set up for.

Without spoiling the film or going on too much about its critical merits, the story is that Speilberg felt rushed by Columbia to get the film into theaters by November of '77. He wanted to push back to the following summer, but the studio (which was in financial trouble at the time) wouldn't budge. Speilberg always felt there were certain scripted sequences he didn't have the time or budget to properly shoot and that the film didn't fulfill his vision, so a couple of years later he convinced the studio to allow him to re-assemble his crew and actors to shoot additional scenes and tighten up the editing. They agreed under condition that the climactic "encounter" of the title be expanded with additional effects to entice viewers back for a 2nd look at the movie. I'm with Peter... I loved the original version just fine and when I saw the "Special Edition" that was released with great fanfare in 1980, I felt the padded scenes the studio wanted were superfluous.

Fortunately, the final edition that Speilberg assembled in 2001 eliminates those scenes and reverts to the original versions ending, while still retaining some of scenes and edits Speilberg had always wanted to include but couldn't back in '77. It's been so long since I saw the original edit, that I don't know if I could honestly compare the experience of seeing this latest and supposedly "final" cut with that first "work in progress", as Speilberg refers to it. Tinkering aside, it's a film well worth seeing on the big screen.

Now if only they could digitally eliminate Richard Dreyfuss and put in a young Harrison Ford.

Close Encounters: Some deletions from the 1977 version included a scene that takes place in the power station before Dreyfuss' first encounter. One Special Edition scene that made its way to the recent Definitive iteration is the Gobi Desert sequence. Over the years, mixed versions have been broadcast on TV, so who really knows how many permutations are out there? I still consider the original 1977 release the best, one of the finest American films of the 70's. I failed to see what was so "Special" in the 1980 edition. The 2001 version is a good compromise.

JSA

Come One, Come All to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" starting Friday March 17th at 8:15 PM---at the Ziegfeld, where the film premiered on November 16th, 1977. This will be the "Definitive Director's Cut." For this first showing only, there will be a very special introduction. Spread the Word!!!!

Come One, Come All to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" starting Friday March 17th at 8:15 PM---at the Ziegfeld, where the film premiered on November 16th, 1977. This will be the "Definitive Director's Cut." For this first showing only, there will be a very special introduction. Spread the Word!!!!

Come One, Come All to "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" starting Friday March 17th at 8:15 PM---at the Ziegfeld, where the film premiered on November 16th, 1977. This will be the "Definitive Director's Cut." For this first showing only, there will be a very special introduction. Spread the Word!!!!

I saw the first press showing of "Close Encounters" at the Ziegfeld in 70mm. A gala night. I recall Paddy Chayesky in the audience.

I saw the first press showing of "Close Encounters" at the Ziegfeld in 70mm. A gala night. I recall Paddy Chayesky in the audience.

Anyone make it down the last couple of weeks to either the "Lord of the Rings" or "Indiana Jones" series? I wanted to get in for "Raiders of the Lost Ark", but I've been waylaid with a bad case of strep. I'm curious about both the attendance for these two series as well as the quality of the prints (especially the Indy series). I'm wondering in particular if the "West Side Story" and "Ben-Hur" screenings were better attended than the "LOTR" screenings - which might make a statement about programming to the Clearview people either way.

I attended the 2 PM showing of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" on Saturday. It was the biggest crowd I've seen yet in the classics series, and the audience was fully into it. There was almost as much whoopin' and hollerin' as there was for the first midnight showing of "Star Wars Episode III" last May. The "Raiders" print was practically flawless, too. I'll bet many people in that crowd left the theater wondering why they don't make movies like that anymore. The show was preceded by a trailer for "Mission Impossible 3", which got booed and laughed at.

This was another time machine trip for me. I saw "Raiders" at the Ziegfeld in 1981 - a 70mm moveover from the Loew's Astor Plaza.

I made a goof - after consulting Al Alvarez' list, I see that "Raiders" played the Ziegfeld in 1982.

Bill: Tsk Tsk. Come on, man! From Script To DVD... :-)

That '82 Ziegfeld run of "Raiders" began July 16, the start of the film's '82 re-issue. Its Astor Plaza run ended quite a bit earlier.

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_new_york_1981.htm
http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_new_york_1982.htm

GREASE was a moveover from either the Loew's Astor Plaza or the Loew's State where it originally opened. But of course it was better at the Ziegfeld.
posted by Bill Huelbig on Jan 28, 2006 at 11:51am
------------------------------------------------------

"Grease" was better at the Ziegfeld because it was a 70mm presentation! The initial run (at the State) was 35mm and began about two months earlier.

Al,
Nice list of Ziegfeld engagements! But what's up with the approximate dates?

Michael: You're right - I should always go right to the source for any 70mm information. Thanks for posting a picture of the Century's Paramus as a single-screen theater on your 70mm in New York page. I've always wanted to see what it looked like - I didn't get there till 1971 after it was twinned.

Hi guys, I'm the new kid here. I was also at the screening of "Raiders" on Saturday. It was great to see not only baby boomers, like me, there but also younger people who couldn't possibly have seen it 25 years ago and only know it from video. Moreover. I saw plenty of people with their kids--the whole point of the Classics program, bringing these great big screen films to succeeding generations. Be sure to go to Clearviewcinemas.com, click on customer comments, and tell them that you like the concept and want more! They really listen. Suggest titles. Tell them to continue the program during the next slow season. Please be positive and constructive, since this is one of the greatest things to happen in NY cinema in a long time. I'm not knocking Film Forum, MOMA, Moving Image, Walter Reade, etc--all great venues. But the Ziegfeld is the Ziegfeld. Sure, Radio City would be more impressive, but it ain't happening there. It would be a tragedy to see the Ziegfeld go the way of the Astor Plaza.

Thank you all!!

Tonight's showing of "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" looked like a brand-new print to me. The "MI3" trailer was once again attached, but there was a special surprise when the curtains first opened: the trailer for "2001", which I'd never before seen in a theater. Also - NO COMMERCIALS! The Classics series just keeps getting better and better.

Ya know Bill, I think Clearview has read and acted on the many pro and con comments on this page, many of our complants seem to have been taken seriously. Take a bow everyone, and thanks Clearview!

Hi Vito:

Absolutely on target, I've been in touch with Craig O' Connor who is programming the Classic series and he encouraged me to send all comments to www.clearviewcinemas.com and click on the "Customer Comments" link. The top brass appreciate it and really listen. They WANT this program to succeed. I've also made him aware of this forum. Thank you everyone. After Indy is North by Northwest, Dr. Zhivago, Singin' in the Rain. Followed by Space Week, and then Lawrence. You have ideas for more. Let them know, by all means.

Thanks, thanks, thanks

Gary

I find it interesting to note that the Ziegfeld series appears to be doing decent business despite minimal advertising---I haven't seen a single ad in the Times for the series---an impressive demonstration that there is an audience in the NYC area eager to see classics on the big screen. Kudos to Clearview for taking this chance.

I was at the INDIANA JONES double feature Friday night (TEMPLE OF DOOME & LOST CRUSADE) and neither was a new print. If you recall, the MI3 preview screened right before those films and the trailer was pristine. Right after they went to the films and you could see the contrast between what a "new" print looks like and and what a faded print looks like. In fact, the contrast was startling.

OK - if that wasn't a new print of "Temple of Doom", it was a perfectly preserved old one. Not one scratch or splice in the entire two hours.

Vito: Have you been able to attend any of these shows at the Ziegfeld? I'm not sure if you live in the area, but we'd all enjoy hearing the comments of a true professional like yourself.

Bill, since retirement I am busy as ever and rarley get into Manhattan. I am sure it will be a kick seeing some of those wonderfull pictures on the big screen again, and plan on making more of an effort to attend soon.

Kudos-right on-only one Ziegfeld and thousands of big screen classics- how about Jaws, Back to the Future, Saturday Night Fever, Guys and Dolls, Midnight Cowboy, Mary Poppins-Yeah, Mary Poppins!!

You got more-I'm sure you do-LET THEM KNOW!

REMEMBER WHAT "THE WOLF" (HARVEY KEITEL) SAID IN "PULP FICTION"--"LET'S NOT STAND AROUND AND S..K EACH OTHER'S XXXX JUST YET"

GET ON CLEARVIEW.COM!!!

THAT IS:

CLEARVIEWCINEMAS.COM

Mary Poppins played recently at the Thalia-Symphony Space. I was wondering if it was a new print.

I saw Mary Poppins a few years ago at the Walter Reade and while a good print the words of the songs were subtitled. This was fortunate.
For the release of the DVD the film should have been rereleased by Disney.
How the kids sit through it today on video I'll never know.(Do they?) The Ziegfeld should get Disney to get them an archive print. People should be introducing their kids to this movie in a theater. It's one of the best.

About Mary Poppins, I totally agree. I was lucky enough to see this as a kid in the theater when it was in re-release in the early 70s. Also a year or two before or after I saw 'The Sound of Music' and 'Oliver' in a theatrical re-release. Gotta thank my Mom for thinking of taking me to all of those. Experiences I'll never forget and perhaps a contributing factor to my big screen fandom. The Ziegfeld should maybe do a 'film for kids of all ages' and include 'Mary Poppins', 'Sound of Music', and maybe 'Chitty Chitty Bang Bang' or another big screen disney classic that I can't think of right now.

In my post the fortunate should read unfortunate.

Excellent idea Irv. These films would be perfect for the big screen and families.
if only they could get SOM and Chitty in 70mm.

Good MGM program this week. So why did they choose this Sunday to be closed?!

Little flashback on when I saw the re-releases of 'Poppins' and 'Sound of Music'. I distinctly remember seeing the trailers for 'Jesus Christ Superstar' and 'Mame' when I saw both of these in the theater. I think the trailer for 'JCS' was before the 'Sound of Music' screening and the 'Mame' trailer before 'Poppins'. So that would make this 1973 and '74 respectively. I remember being a little spooked by the 'JCS' trailer. As a little kid the idea of hippies and Jesus was a concept to big and abstract for my little head. I also remember seeing the 'Mame' trailer and knowing who Lucy was. Funny to think that rock bands like Led Zeppelin and the New York Dolls were at their peak at that time and I was just a little kid being dragged by my mom to see musicals at the movie theater.

My Mom used to take me religiously to see Disney theatrical re-releases. What ever happened to them? Disney continued this practice (albeit with decreasing frequency) right through the early to mid 90's. I think I remember "Sleeping Beauty" having a re-release not all that long ago. Seems to me that's why certain classic titles of theirs were offered "for a limited time only" when they came to home video - so that Disney might still have an audience for theatrical re-release of those titles. I always wanted to take my kids to the movies to see my favorite old Disney film "Pinnochio"... but now, I fear, they are growing too old for it to have the same impact as it did when I saw it as a child.

I remember seeing the "Mame" coming attraction at Radio City Music Hall when I saw Disney's "Robin Hood" (or was it the musical "Tom Sawyer"?) there. I recall thinking at the time what a very long trailer it was - and joking that we didn't need to come back and see the film as the trailer showed so much of it, even though we did go back to RCMH to see it.

I love that Clearview played the "2001" trailer the other night! I can't wait to see it once again on the big screen. I hope the print is in good shape and that the entrance music and entr'acte are presented properly.

Oh Ed! If only we could see it on an 80 ft curved screen. But then there would be nothing left to live for would there? Except maybe to see it again and again...

Hey Ed-

I saw the animated Disney's 'Robin Hood' at Radio City as well at the 1973 Christmas Show. They played the film before the live show. How's that for a full day of entertainment. I gotta give myself credit for actually staying in my seat for that long back then. I recently went to the RCMH Christmas Show this past year with the in-laws and their kids. Those brats couldn't sit still and keep quiet long enough before their dad had to yank them out of the theater and the show wasn't even half way over yet. Too much TV!!!

Now that you mention it I do remember seeing 'Tom Sawyer' back then starring Johnny Whitaker, Jodie Foster, and Celeste Holm. That's a blast from the past! Wasn't it something like "Reader's Digest Presents". Probably saw that in the same theater as 'Mary Poppins' and 'Sound of Music'.

Prior to the home video era, Disney re-released their classic titles every 7 years or so (and often did blockbuster business during those reissues). Following the advent of home video, the studio experimented with reissues of classics previously released on video---"Pinocchio" (in the late 80s/early 90s) and more recently, "The Little Mermaid." My recollection is that neither reissue did well enough to justify the cost of new prints and marketing.

You have a good memory, Irv. I had to check the Reader's Digest connection on imdb.com. Apparently, the magazine shared production expenses with Arthur P. Jacobs' Apjac International (I always associate Apjac with the "Planet of the Apes" series). I always thought this was a Disney production, but I am wrong. The score was written by the brotherly partnership of Robert and Richard Sherman, who had worked for Disney since the 1950's and scored many of their films, including "Mary Poppins", "The Aristocats", "Bedknobs & Broomsticks", "The Jungle Book" and the Winnie the Pooh series. They also took on non-Disney assignments such as "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang", "Charlotte's Web" and this film. They blessed the human race with Disney Theme Park's signature song "It's a Small World" - for better or for worse.

So anyway... I had previously asked about the Ziegfeld's screen dimensions and was wondering if anyone had an answer for me? I know it's not the 80 foot curved screen both Vincent and I pine for, but I'm still curious as to just how big it is.

I believe the current dimensions are 50 feet by 24 feet. Back for the 1973 70MM reissue of "This is Cinerama", the temp screen was 63 feet by 27 feet.

When "Lady & the Tramp" was recently restored for DVD, I was thinking what a shame they did not re-release it to theatres. It was a Cinemascope cartoon and looked AWESOME on the big screen. I remember the last theatrical re-issue I was running the Cinemart and we were getting full houses even at night.

The 63' screen was good. Not great, but good. 50 for a house this size is, let's just say to be kind, pathetic.

The comments regarding re-releases prompted me to recall the days before video tape when it was quite common for studios to re-release the older movies, quite often in the form of a double feature.
We would receive reburbished prints, which meant the film exchange would consolidate several prints together to replace missing footage, the prints with surface scracthes (non emulsion) would be sent to a lab to have the scratches removed or covered up, consoladated industries in New York did most of that work in NY. Prints would then have new thread up leaders attached and shipped off to the theatres. The exception to that was Disney, who always supplied new prints for re-issues.

Here are some dimensions to other Broadway Theatre in NYC.

Broadway Theatre: 78 feet by 26 feet for 3-strip Cinerama
Capitol Theatre: 90 feet by 33 feet for Cinerama
Warner Theatre: 67 feet by 24 feet for 3-strip Cinerama
81 feet by 30 feet for 70MM
Rivoli Theatre: 66 feet by 27 feet for Todd-AO
Paramount Times Square: 64 feet by 45 feet VistaVision

Hollywood
Cinerama Dome: 86 feet by 32 feet Cinerama
Warner Cinerama Theatre: 76 feet by 28 feet for 3-strip Cinerama

Hmmm. Thanks for the stats, William. The Ziegfeld's screen looks big enough when you sit in the front half of the orchestra - as I stated earlier, I like about 10th row or so. But with the theater's long rectangular shape, the impact of the screen size diminishes the further back one sits (for my tastes, anyway). Many of those older theaters, while much larger and with greater seating capacities, were designed with a porportionately shallower fan-shaped floor plan, which brought a greater number of seats closer to the screen by virtue of their cantilievered loge and balcony sections. As a result, I think the screens seemed even larger than they were.

Not sure what the dimensions in the old Harris on 42nd Street were, but that screen was truly impressive in relation to the size of the auditorium. It's one of the few Duece grind houses in which I ever visited the balcony and I remember sitting dead center in the 1st row and thinking like I was going to fall into the screen. It felt like I could have leapt off the balcony right onto the face of the screen.

Are those horizontal screen measurements for a CURVE or a CHORD?

Vito... I remember back in the days before VHS and Beta, a company called Castle Films (I always wondered if the great B-movie showman William Castle had anything to do with this outfit) used to issue Readers Digest-like versions of old theatrical films on single 8mm and Super 8mm reels for viewing at home. They may have had 16mm as well, but I defintely had (indeed might STILL have) many 8mm reels from Castle Films for films like the original "Frankenstein", "Bride of Frankenstein", "Son of Frankenstein", "House of Frankenstein" (see a theme developing here?) and "Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein". That last title was my favorite because it was a Super 8 reel with SOUND! The silent reels all had subtitles. I also had a color reel featuring a condensed "Dr. Cyclops" as well as the '50's sci-fi flick "Tarantula" and "Abbott and Costello Meet Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde". Some of the titles were on the short 50 foot reels which pared down 90 minute features to the best 3 or 4 minutes while still retaining some semblence of a story line. Some titles also came in the bigger 200 foot reels which ran more like 12-13 minutes.

The films used to be sold in camera stores (or in department stores that had camera sections) and I remember the cover art was always fantastic. In some cases, even more so than the films themselves. My Dad would drag the home movie screen out into the gutter during our annual block parties and run a few extension cords end-to-end from the stoop light fixture to the fire up the projector and he'd run the movies for the neighborhood kids (myself and my brother among them). It was always a big hit. Man, thinking of those old films brings back such awesome memories. I remember how often the film would jam in my Dad's projector and start to bubble under the heat of the lamp. I became quite the expert splicer under my Dad's tutelage.

Sure, I've got thousands of full length, crisp quality, surround sound movie titles at my fingertips via cable-TV, On Demand services, Netflix, Blockbuster, even the local Library... but nothing will ever replace the experience of watching a familiar old flick with freinds - be it on the bottom of a double bill in some faded grind-house palace, or at the run-down nabe for 80 cents, or when boiled down to a precious few minutes in a heavily spliced silent 8mm print on my Dad's noisy projector while sitting on a few folding chairs out in the gutter under the stars courtesy of Castle Films.

Minor correction to my post on Castle Films... the silent versions of the movies utilized title cards, where necessary, not subtitles.

El Capitan Theatre in Hollywood has shown several Disney classics on the big screen for a limited time, prior to their DVD release. They've done it recently for "Lady and the Tramp", and also for the 40th anniversary of "Mary Poppins", among others. With all the resources that Disney has, I wonder why New York and other major cities are not included in these engagements. And, I can only speak for my 7 year old son, but yes he can sit through "Mary Poppins"!!! It's one of his favorite films. I am a firm believer in the power and beauty of cinema, and try to pass on that appreciation to my kid. Last fall, he saw "Close Encounters" for the first time on the big screen, and he was in total awe, a jaw dropping experience for him.

I have hope for the future!

Regards,

JSA

The Castro Theater in San Francisco showed 'Mary Poppins' last month for 6 days with on-screen lyrics so the audience could sing along. Not that I would want on-screen sing along lyrics but it would be cool to see on the big screen for sure. Speaking of The Castro they seem to have a pretty healthy revival calendar. The Ziegfeld and Lowes Jersey do a great job here in the East, but I think our friends out on the West coast have us beat in the film revival department.

http://www.thecastrotheatre.com

Oh my goodness Ed, I sure do remember those Castle films.
I too collected the 8mm versions of many of the Universal International pictures, wasn't it fun the way they condensed an 80/90 min movie down to 10/12 mins. Later on, I switched to the
400'16mm sound versions, in fact my local store would rent them out by the day or a weekend, similar to the way they do today with DVDs.
Before video, you could rent full length 16mm films from most of the major studios from an outfit called Films Incorporated, the movies were available 6 months after the theatrical release. I loved reading your story, it reminded me of great times.

Irv; of all the vintage theaters running classic film in the New York area, I feel the Lafayette has the best line-up, the most consistent high-quality prints and - by far - the best standard of presentation. Just check out this weekend’s line-up: dual strip 3-D, stereo sound, a dye-transfer archival print, etc. For fans of classic film and beautiful theaters, it doesn't get much better than that!

http://www.bigscreenclassics.com/indexlafayette.htm

Hey Bob-

Thanks for the tip. I actually visited the Lafayette for a screening of Hitchcock's 'Suspicion' around this time last year(?). Great theater and great presentation of the film. I'm a city dweller and don't own a car, so the trek to the Lafayette for me begins at about 8:30 AM if I want to get the PATH to Hoboken for the train to Suffern. Long story short, I'm not really a morning person, especially on the weekends. And although 'Suspicion' was great I couldn't help from nodding out here and there during the screening. Not my favorite thing to do in a movie theater, even if the film is bad. But I'm sure I'll find a good reason to visit The Lafayette in the future. Just have to go to bed early the night before...

Hey Bob-

I stand corrected!!! I just looked at the schedule for this weekend and they're showing stuff in the afternoon! 'Loving You' with Elvis??! I am really going to plan on seeing that one. I've only seen parts of it and the color is amazing. I'm sure they'll have a great print of it. Thanks again for the info.

Wow...whadda weekend coming up in the New York area. Films at the Ziegfeld, Loews Jersey, and Lafayette. Looks like film revival is making a pretty good come back. It's the film revival-revival. Now if we could get one or two more theaters in Manhattan to have some nice repretoire schedules, I could stop complaining and the world can once again be a peace.

Irv... We all know what is TRULY missing from the NY scene - a proper three-strip Cinerama house for the City! Is that just a lost cause? Either the Ziegfeld would have to renovate or the shuttered Mayfair/Demille in Times Square would have to be refurbished and rescued from oblivion. Neither one of these options appears to be a good bet at this point, so I imagine I'll have to travel across country for that particular cinematic experience.

Irv: the archival print of LOVING YOU screening at the Lafayette IS amazing. It's not only an original dye-transfer Technicolor print; it's the only known surviving 35mm IB print!

To the best of my knowledge, it has not been shown theatrically since the early 60's when it was pulled out of circulation by Hal Wallis. This one-of-a-kind print will not be shown at any other venue. Its access is exclusive to the Lafayette because of their professional staff and high standards of presentation.

In other words - don't miss it!!

Ed-

Nice thought my friend, but I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that that's not going ot happen, although I would LOVE IT if it did. In my opinion, The Ziegfeld can stay the way it is, as far as the Mayfair goes that would be a great idea. The catch to that would be making that theater attractive to all the tourists that now invade Times Square. It would have to be Cinerama and IMAX for that, because I don't think mainstream America (ie. the huge chunk of the Times Square tourists) even know what Cinerama is. IMHO, a theater like that would have to have some sort of diverse programming especially for IMAX because most people know what that is. If there was say 'Star Wars' in IMAX or a reallly popular film like that than maybe that could work. They could also dig up something like that Rolling Stones IMAX thing from a few years ago. The Cinerama thing would have to "piggy back" if you will, on the notoriety of IMAX and then geeks like us could see "Once Upon a Time in the West' or '2001: A Space Odyssey' in Cinerama. Can an IMAX and Cinerama theater physically exist? Don't know, but at least one can dream...

One good thing I'll say about the Oscars the other night. They were plugging for people to get out to the theaters again with that montage they did about the beauty of the 'big screen'. They even had a clip in it from 'This Is Cinerama'. Great idea from the Hollywood folks, right? Here's my note to them: start putting out some original material instead of insipid remakes, and some films that need to be seen on the big screen and MAYBE you'll get people back in the theaters again. So far though, I don't see that happening. I just read last night that 'Hairspray'is being made into a movie again starring John Travolta in the role Divine originated in the movie and the one Harvey Firestein did on Broadway. How ridiculous is that? And they wondering why people buy DVDs and stay at home. I think maybe they're also wondering why something like the classics series at the Ziegfeld is successful and being extended.

Dear Cinema Treasures Friends:

As I said, several posts above, I am the new kid in town (although I'm 55.) I've spent the last two hours reading all the posts on the Classic series, both positive and negative, and am getting a hell of an education on print quality, aspect ratios, curtains, and Ziegfeld history. I love it all, this is a great site. Close Encounters is one of my all time favorites, and I worked up the nerve to ask both Monique and Craig if I could introduce the first screening of the film next Friday, March 17th at 8:15 PM. They said yes. I promise you that I will have some very nice things to say about the film, the series, and the theatre, which despite it's flaws, I believe we would all miss if it were torn down. The bottom line-nothing matches "Close Encounters" on the "Big Screen" as Irv just mentioned above, regardless of 35 mm, 70 mm, 6 track, whatever.

I feel privileged to be able to introduce this film and humble in light of the expertise shown by the members on this site.

Regardless of anything, I believe that we all agree that this series, with it's flaws, is great for New York. I respect all of your opinions, promise to be brief, and hopefully interesting--and then ON WITH THE SHOW!

Thanks, in advance, for listening

Gary

Congratulations Gary, that's terrific! I look forward to hearing your introduction.

Thanks, Gary. A guy who calls himself Ziegfeld Man SHOULD be allowed to introduce the classic films there. It will be fun re-living "Close Encounters" at the Ziegfeld after almost 30 years. One thing I noticed back then at many of the 1977-78 shows which we don't see happening anymore: people taking flash pictures of the movie while on the screen.

Gary... When did you ask Monique about doing this? It wouldn't have been at the Sunday matinee showing of "Ben-Hur" the other week, would it have? I only ask because after that showing, I went up to Monique (who, before the show, offered me free passes if I wasn't happy with the print quality) to thank her and compliment the excellent job being done by all Ziegfeld hands and I noticed a couple of gentlemen discussing with her the possibility of one of them saying a few introductory words before an upcoming feature. She explained that her manager thought it would be OK if they were able to get a copy of the comments before hand.

I didn't catch the title of the film in question (as I didn't really want to eavesdrop) so it might not have been you. If it wasn't, isn't it interesting that this series is attracting such a passionate crowd - including folks who have an interest in offering some public comments to preface the presentations? Nothing lasts forever, but I hope this series - and the grass-roots spirit that makes it so exciting - continues to prosper for many years to come.

Good luck, Gary!

Sounds great Gary. Also looking forward to it.

My mistake... I saw "Ben-Hur" at the 4:30 Saturday showing, NOT Sunday.

Dear Bob, Bill, Ed, Irv and and everyone. Thank you for all your kind words. I already feel that I have a brand new group of friends who share the passion that I do for great movies and the Ziegfeld. Yes, it was me at the "Ben-Hur" screening who had the discussion with Monique, and particularly I was emphasizing the importance of the version of "Close Encounters" that would be shown. She is a great manager, but a little young to remember the ins and outs of 1977 vs 1980 vs " The Definitive Director's Cut," so she encouraged me to contact Craig, which I did. He assured me that it would be the "Definitive" that would be shown, which gave me a sigh of relief. yeah, maybe 1977 would be better, but definitely not the 1980" Special Edition."
In 1999, the "Definitive" was shown at Lincoln Square for Columbia's 75th anniversary. The theatre was packed on a Sunday night and we all had a great time, as we will next week.

I grew up in Sunnyside, Queens in the late 50's and spent my Saturdays at Century's Bliss (isn't that a great name for a theatre) and the Sunnyside. I'm sure both long gone. Multiplexing destroyed a great theatre on Long Island, the Central in Cedarhurst, where I first saw "Close Encounters," I had a headache and fever (which i didn't realize at the time), but went anyway. It was a fund raiser for the school I worked in. The movie was so enthralling and wonderful it didn't matter that I was sick. I think about that evening often. The last great single screen on LI, the Cinema 150 in Syosset/Woodbury is gone also. Whatever your issues are with the Ziegfeld, I think we all feel fortunate that we have it.
I went to "Raiders," "West Side Story" "Ben-Hur", and hopefully more this weekend. Does it get any better than this.

You are all a great bunch of people with a talent for enthusiasm, and I thank you for welcoming me into the group. See you at the movies.

Best,

Gary

Gary... the Sunnyside has been bulldozed and a big drug store stands on its site. Meanwhile, the Bliss is still standing and is serving as a Jehovah's Witness church. I snapped a few exterior photos late last year and posted them on the CT page for the Bliss - which you can open right here.

According to posts on that page, the interior has been pretty much stripped of original decor and streamlined in appearance, but the exterior appears to be in good shape. I've always been curious if the nice wood doors that are now in the entrance were original or installed by the church. Perhaps you could shed some light on that if you visit the page.

Ed, I left Sunnyside in 1960 and never went back, but, you know those doors look very familiar. Ironically, my big sister (she's 60) turned me on to films and I have a very nice memory of seeing "North by Northwest" there in 1958. I was 7 1/2!!! As I got older, I got into a regular Saturday "habit" either at the Bliss or Sunnyside. "The Fly" "House on Haunted Hill" William Castle was my hero!!! One funny memory-all my friends went to see "Sink the Bismarck" at the Bliss--not me-I had to see "The Tingler" at the Sunnyside. I remember one other place The Center or Centre, but that was off limits- for my parents only. What did they show there?

The Center is still there on the north side of Queens Blvd alongside the elevated Flushing IRT line, Gary. Don't know what the fare was back in the late '50's, but today it is a 6-screen multiplex. Here is the CT page for the Center Cinemas (as it is known today) that includes a recent exterior photo - which I took about a week before I snapped the Bliss.

Wow, Ed, I remember the Center as a tiny place, somehow the exterior looks the same, but not the marquee--it's been a long time. Let me try this one. Sometime, either 1955 or 1956, my family spent the summer in the Rockaways in the days of bungalows and rooming houses. Maybe around B.30th street. On the Boardwalk was something called an "open-air" theater, where the roof would close during daytime showings and open up at night. I think I saw "Carousel" there. What do you think?

Please post reports on the condition and presentation of Singin' in the Rain, North by Northwest, and Dr. Zhivago.

Another great film screening today at The Ziegfeld. I was at the 4:30 'Dr. Zhivago' and it was yet another amazing film-going experience. I had never seen this film before and was impressed by the acting, cinematography and overall emotitonal tone that, as I can see now, has made it a timeless masterpiece. I was also impressed again, like I was at 'Ben Hur' that a film clocking in at 3 hours and change was able to hold my attention from beginning to end. When you see a film that's this great and this long, it really gives you a different sense of the story and it's characters. It's almost like you're living with them for a while. That I think is one of the great things about going to the movies; something that can completely sweep you up and into a whole other 'reality''. Top notch acting from Omar Sharif, Julie Christie, and the late-great Rod Stieger. I could go on about all of the great things David Lean does with the narrative construction of this film, but I'll let all of you find that out when you see it.

As far as print quality, I would say that this print ranks about the same as the 'Ben-Hur' print that was shown a few weeks ago. Some minor problems here and there, big patches of scratches, but at other times the film was as sharp and colorful as it could be, particularly the scene when Stieger, meets Julie Christie's fiance 'Pasha' played by Tom Courtenay who was nominated for an Oscar for his supporting role. The projectionist really did decide to crank the audio on this film. At times it was overpowering, but in a good way. Loud but never overmodulated. When trains were coming down railroad tracks for example it really sounded and felt like a train. What did they call that in the 70s? 'Sensoround'? Remember that?

Two little notes: there was an Intermission which was a good thing but it was really short, like 5 or 6 minutes. I went to the bathroom quickly but by the time I got back, the second part had already started and I missed the first two or three minutes.

The other somewhat funny note is when I was at the consession stand during the overture (I made it into the theater right before the titles) a women came out of the theater and said to one of the ushers "there's music playing, but I don't see any picture". I turned to her and told her that was they way it's supposed to be and she just laughed and went back in.

Once again great film. If I can I might go see this one again. This is what living in New York is all about. I hope this series never ends, which brings me to one final point. I was thinking today whenever it is that The Ziegfeld goes back to a first-run schedule, I'm proposing that maybe they do something like the Lafayette in Suffern and have a classics screening once a week on maybe a Saturday or Sunday or whenever it's convinient inthe schedule. Maybe out of this festival a Classics at Ziegfeld Film Society can be created?

And now on to the 12:30 Saturday Screening of "Singin' In the Rain".

Irv:

You just took me back to 1966, when I saw Dr. Zhivago at the Crossbay in Ozone Park (another lost theater?) An incredibly romantic and powerful movie, and that music!! My teenage fantasies were with Julie in the snow. By the way, anybody like "Demon Seed," which finally came out on DVD last year. A really novel Sci-Fi with Julie doing incredible acting.

Monique told me that after "Lawrence," the theater was coming back with "Ice Age 2"

But as far as "I hope this series never ends"--this is why Craig keeps emphasizing that people visit the Clearview web site and lay on as much positive feedback as possible. The top brass, i.e., his bosses, really listen. I will be emphasizing this in my intro at CE3K. I'm not kidding, after I sent my first feedback (you have to fill out a brief survey and leave comments), I got a nice thank you e-mail from Craig's boss which was cc'd to his the whole office.

If our whole group inundates Clearview ( and wow am I happy I discovered this group) it will really make a difference. If everyone else who comes to these screenings also does it, then I really believe this can continue on some regular basis, at worst, during the slow season, which, I presume is now.

One great theater and thousands of classics- I would love to have a T shirt with that on it!!

Gary

Irv: Thanks for the glowing report on "Zhivago". I'm really looking forward to seeing it tonight (and again on Thursday night).

I attended the Indiana Jones week and noticed that the darker scenes (The "Well of Souls" scene in Raiders) were a bit too dark. Does this have to do with the quality of print or the projector light being too low...or both?

I reposted my comments of 2/23/06 about Ben-Hur directly on Clearview's "Contact Us" page.

Fever Dog: The projector light is definitely bright enough. I think that's the way those scenes are supposed to be. It's the way they appeared in their original theatrical release, I'm sure. "The Godfather Part II" at the Ziegfeld was noticeably darker than any video version I'd ever seen, but it's also the way I remember it looking back in 1975 at the Clifton (NJ) Theater.

"North by Northwest" this afternoon - great. The sound was amazing. The crop duster scene was never more intense, all due to the size of the image and the sound.

"Doctor Zhivago" tonight would have been a home run but unfortunately, during the intermission, someone complained about the soundtrack. The first half was at a volume level that brought out the full power of the sound and the score, as beautifully described by Irv a few posts above. When the trains went by, it did almost feel like Sensurround. After the complaint, the volume went way down and the movie sounded like it was playing at any old multiplex anywhere. I'm hoping the same projectionist is on duty for "Zhivago" on Thursday night and keeps the volume at its original level through the whole movie, letting the Ziegfeld do what it does best. I also hope the complaining person stays out of the Ziegfeld until the Classics series is over.

Total 5-star situation this afternoon with the screening of 'Singing In the Rain'. Another film that I had never seen before. I thought it would be wide-screen, but nevertheless I wasn't dissapointed. There was some focusing issues over the opening titles, but...so what, no biggie. Print quality overall was excellent. Amazingly colorful and sharp. Great musical numbers. Sort of reminded me of 'The Gang's All Here' in some respects. I was suprised, and definitely pleased at the cynical take on Hollywood in the story. So much of it reminded me of today's celebrity infatuated culture. And how 'bout Debbie Reynolds at all of 20 years old! How damn cute was she?
Great film. The Ziegfeld has been out doing themselves with every film in this series. Don't Let it end! I don't give a rat's ass about 'Ice Age 2' and I don't think the rest of the world should or will care once that's in the house when this series ends.

Here's a few suggestions for the next classics fest:
'The Hustler'
'Oklahoma'
"Fist Full of Dollars'
'Good, Bad, & the Ugly'
'Vertigo'
and yeah how about The Beatles "Help!"
and for you real off-the-wall cult film folks Otto Preminger's "Skidoo", a wide-screen film about LSD starring Jackie Gleason, with appearances by Groucho Marx and many others! Yes, you heard it right..it's a film about acid with Jackie Gleason and he trips in the film. Amazing!

Bill, I was distrurbed by the sound level change you described during Zhivago, managenent should have monitored the situation to determine if in fact the sound was too loud, if a change is made, it is then the managers responsibility to monitor the change to be sure it was proper one. Perhaps Clearview might instuct the managers to make a determination of what level the sound should be and then instruct managers to politly explain to complaining patrons that the movie is being shown in such a way as to optimise the full impact of the story. During my management years I would never change the level of the sound or the comfort of the heat/air conditioning for one or two patrons, but rather make a determination what was best for the majority of the audience. I would rather give a refund or pass to one patron than ruin the experiece for everyone.
During management classes, which I gave in the last few years of my career, I taught the importance of paying attention to sight and sound in the theatre, I would insist on managers sitting in the theatre a few minutes every show to monitor the picture on the screen as well as the comfort of the room temperature. A theatre like the Ziegfeld needs that sort of policy.

Hey BILL and VITO,

I'm really sorry you experienced a "too loud" complainer, Bill. It happens to me quite often at first run movies: the volume will be at a perfectly acceptable level and someone (who is usually sitting on top of the screen) will go out and complain "it's too loud" and invariably, the volume goes down not by a little, but a lot - usually to a level where you can no longer make out much of the dialog. I'm kind of surprised that it happened at Zhivago - why didn't you march right out and ask them to turn it back up? I've now seen 5 of the revivals, only West Side Story was a little low, but it was still this side of acceptable. I was going to see Zhivago on Thursday, but now I'm afraid to...
And, VITO - I bet I would be happy if you were running the show. If you recall from one of our past conversations, I have to practically DRAG someone into the auditorium with me to observe the problem first hand.

Adding to Bill's comments, I was also at last night's "Zhivago" screening. The audio levels for the movie's first half were cranked up a bit, but this was a case where "louder is better." Listening to that wonderful overture (yes, there were people turning around and looking back at the projectionst's booth with that "where's the picture?" look on their faces), the sounds of trains roaring down the tracks (you could almost feel them whoosh by), even something as simple as the crack of a streetcar's guidewire spark -- the effect really hit you. When the audio became notably lower right after the intermission I thought there was a problem with just that reel, but then it continued through the end the end of the movie, hurting it --it sounded "less big." Picture quality was excellent, except for maybe three spots where, for a couple of seconds, a bunch of crisscrossing black lines -- like a spiderweb -- popped up. The Intermission was very short -- 3 minutes? -- with music played over black and then the sound of a train as the black turned into a POV shot of the refugees' train coming out of a tunnel into the light. The Intermission seemed to be in the wrong place -- I vaguely recalled it came right after Zhivago and Lara part at the hospital and there's an interior shot of Zhivago going up the stairs in the background with the dying sunflowers on a table in the left foreground, instead of where the Intermission was last night, which was a few minutes later in the movie, right after the rescued peasant woman says "That's Strelniknov!" and there's a cut to a close-up of Tom Courtenay on his train. The movie ended with the 1999 restoration credits -- "Presented By Turner Entertainment" -- instead of the original 1965 release's "An MGM Presentation." Seeing "Zhivago" on the big screen you can again appreciate the Oscar-winning cinematography (Freddie Young), set design/art direction (John Box & Terrence Marsh) and score (Maurice Jarre), and the acting of Courtenay, Rod Steiger and the luminous Julie Christie. Looking forward to seeing it again Thursday night...and hope they leave the audio levels where they belong for the whole movie. Also saw "North By Northwest" Saturday afternoon, and while the picture quality wasn't perfect (too many scratches on the far right-hand side of the screen), the Herrmann score and Ernest Lehman's dialogue sounded great.

Richreel, the Zhivago intermisson is as I remember it in the original release. REndres, Radio City chief projectionist, tells a great story of how when Zhivago played at RCMH, he tried to get the travelor curtain to open at the same speed as the light at the end of the tunnel grow closer, hopefully he will see this and re-tell the story. It is a tough nut to crack trying to keep everyone happy with respect to sound volume, but as I mentioned, we must educate those who want to have the sound turned down to the advantages of hearing it louder for a more powerfull experience. I would never allow my staff to ruin the presentation just to satisfy a few, never have, never would.
movieguy,I feel your pain, managers have got to be more involved in the sight and sound on the screen, it cannot be left to the projectionist, although when I ran a show I would always go into the theatre to check the sound at least once or twice during a performance, and let me tell you it was ALWAYS loud. In fact for the musicals I would run the fader up a notch or two for the musical numbers.There was never a doubt, when I was in the booth, that you were listining to 4 or 6 track sound.

Hi Everyone,

Although I've been sick all weekend and couldn't get to any screenings, it's great just reading your comments.As far as I'm concerned, Ziegfeld=Big Picture + Big Sound (Wouldn't that be great on a T-shirt) I just e-mailed Craig at Clearview to take a look at these comments, so he can be apprised of them, especially the audio issues, bright and early Monday AM. With "Out Of This World Week" and "Lawrence" coming up, the sound has to be big.

I'm looking forward to meeting you all, at Devil's Tower, for the landing, this coming Friday evening. John Williams score will SOAR!!!

HAPPY PURIM AND ST PATRICK'S DAY

GARY

Great idea for a T-shirt, It has to be loud, starting with the overture. In my roadshow days I used to hate those whimpy overtures,
I wanted something to make em sit up and notice, like "Sweet Charity"
which started with a big brassy "Hey big spender" I used to rattle a few old folks dentures with that one I can tell you.

I too thought the lower volume was a problem with that first reel in the second half, but I never could bring myself to get up and ask the manager to turn it up. I did consider it, but I didn't want to miss any of the movie. Looking back on it now, maybe I should have.

I asked one of the friendly Ziegfeld employees about the sound situation when the show was over. She told me that the woman who complained did it right at the beginning of the film, and it was turned down slightly, but not enough to spoil the presentation. She then complained at least two more times because it was still too loud for her. She even banged on the manager's door. I guess she was too much of a troublemaker for them, and the result was the lowest volume I'd ever heard for a movie at the Ziegfeld in 36 years. I truly hope this woman stays away from the theater until "Ice Age 2" opens. All the rest of the upcoming films in the Classics series need to be, in the words of Vito, real denture-rattlers.

Movieguy718: The same employee I talked to about the sound assured me that it would not happen again on Thursday night. She said she'd tell the manager and the projectionist that I complimented them on the loud volume in the first half, and that it really made the show special. I'm going back on Thursday - there's a really good train scene in the second half (when Zhivago is nearly run over) that was spoiled by the low volume on Saturday.

Did the overture play on a blank screen or did it play over the white traveler curtain?

On Saturday, it played on a blank screen with the projector turned off. The intermission card went right into the entr'acte music, which also played on the blank screen. It lasted only around 3 minutes. The ending was done right, though - the curtains closed during the very long final shot of the rainbow over the river.

Bill, What you have described explains why the intermissions are so short, assuming they are running platters, they are simply splicing the beginning of part two, with the entr’acte music, onto the end of part one after the intermission tag, which means the intermission is only as long as the entr’acte music, so technically there is no real intermission. Clearview, please instruct your projection staff to stop the show at the end of part one, raise the lights, close the curtain and take a proper 10-15 minute intermission. Then, for heavens sake, start part two properly with lights dimmed half and the curtain closed until the end of the entr’acte music. If an automation system is in use, most of them can be programmed to stop and re-start the show. If the Ziegfeld automation cannot, then please just run that part of the show manually. Come on guys, these films are supposedly being shown “as they were meant to be seen” well…. almost, but no cigar.
As for the complaining woman banging on the managers door, that’s what most theatres have security for, she should have been given refund and shown out the door.

Regarding the intermission: Just be happy you got that much. Over the years I have run Zhivago as either a manager or projectionist several times, and seen it in theatres numerous others. Most of the time the prints were missing the intermission tag as well as the entr'acte. To make matters worse, the second half starts with that train tunnel sequence which begins with almost a minute of black film with only the sound of the train. Foolishly, no thought to put frame lines on this part (or the overture or entr'acte for that matter) which meant that to be sure that it was in frame you had to run several hundred feet through a counter. That is more feet of film than there are projectionists who will take the trouble to do such a thing these days. Most projectionists, and I don't only mean "doorman projectionists" just ran the film down to the first pin prick of light and made their cut there.

Other than the roadshow engagement in 1965, I have only seen Zhivago run completely and correctly twice, both 70MM presentations at the Fox Theatre in Atlanta. The one time I ran it there, the opening tunnel footage was missing. During my reel to reel days I remember two occasions where the famous "Astro Dater" intermission strip was used in place of the missing intermission tag. Also, one manager hated to run intermissions because they made him stay later, so he only had them when there was a crowd. On the other shows he would instruct the operator to make the changeover just before the intermission tag hit the screen. One manager even had the black tunnel footage cut off because he did not like people coming out complaining about the light being out. It is not only the Burger Kings of the world who have trouble getting good help.

Gee Stan, what a depressing post!
It is painfull to read about some of the butchers we have had in our projection rooms as well as the cookie cutter managers. Sadly, there are more and more of them around today. I come from a different breed of theatre managers and projectionists who took pride in putting on a good show and enjoyed going the extra mile to thrill audiences with all the whisels and bells we could muster up.
Well...they can't take away our memories, and that's what Cinema Treasures is all about. We all need to share the stories of the good
ole days and try and educate the current flock of theatre people, like the folks at the Ziegfeld, how to "put on a show"

Stan... I have to believe that Clearview and the staff at the Ziegfeld want to do better than that and have a keen interest in providing a good moviegoing experience for its patrons. They seem to have particular interest in monitoring this board and taking into consideration our suggestions and criticisms - because I think they understand that we (and others like us) are the target audience for this series and that our word of mouth is the most powerful advertising tool they have for the program.

We can be happy to have these films screened, but I think we should still keep our voices loud and the message clear that we would really like to see these movies presented as close to as originally intended as possible - meaning 70mm wherever possible and with complete overture/entr'acte and full intermission break (including appropriate curtain and house light cues). I pose it as a challenge to bring back a level of showmanship to an industry that has been sorely lacking in professionalism for far too long.

Gary... Sorry I won't be able to make your introduction to "Close Encounters" on Friday night due to conflicting plans from which I cannot wiggle free. Good luck. I hope you find a receptive audience there (I understand they were a bit impatient towards the Time Out Magazine critic who attempted a few words prior to the "Godfather" films that kicked off the series. I plan on getting down to the Ziegfeld on Sunday and catch both "2001" and "Close Encounters" - with a possibility of making it a triple feature if I can find the strenght to stick around for "Alien".

Speaking of sharing old stories, I could crash this site with entries about uncaring or inept managers and or projectionists that I have worked for and with over the years, and I am sure Vito could do the same. I could also submit many examples of people who took pride in their profession and gave the extra effort to put on a good show or provide a clean and well maintained venue to see it in. Fortunately, I learned my lobby, managing, and later on my projectionist trades from people who fall into the latter category. I think anyone who works at a special place like the Ziegfeld do too.

These days, when anything less than 12 screens is considered too small to bother with, it is not much different than working at the ball park or the local fast food eatery. Projection wise, it is sometimes all you can do to get all of the films built up on Thursday night. As for presentation, forget it. In these days of push button, or even worse, timer starts, no curtains, and light and sound cues handled by automation, all people expect is to see and hear the movie. (Remember when we used to fade out the non sync music before starting the show?) I think the downhill slide started in the mid 70's when theatre companies started carving up these once fine theatres into shoeboxes with their postage stamp screens. If the public had complained then things might have been different. Instead, with their complete lack of taste, they continued coming, and in record numbers. Why should a theatre company worry about being a class act when they were too busy counting their take?

This goes for the film companies too. Just one example. Hardly a week goes by that I do not get a print with at least one reel beginning or ending in a fade in or out. You would think someone in the industry would see the value in printing easy to see frame lines in such a spot, but they rarely do. (Just as I mentioned in the post about the train tunnel sequence.) Do they really think some "projectionist" with 10 prints to build up is going to go to the trouble to use a meter to find the frame line? Fat chance. Most of them just run down to the first image where they can make out the line and make the cut there, or go the other way and cut it after the 2 in the leader thus adding 2 seconds of black, silent film to the show. As for the way the Ziegfeld handled the Zhivago intermission, I am sure that it was due to the tight show schedule. Given that situation, I think that was OK. At least they did not cut off the intermission tag and entr'acte and go straight from the train fade out to the tunnel sequence.

As for the Ziegfeld itself, if anyone from Clearview reads this I want to thank you for running this series instead of just letting the house sit dark until Ice Age 2. In the early 70's I worked for Walter Reade in Atlanta, and one of my managers was a company man from New Jersey. He told me that the first two things the home office checked each morning was first, how did the Ziegfeld do?, and second, how did the rest of the circuit do? I wish there was a theatre like it still standing in Atlanta so I could work there. I have always wanted to see some of the old classics at The Ziegfeld and you have given me the chance. I was going to come up for West Side Story, but was snowed out. Hopefully I will have better luck this Wednesday when I come up for CE3K and Alien.

I am seeing Dr. Zhivago Thursday 3/16/06; I understand that the "intermission" music is actually the entr'acte music, but my question is...Do they close the white traveller curtain and raise the house lights to half for the intermission? Or do they show a blank screen during the intermission time.

Saps: On Saturday night the entr'acte ran on a blank screen with the lights off, but since the Clearview people have been reading these comments, who knows what tomorrow night will bring? I'll be there to see for myself.

Hi people:

I still consider myself the new guy, and am deeply indebted to your kind words re: the Friday intro to CE3K but also I am in absolute awe of the knowledge and enthusiasm that you people display. I always believed in what Marcus Loew said, "We sell tickets to theaters not movies." I think I got that right. In other words, how the movie is shown and where it is shown is just as important as the movie. I see that pride all over these postings. I think that the Ziegfeld mostly gets it right, and if not they're really working to. After the last screening I saw which was "Raiders," I was looking for Monique just in case I never made it back before CE3K. I was told that she was in the auditorium---I found her sweeping up popcorn with the rest of the staff--and she's the manager.

Regarding Craig-I sent him a head's up e-mail over the weekend just to make sure that he was cognizant of the audio issues that have been raised especially on Zhivago.

His reply:

"I have been reading the comments on Cinema Treasures and I know that we have a very loyal and vocal fan base out there!"

In all of my dealings with him, both phone and e-mail I have to say that he really wants this Classics Program to work and is very open to feedback, both good and bad. We all know the place has to make money to do this, and Craig really wants it to work. He welcomes our physical presence and financial support, our constructive criticism, and all the nice things that we can possibly say on WWW.Clearview.com, which will all go to his boss.

Overall, yeah with some relatively minor reservations. I think we are all having a great time. I could have probably asked Monique for a free ticket for CE3K given I'm introducing, instead I bought a ticket on line. I would even send a donation if they asked for one, I was a member of MOMA all of last year and only went to one screening. Not to knock MOMA-but Barry Lyndon at MOMA is not Barry Lyndon at the Ziegfeld.

FINALLY- VERY IMPORTANT VERY IMPORTANT VERY IMPORTANT

PLEASE IGNORE THE BLURB IN THE NEW ISSUE OF TIME OUT. WE ARE NOT SEEING THE "1980 SPECIAL EDITION" I WOULD NEVER INTRODUCE THAT OR EVEN SHOW UP--WE ARE SEEING THE "DEFINITIVE DIRECTOR'S CUT" (ON DVD IT'S THE COLLECTOR'S EDITION") I LOVE TONY AND AM A CHARTER SUBSCRIBER- I GOT INTO A BIG FIGHT WITH THEM TODAY ON THE PHONE ABOUT THIS. THEY DROPPED THE BALL- SINCE I HAD TO EDUCATE THEM THAT THERE REALLY IS A THIRD, BETTER EDITION. I THINK, AFTER TALKING WITH ME, THEY'LL NEVER SCREW THIS UP AGAIN.

THANKS TO EVERYONE FOR YOUR KIND WORDS AND SUPPORT-SEE YOU AT DEVIL'S TOWER.

GARY

Last night "Doctor Zhivago" was presented at the perfect LOUD volume level from beginning to end. The overture played with the white curtains closed, and they opened up while the MGM lion roared. There were no commercials or trailers, only the movie - just like 1965. I wonder if the commercials are only a weekend obligation - every weeknight show I've attended so far in the series didn't have them. I think there were more people there last night (a Thursday) than there were on Saturday. Probably "Zhivago" fans like me getting one last look at this beautiful epic film.

One bad thing: all "Alien" shows have been cancelled due to a print problem. More "2001" and "Close Encounters" shows have been added to replace "Alien".

Bill, how was the intermission handled?

The intermission was the same as Saturday night (no curtains, blank screen, entr'acte spliced to intermission tag) with one improvement: the house lights were turned up slightly. It's almost sacriligeous to say this, but if they did have a full 15-minute intermission I would never have caught my 12:15 AM bus back to New Jersey, so I wasn't too upset about it.

So the operator (I refuse to call him/her a projectionist) could not take the trouble to close the curtain on the intermission tag, and open them again at the end of the entr'acte music. As for the lights, I would not be surprised if that was done from a remote switch down in the lobby somewhere, so the operator does not have to get out of a chair and do any extra work. DISGRACEFULL!

But the white curtain was closed during the overture, which shows a bit of care in the presentation.

When I said I wasn't bothered by the lack of a full intermission at "Zhivago" that of course doesn't apply to "2001", which is a whole hour shorter and starts earlier besides. We'll see how the show goes tomorrow night.

If I see "2001" three more times (and I'm planning to) that'll make 50 times I've seen that movie in a theater. This has been over a span of 38 years so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but I'm sure you Cinema Treasures regulars will understand. A large majority of those 47 viewings were at the Ziegfeld, by the way.

Ok Clearview projectionists, listen up.
Assuming you get the complete print of 2001 please handle it as follows:

Overture: Raise stage curtain, lower lights to mid.
As overture ends lower lghts to full out, open title curtain as MGM logo appeares (do not show any white sheet!)

Intermission: close title curtain and stage curtain, making sure the two panels kiss and the stage curtain hits the stage as the intermission title fades out.

No music (non sync) played during intermission

Act two: raise stage curtain and lower house lights to 1/3rd as music begins. Half way thru the entr'acte music, cut lights to 2/3rd
leaving just enough light for patrons returning to seats
During the last few notes of the music, lower lights completly and open title curtain as first scene fades in.

End of movie: repeat intermission instructions and play exit music with both curtains closed and lights up.

Now take a bow, ya done good!

That's pretty much how I ran it at the Lafayette in 2004, Vito.

We had Gary Lockwood and Keir Dullea in attendance and they thought the show was great.

Atta boy Peter, I'm proud of you. There is absolutly no excuse for the guys at the Ziegfeld not to do the same.

I was at the show Pete put on in 2004, and it was definitely the best presentation of "2001" I'd seen since Cinerama at the Loew's Capitol in 1968. Having Keir and Gary in attendance gave it an extra dimension even the Capitol didn't have. It was a 35mm print, but the sound still shook the Lafayette to the rafters. I think people must've heard it out on the street. It was glorious!

Hi Guys:

Thanks for the heads up on the schedule change. I'm still introducing the evening showing of CE3K tonight. If you are there, please come up to say hello to me at the end of the film. I feel like I already know all of you but would love to shake hands and thank you for coming, personally.

Gary

Too bad about "Alien" - and so much for my thoughts of making it a triple feature on Sunday - but better they scrap the showing than present a poor print. Any details on this print problem? Was it a matter of someone actually checking the print and rejecting it for quality or something else?

And I'm dying to hear word of the print quality and presentation of "2001" and "CE3K" tonight or tomorrow. In any event, once again let me wish you good luck tonight Gary. Or should I say, 'break a leg'?

Gary: Looking forward to hearing your speech tonight. One more feature you'll never get at your local multiplex.

Ed: I don't recall exactly what the signs on the Ziegfeld doors said about the "Alien" print, and I didn't ask anyone. Maybe the print itself was unavailable for some reason. The Loew's Jersey screened "Alien" a couple of years ago - it was a little bit scratchy but basically OK.

Odd news about "Alien" as the film received a wide national re-release in the fall of 2003---I assume that quite a few new prints were struck at that time.

Nice blurb in the Sunday NY Times Arts and Leisure section on the Ziegfeld series (second to last page, in the section titled "The Week Ahead"). The writer comments on the prospect of seeing the "brain boggling triple feature" of "Alien," "Close Encounters" and "2001" in "Manhattan's most palatial movie palace." The writer also notes the "nicely discounted" admission price and as an aside, how Warner Bros. "notoriously botched" the re-release of "2001" in 2001, by "dumping it at Christmastime with next to no publicity" (that would be the 70MM engagement at the Astor Plaza).

Excellent speech last night by Gary. He even paid a fitting tribute to the dear old Roxy. I sat in approximately the same bad seat (4th row on the right) from where I first saw "Close Encounters" on the day after its premiere in 1977, in a vain attempt to re-create being 23 years old again.

Saw "2001" twice at the Ziegfeld today, just like I did several times back in 1974. Sitting in the front row, center seat sure brought back some good memories. The print, though not in mint condition, was good enough. But the sound was incredible - the seats in my row were vibrating.

I made a real pilgrimage out of it, walking past the sites of all the midtown theaters where I saw "2001" over the years. In geographical order from the bus terminal: Loew's Astor Plaza, Rivoli, Loew's Capitol, Radio City Music Hall, Ziegfeld.

Great memories Bill. I only saw one of those screenings you mentioned at the Loews Astor Plaza a few years ago which I believe was in 70mm. I also saw this once at the old Cinema Village, and I think maybe once at the Biograph. Tonight's screening however was not as sensational as the 70mm at the Loews AP. As you mentioned the print was not in mint conditon but was fine nonetheless.

Like I've said before several times here, this is and has been a great fesitival. I haven't complained much, but after tonight's screening of '2001' I can't help but file a major grievance which is this: the screen was not masked properly to fit the projected image of the film. The left and right side of the screen was too wide and left vertical black space along the soft border of the film image. For me this a huge pet peeve. Instead of a great presentation of a great film in a great theater,this looked like a poor revival screening in a lame first run cineplex. At this point after all of the films I have seen in this festival (West Side Story, Ben Hur, Singin' In the Rain and Dr. Zhivago) I thought the Ziegfeld had for the most part got this right. This is why I was so disappointed to see, and I hate to say this, such a medicocre presentation of this legendary film. As Bill metioned, the sound was GREAT. but why was the screen not fitted properly? It was for all of the other films I saw.

The other thing too is the Intermission parts of these films. Ben Hur and West Side Story had none. Tonight at '2001' there was one like the one at 'Dr Zhivago'. Both were too short. In my opinion intermission should be 10 minutes at the very least. Tonight and at Zhivago they were 3-4 minutes tops. Unless there is enough time to get out of your seat and either use the restroom or go to the concession, then there shouldn't be a intermission at all,because what is happening is people are getting out of their seats to do either of these things and returning to their seats too late missing the first few minutes of part two. I don't understand. If there isn't such a tight schedule between films like there is for '2001' why can't there be a long enough intermission?

Finally...and this has nothing to do with the theater management, there were people talking tonight during the finale sequence 'Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite'. I'll be damned if I can figure out why people think they have a right or a REASON to talk above a whisper during a film in a movie theater. I
have unfortunately encountered this in alot of revival situations-Film Forum, Lafayette/Suffern, Loews Jersey, and tonight at the Ziegfeld. In the left side of the theater around Row K there was a middle aged couple-late 40s early 50s who during the finale HAD to have a discussion. The women kept asking "what's going on? Is he alone in the room? what's going on here?" You know what? SHUT-UP! Discuss it after the film is over like normal people do. What the hell?

I am planning on going back on Thursday for the 4:30 screening of '2001'. A friend of mine who has never seen this film is coming with me. For the most part, great job Ziegfeld people, but am begging you-please mask the screen properly so this film can be seen 'the way it was meant to be'.

Until then 'klatu barrada nikto'!

Irv:

The new 35mm prints of 2001 are not in the same 'scope ratio as the other films you mentioned. When they made these new prints, WB kept the original 70mm aspect ratio (about 2.20:1 as opposed to the standard 35mm 'scope ratio of 2.35:1) by putting the vertical black pillars on the left and right. When running this film. it doesn't completely fill the width of the 'scope screen. When I ran it at the Lafayette in 2004, I was fortunate to be able to manually adjust the side masking on my screen and fit the image perfectly. I would guess that the Ziegfeld does not have manually-adjustable masking for something non-standard or they didn't notice. As for the intermission - or lack thereof - that is pretty inexcusable.

Regarding folks chatting - I find we sometimes get it at the Lafayette when there's a large senior citizen contingent.

Irv: Sorry you had to be bothered by talkers. There is so much pure silence in the second half of that film, any talking reverberates around the whole theater. Just so you know, there are no "2001" shows on Thursday. The last shows are Wednesday at 4:30 and 8:15. I'll be there for my 50th theatrical viewing at 8:15.

I was at the 8:15 screening of CE3K on Firday night. The print was in pristine condition. The sound and presentation were excellent. Gary's speech was very appropriate and reflected a lot of the sentiments posted here.

I was a theater manager for Loews and City Cinemas some years ago. I would always hope to have a staff as friendly and courteous as those at the Ziegfeld. They are wonderful. To the staff at Clearview Cinemas, congratulations and thank you for putting together a terrific series. This has been great fun and I hope it will continue, when possible.

Back to the Ziegfeld on Wednesday for 2001, then Lawrence!

Peter-yeah I thought maybe there was a chance that they couldn't do anything about the screen masking. On the other hand if you had the manual capability to correct it at the Lafayette, a much older theater, you would think that a place like the Ziegfeld could do it as well. Whatever the case, it's kind of unfortunate. I was really looking forward to another grand-slam screening of this. I guess I have my memories of the Astor Plaza screening. Now that I think of it, last summer The Paris made an attempt at doing revival screenings Saturdays at Midnight. They had a 70mm print of '2001' (that I missed). Wondering why the Ziegfeld didn't get a hold of that print. I'm guessing it probably cost more to rent or something? What's funny is during the end credits of this particular print of '2001' last night it said 'in CINERAMA". Yeah...we wish!

Dear Everybody:

Thank you for all the kind words that you've said about my "speech," Friday night at CE3K, I was a bit nervous as I hadn't spoken before a group in many years, but I did make every effort to talk about the importance of seeing films in theaters, for generations to follow, and my love for the Ziegfeld, with all it's flaws. So thank you for the great reception. I have a very good feeling that this program will continue, in whatever schedule and format, that can be feasible--and can only get better. In fact, the program was never supposed to last as long as it did. The positive feedback on those little white cards, the feedback here, (which Craig reads), and more feedback to clearviewcinemas.com can make it happen--and they welcome constructive criticism. There was a lot of confusion on the correct version of CE3K (although I really did meet someone at Friday's screening who likes to see Dreyfuss enter the spaceship). I worked very hard with Monique and then Craig, who actually got the print from Spielberg's people, whichj I agree looked great and sounded great. Would 70mm have looked better, hey I can't worry too much about these things. Just seeing that mothership turn over on the widescreen was good enough for me, and actually having the opportunity to introduce--an absolute peak moment in my life. And I encourage any of you to do the same for your favorite--all I had to do was ask and then figure out what I wanted to say. As the new guy, again, I thank you, and feel that I have a whole new group of friends. See you at Lawrence

One last thing, that someone will get a chuckle about. In August of 2004, I saw "2001" at the Walter Reade at Lincoln Center. Beautiful picture and sound. Right before the screening-the management got up to apologize that they had gotten "the wrong print." This one had the appropriate intermission, so he was apologizing that there would be a break in the film. Go Figure!!

Gary

P.S.

Got the following e-mail from Craig-which I'm sure he won't mind my sharing with you.

"Hi Gary,

Happy to hear that everything went well. I wanted to be there, but had
to be at another theatre for our Grand Opening in NJ.

Yes, I agree with you on the classics! I think it's a great program
that can only grow in time. Let's see what happens...."

Well, to me the fact that a place like the Ziegfeld still exists, as I tried to convey in my talk, is both a miracle and a blessing. And the classics program--so fabulous that I think I am not overstepping any bounds to say that we would all like this to continue and indeed "grow in time." I believe that we and everyone we know can make this "grow in time." I don't need to and don't want to preach-we all know what we have to do. I'd rather spend my time enjoying more big-screen classics at the Ziegfeld. Each of us can think of 40 more cherished titles. I would start with "The Shawshank Redemption" which I've never seen in a thatre--because "Hope is a good thing."

To Arabia......


Gary

Craig

Correction:

The post was from Gary, the e-mail quoted was from Craig

Thanks

Just wondering... I've stated before that I will go out of my way to see any old crap that they slap up on the screen at the Ziegfeld just to try to help support the place. Anyone else do this? Let me tell you, I have seen new releases here on a Sturday night with just 19 people (sometimes less) in the house, and meanwhile, the same movie will be a sell-out on 42nd Street. A few weeks of "classics" at $7.50 a pop sure as hell ain't gonna keep the joint open. What I'm saying is... if you're gonna see Ice Age 2 and it's showing across the street from your house, make the trip to the Ziegfeld instead. And buy some popcorn and soda at the concession stand - you all KNOW that's where they make their real money... I've seen 7 of the classics and I've seen people smuggle in complete meals at all of them. Shame on you!

Movieguy718... My lady and I paid $30 for a pair of tickets to the 1pm "2001" as well as the 4:30 "Close Encounters" on Sunday and, since I was settling in for a day of classic movie-going, we brought with us a sandwich from our local deli to split for lunch between shows. I also purchased a medium popcorn, a bag of M&M's and 2 large soft drinks from the Ziegfeld's candy counter. I felt no shame. What I felt was well fed and fiscally responsible!

Having said that, I also felt immensely entertained by these two terrific movies! "2001" is absolutely a magnificent work of art unlike any other film and stands as my all time favorite motion picture. My lady fair - having never seen the film before and not being particularly fond of anything avant-garde, let alone sci-fi - did not share my enthusiasm for the movie. In fact, she hated it. To each their own, but happily, she did very much enjoy "Close Encounters" (another film she had never before seen).

As for presentation, they played the usual interminable ads (no trailers) along with a short commercial presentation called "the clearview" or something that I suspect runs before every feature along the chain. That started about 15 minutes before each show time, so that the movies themselves started at the advertised times. The curtain was closed completely for the "2001" overture, but the house lights seemed to remain at full strength. As others have commented about previous screenings, the film played straight through the Intermission card into the entr'acte music in complete darkness and with the curtains fully open. The print for "2001" was very scratchy with signs of serious wear at the real changes and at least two instances of dropped frames, but the sound was strong and clear and in full surround. "Close Encounters" was a positively perfect print; as if it were struck just for this occasion. Impeccable picture quality and sound presentation (and no pesky overtures or intermissions to muck about with the projectionist).

The theater was not as filled as it was for either "West Side Story" or "Ben-Hur" - the other classics I've taken in during the series. I'd say the theater was 1/4 to 1/3 full at most, but the crowd was extremely enthusiastic and respectfully quiet throughout both films. Oh, and someone had mentioned above that the weekday showings did not feature commercials and I forgot to respond that the Tuesday night "West Side Story" did include a number of ads prior to the screening. Perhaps they dropped showing them during the week at a later date?

Gary... do you have a copy of your comments that you can post here on CT for those of us who were unable to make it down? Finally, the sign on the door regarding "Alien" states that the screenings were cancelled due to a "damaged" print. Next stop, Arabia!

Whenever I visited New York, I always went to see a film here, the Ziegfeld even managed to make "crappy" movies look good, now, if I read some of the recent postings correctly, they manage to make good movies look "crappy"! Showmanship is rare these days, if there is a projectionist in the booth(s) he/she is likely running anywhere from 12 to 30 screens, having been there and done that, it's almost impossible to keep an eagle eye on everything, it's thread and start all day. And most of these theatres have managers or high school kids running the film. Even the union projectionists (I was one) that are working today probably have never done a manual start or close-in, have never done a changeover and wouldn't know what a carbon arc lamp was if they tripped over it! I wish we could have some theatres that still did it the way we used to, but it ain't gonna happen. It's all about money, which is exactly why there are no 70mm releases anymore, they herd the masses in like cattle, subject them to minutes of on-screen ads and put on a lousy presentation and call it a day! As long as people are willing to put up with this abuse, it won't change, and if the Ziegfeld has lowered itself to this level, the purists like me and you are in alot of trouble!

Hal T... The series at the Ziegfeld is actually quite an exciting and enjoyable affair. There is still nothing like seeing a great movie on a nice sized screen in a big theater like the Ziegfeld. There are many aspects of the presentation that have come under the scrutiny of our collective purist's eye, but I think most of us will agree that Clearview has been very responsive to these criticisms and suggestions. There are still some kinks to be worked out (the whole intermission business and getting hold of good 70mm prints) but on the whole, I think the reaction here on this board has been overwhelmingly positive.

I would appreciate the people in the booth at the Ziegfeld not be referred to as projectionists. They are mearly threading a projector feed by a platter, pushing a button and then sitting on their butts for two+ hours. Hal made some very good points, the Zeigfeld guys would not have lasted a day in my time. They have only one screen to attend to and could do a lot more to enhance the presentation with a little showmanship.They choose not to bother.

Gee Hal. "It's all about the money?" When super budget productions like WEST SIDE STORY, BEN-HUR, 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY and LAWRENCE OF ARABIA were produced they were even bigger risks than today's films which can generate millions in a weekend. It was even more about the money then when one screw-up on Broadway could mean 50% of the film's world wide gross. These older classics were often ruined by bad projectionists, rude customers (juvenile delinquents, we called them) and careless sloppy staff. If you really want to remember how cattle were herded in the good old days go to a Christmas show at Radio City Music Hall.

I think if you read the posts above, The Ziegfeld suffers from none of these and I cannot say the same was the case during the Walter Reade/Cineplex Odeon days.

I think your memories are rose coloured and you need let go and give credit where it is due! Most new cinemas have great presentation. It is most of the movies that tend to be crap and make this series so special.

WOW: Everyone, can we all calm down, please. Remember what Craig told me above, "A great program that can only grow in time!" The man really wants this program to succeed, and is open to constructive criticism. But he is not the President of Clearview Cinemas. The first time I ever spoke to him, I offered some "constructive criticism." He immediately said, "I know, the overtures, the intermissions..." And then I said, "Not at all." I told him that Clearview could have done a better job in getting the word out to everyone about the program. Sure, print quality, sound, overtures, ALL IMPORTANT! I agree with all of you, But as a start, I am grateful for two things, first, that the Ziegfeld is still standing and functioning as a theatre and secondly, that they gambled on two months of classics, yes, TWO MONTHS, as an experiment.

The "kinks" can work out in time, as long as the program can continue. I really believe that a first priority is to ensure that the program can continue on some regular basis.

Hey, I respect all of your opinions, I wouldn't settle for the 1980 Special Edition of CE3K, I would have been embarrased to introduce it. I was in constant touch with Craig about this, and guess what, that great print that you've all been complimenting came directly from Steven Spielberg. I am not making this up. Craig worked very hard to make that happen!

What can I say, of course, Clearview has to make money to keep the place open and at the same time is gambling that a festival of movies that are all available on home video will draw an audience. I absolutely applaud that. Would CE3K or Lawrence look as good at the Film Forum? I recently saw "Barry Lyndon" at MOMA, nice theatre, but not the Ziegfeld. I am not saying, lower your standards, settle for mediocrity--I wanted a great print and the "right" version of CE3K, and best of all I wanted to introduce it. I worked very hard to make all this happen ( and screamed at the "Film Critic" at 'Time Out' for his ignorance of the 'Definitive Director's Cut' )

You have issues, tell Craig about them, but please remember that if this program can't continue, then all the issues will be dead issues-and then we will have nothing but our DVD's.

Thank you for asking for a copy of my intro: Here it is:

Good Evening and Welcome:

WE WANT EVERYTHING TO BE PERFECT TONIGHT ! SO, RIGHT BEFORE

YOU CAME IN, WE DID A SOUND CHECK, THEN WE DID A PICTURE

CHECK,--NOW, ONE MORE CHECK TO DO! WE NEED TO DO AN

ENTHUSIASM CHECK- HOW IS EVERYBODY’S ENTHUSIAM!!!


SO, MAYBE YOU WERE EXPECTING STEVEN SPIELBERG TONIGHT?

WELL, CAN YOU KEEP A SECRET? HE’S JUST A LITTLE TOO BUSY RIGHT

NOW –AND THAT’S BECAUSE HE, AND GEORGE LUCAS, AND HARRISON

FORD ARE IN pre-production on Indiana Jones 4.

BUT I DID GET A RATHER CRYPTIC E-MAIL FROM HIM:

It said, “Gary, make sure YOU eat before your talk tonight—I suggest a BIG PLATE of

mashed potatoes and a VERY LARGE FORK. AND STOP PLAYING WITH THE

POTATOES!” WHAT’S THAT ALL ABOUT?????


OK, I BETTER GET STARTED OR MY INTRO WILL BE LONGER THAN BEN-HUR

In a few moments, we’ll be on our way, to “THE DARK SIDE OF THE MOON.” AND

I THANK ALL OF YOU, IN ADVANCE, FOR THIS VERY SPECIAL

OPPORTUNITY TO PREPARE YOU FOR THE JOURNEY.

About 20 years ago, I got the shock of my life. I used to be a high school teacher, and I

loved to talk movies with kids. And one day, with one young man, the movie was Jaws.

And we were both really into it. He loved the thrill and tension AND ROLLER

COASTER RIDE of the movie, but as a teacher, I wanted him to know what makes great

films work—the brilliant editing that propels the story forward; the underwater shots

from the shark’s point of view, that enhance the terror; that pulsating, pounding,

magnificent score by John Williams; and, especially Spielberg’s astonishing use of the

wide screen as, Quint is dragged, kicking and screaming, across the entire deck of the

sinking Orca in his final showdown with the shark . And this kid, who loved Jaws, and

who was really smart, just wasn’t getting it. AND I COULDN’T UNDERSTAND

WHY, WE BOTH HAD SEEN THE SAME MOVIE! OR SO I THOUGHT !!!

So finally he said to me. Mr. Joseph,” You have to understand something, I’ve only seen

Jaws on videotape, never in a theater.”
Now if that isn’t a MANDATE FOR what’s been going on IN THIS THEATER for the

last SEVERAL WEEKS, I don’t know what is.

LOOK: IN THE PAST FEW WEEKS

1, YOU’VE BEEN MADE OFFERS THAT YOU CAN’T REFUSE

2. YOU’VE RACED CHARIOTS WITH JUDAH BEN-HUR

3, YOU’VE RUMBLED IN THE STREETS WITH THE JETS AND THE SHARKS.

4. YOU’VE FOUND LOVE IN THE ICE AND SNOW WITH Dr. ZHIVAGO

5. YOU’VE BEEN SINGING IN THE RAIN

6. THIS AFTERNOON, YOU WENT TO JUPITER AND BEYOND..

7. NEXT WEEK YOU RIDE INTO THE DESERT WITH LAWRENCE, AND YOU KNOW THE CAMELS WILL BE HUGE.

DOES IT GET ANY BETTER THAN THIS?

WELL, ACTUALLY, ……..IT DOES! RIGHT NOW!

This REALLY is an HISTORIC EVENING— because” Close Encounters” had its world premiere-right here- at the Ziegfeld on November 16, 1977.

The next morning in The New York Times, Vincent Canby wrote:” Steven Spielberg’s giant, spectacular Close Encounters of the Third Kind is one of the best, most-elaborate science fiction movies ever made----- The film is breathtaking----- the Close Encounter in which the earthlings and the alien creatures come together, a sequence as beautiful as anything I’ve ever seen, has been deliberately designed to suggest a religious experience of the first kind. Whether or not you believe it, this climax involves the imagination in surprising, moving ways. This is a day in which the earth might have stood still. If indeed, we are not alone, it would be fun to believe that the creatures who one day visit us are of the order that Mr. Spielberg has conceived.”

Now, speaking of “religious experiences” just a few blocks from here, there once stood the ultimate Movie Palace, so fabulous and beautiful, that it was dubbed the “Cathedral of the Motion Picture.” ANYBODY REMEMBER ? This was the world famous ROXY THEATRE.

NOW, GET THIS: Almost 6000 seats, six box offices, a five story grand foyer and rotunda, ushers in black tie, dazzling Baroque décor, lounges, smoking rooms, three organ consoles, twenty-one-bell cathedral chimes, a resident symphony orchestra of 110 musicians and four conductors, a chorus of one hundred voices, and a ballet company of fifty dancers.

Oh yes, and one other thing—the Roxy showed great movies on a great big screen---for JUST over three decades. All gone, like the rest of New York’s GREAT single screen MOVIE palaces including, most recently, Loew’s Astor Plaza.

ALL GONE EXCEPT FOR THE ZIEGFELD!

BUT THE ZIEGFELD IS SO MUCH MORE THAN A BIG SCREEN AND BIG SOUND, THE ZIEGFELD WOULD NOT BE THE ZIEGFELD WITHOUT THESE HARD WORKING PROFESSIONALS WHO PRIDEFULLY RUN THIS PLACE—ALL HERE TO MAKE YOUR ZIEGFELD EXPERIENCE THE ABSOLUTE BEST!

For those of you in the audience who have experienced Close Encounters on the “big screen,” well, you know why you are back here tonight—I think it has something to do with those mashed potatoes. But for those of you who have never seen the film, or heaven forbid, those of you who have only seen it on home video or TV, I promise you ONE HELL OF A RIDE.

The real Close Encounters aficionados know that there are multiple versions of the film, but, don’t worry, tonight we are going to see the GREATEST--- Spielberg’s Definitive Director’s Cut from 1998. You don’t have to go inside the spaceship with Roy Neary—by film’s end, your own imagination will take you there as John Williams’s music soars!

But just before that, in one of my favorite scenes, the scientist, Claude Lacombe, asks Roy Neary, “Mr. Neary, what do you want?” And Neary answers, “I just want to know that it’s really happening.”

Well, tonight------- as Norma Desmond would say------ for all you wonderful people out there in the dark--- here---- at the world famous Ziegfeld----- “ It is really happening!”

As they say in the film:

“I DON’T THINK WE COULD ASK FOR A MORE BEAUTIFUL EVENING, DO YOU?

Thank you for coming and enjoy the show!


Gary

Cool intro Gary. Nice bit of trivia there on the date of the premiere of CE3K at the Ziegfeld. That very day was my 11th birthday. Wonder what I was doing that day, can't even remember.

In regard to Hal, Al, and vito's previous comments. I agree that there is some revisionism going on here in terms of how theaters used to be. At the same time, I think I'd have to say that there is definitely something missing with what's left of today's movie going experiences. Al you're totally right. There are some theaters, a few in Manhattan, that actually are cool theaters. Tower East (haven't been there in a while) is a good one, and of course The Paris. The product just isn't out there often enoughto get people into the seats. Most of the films today, as we've stated one way or another, totally suck!

Ed-agree with you 100%. Just about everybody here including myself has had a grievance with some of the presentations during this series. And they're all prety valid. But overall this has been a great series and a real positive experience. Can't think of a better way to get through the last days of another desolate winter in New York. I hope Clearview/Ziegfeld finds a way to continue it in some form in the future. One thing that I can't complain about anymore is how people in the entertainment business don't take chances any longer. This was a big gamble but a great idea and hopefully the receipts will prove that after the final showing of 'Lawrence of Arabia'.

Irv:
Irv

Thanks for the kind words, I'll probably be at the afternoon screening of Lawrence on Saturday and am thinking of asking Craig to talk again in light of Premiere's voting O'Toole's performance as the greatest in film history (see newest issue) I have Lawrence on VHS, laser, and DVD-(I also have a home theatre with an 80 inch screen.) I refuse to watch any of them-can't match the Ziegfeld experience. Isn't this what it's all about?

Gary

Gary

Gee whiz guys! When I said it was all about the money I wasn't trying to imply that money was the only issue, it was an oversimplification. My point was, the modern economics of theatre operation do not allow for roadshow type presentations in this day and age, and the cost of making 70mm prints combined with booth equipment costs simply discourage the use of 70mm prints. This is unfortunate, the studios do not want to spend the dollars to make 70's and the theatre owners do not want to spend the money on the equipment because there are no prints to run, kind of a nasty circle don't you think? I do not have a solution, unless the theatre owners insist on making 70's available the studios won't make them, plain and simple problem. And yes I would agree that RCMH does herd people in like cattle, it's a 6000 seat theatre for crying out loud! How else would they deal with it?
The Egyptian out in LA runs 70mm festivals from time to time, seems the Ziegfeld would be a wonderful venue for such a festival, judging from some of the postings, I'm not the only one that feels that way.

Hal, I'd love to see 70 mm film festivals, and that includes some of the recent Ziegfeld classics that weren't presented in 70 mm but were issued that way.

As to new releases, there's another problem. 70 mm presentations are expensive, as you know. They was more of an effeciency of scale when they were presented in single screen flagship houses in the cities. One 70 mm print was shown in an auditorium that ranged from 500 seats (such as the Paris) to 1000+ seats. Unfortunately, there's very few such screens left! The blockbuster movie is often presented in a multiplex every half hour, requiring several prints, and at the same time throughout the city & suburbs since there's no more downtown exclusive for maintream movies. The cost of making, shipping, and showing all those 70 mm prints would be high.

No doubt the old days were better: 70 mm 6 track on giant screens in single screen moviehouses!

RE the world premiere of "Close Encounters" at the Ziegfeld:

The film opened to the public on Nov. 16, 1977; the world premiere event was held the previous night.

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_new_york_1977.htm

It has been mentioned here that this "Definitive Director's Edition" of "Close Encounters" is a third version of the film. I consider it a fourth version, with the third version being the network television edition since it, like this new cut, was essentially a combination of the '77 & '80 theatrical cuts. (There was also the Criterion laserdisc edition which, I believe, allowed some user programming to include/exclude certain scenes.)

Which version is your favorite?

I've enjoyed reading everyone's postings regarding the Ziegfeld's festival. It's about time New York City had one of these! We on the west coast have been rather spoiled the past few years with an amazing array of screenings of films, especially those of the Cinerama and 70mm variety that until recently I figured I'd never get to see in my lifetime in their original form. I always thought it was a bit weird that New York, given its size and importance, did not seem have nearly as many film festivals as in L.A.

What do you guys think of this: If anyone who has attended the Ziegfeld fest wishes to do a write-up -- could be something similar to the postings here, or perhaps even a full article -- Bill Kallay and I will consider posting it on our website, FromScriptToDVD.com. Perhaps this could help spread the word and encourage the Ziegfeld and other venues to consider more classic film festivals in the future. If interested, give me or Bill a shout.

You are right about the Criterion laserdisc edition of Close Encounters. Its possible to view 3 different versions of the film but you have to stop the film to access the right scenes on the disc.

Hi Michael, I would love your opinion on this.
I feel the Ziegfeld is showing very little showmanship in the manner in which they present the classic old roadshows, do you think I am wrong with my rants about how poorly the Ziegfeld handles the intermissions? How are they done in LA?

Which version is your favorite?
posted by Michael Coate on Mar 21, 2006 at 11:57pm

Without a doubt, the 1977 original version of "Close Encounters" is my favorite, maybe because I saw it so many times back then. I still get a little jolt whenever one of the newer versions cuts abruptly to the Gobi Desert, or when the scenes come on in re-arranged order - it just feels wrong to me. I wish I could let Spielberg and especially Lucas know that the version of your film that the vast majority of its audience first fell in love with should always be the definitive version.

I'm not sure about that. This latest version that I saw at the Ziegfeld was incredible. I seem to recall thinking back in '77 that the film dragged a bit in the mid section. I think Spielberg succeeded in tightening up the film with his edits. Again, I only saw the original once and then the "Special Edition" once in 1980 (the ending of which left me non-plussed).

As the one who introduced CE3K last Friday evening, I am going to take the liberty to respond--YOU ARE ALL RIGHT! If I could have pulled it off, I, too, would have lobbied for the'77 original that had me so taken away that I didn't realize that I was watching it with a 102 fever ( I was out of work for three days after with the flu). This whole issue of "best version" has ben going on for years. When I first saw the 1980 "Special Edition" ( only on video), what upset me the most was not the ending, but the SEVERE editing of Neary's sequence in which he rips the house and garden apart as he attempts to re-create the vision that's haunting him, i.e., Devil's tower. To me this is the heart and soul of the film. Yeah I also miss the original scene at the power station, Roy looking at the pillow,etc. But without watching Roy go totally nuts as he does in the original, I thought the film was ruined.

The "Definitive Director's Cut," I'll take that anyday!

I've asked Craig to allow me to say a few words at the Saturday afternoon screening of "Lawrence," so you may be seeing my puss again.

Thanks,

Gary

It looks like the 70MM print of "Lawrence of Arabia" will be a DTS soundtrack version. Note it is a used print.

I wonder if it's the print that the Ziegfeld played a couple of years back? How many 70mm prints could there be in the U.S.? And how many times could each of them have been screened since they were struck, given the dearth of proper facilities.

There might be only 3 or 4 prints available since the last re-issue. Columbia has one that only has very few shows on it for studio screenings only. It's not how many times they have been screened, but how it was handled at those screenings.

Hello to all,

Just want to throw my two cents regarding the roadshow presentations: I have attended many classic film engagements in the LA and Orange County areas. It's my experience that, with only one notable exception, intermissions and overtures are generally handled well. A minor discrepancy may be proper light fading during the overtures, but it's not that big of a deal. I emphasize, "may be". I'll have to pay more attention to that next time. The notable exception was a presentation of "El Cid" in a theatre at Orange County, which shall remain nameless, to protect the guilty. I just barely had time to return to my seat from the restroom during the, er, "intermission".

As far as CE3K, I'll reiterate that the '77 version is much better in terms of story continuity. The '80 scenes with Neary inside the spaceship were, in my opinion, a waste of time. The Director's Edition is not bad, and I try to catch it on the big screen when possible.

The Heights Theatre in Minneapolis is currently running a 70 mm DTS engagement of "Lawrence of Arabia".

JSA

Tonight, for my 50th time seeing "2001" in a theater, I sat in the upstairs section of the Ziegfeld, something I hadn't done since 1970. While the screen did seem smaller from there (unless you took into account and put into proportion the people sitting underneath it), the sound was even more impressive as it boomed from the Klipsch Professional speakers all around the building. What a beautiful theater the Ziegfeld is. Can't wait to see "Lawrence" there on Friday night.

To the staff at Clearview Cinemas: The next time you do a Classics series, would you consider setting a "series pass" admission price? Either that, or please consider renting me a seat by the month.

Seven visits to the Ziegfeld in a month. Seven great movies. A few minor tweaks to the presentation of these films would be great; longer intermissions, lights at 1/2 during the overture. Presentation and sound overall, has been great throughout the whole series.

Once again, thank you for a great series.

35 years after deciding that it would be an entertaining thing to do, I can finally check "seeing a movie at the Ziegfeld" off of life's to do list. Specifically, the 1 PM showing of CE3K yesterday. I was not disappointed. The experience was just what I expected after reading all of the posts here. Namely, a friendly, professional staff which greeted each person individually, a clean facility, big screen, booming sound, lax effort from the projection booth, and a professional manager (Nicki, I believe she said her name was) who did not mind taking a few moments to talk with an out of owner.

While never one of my all time favorites, CE3K is a big, class, production. Yesterday took me back to a time you could go to a movie and even if the movie was not exceptional, enjoy a theatre with some class and individuality, a big screen, and a good presentation (well, can't have everything). In short going to a movie was "an event." Appearance wise, the auditorium looked just as it does in the fine two page layout devoted to it in the Cinema Treasures book. I see what people are talking about when the size of the screen is the subject. To their credit, most megaplexes built today do try to pack as large a screen as possible into their small auditoriums, but projection wise, you do not get the same look as you do when using a screen that is large in its own right, and not just in relation to its auditorium size. While in relation to the house the Ziegfeld screen may look small, especially on a flat movie, but I am sure it beats anything in a multiplex. I sat on row "O" and enjoyed the nearly forgotten experience of having to track the action back and forth across the screen. This is something I can not do in a megaplex because when I sit close enough to do that the focus is way off.

Another thing that I noticed was the small size of the lobby. Back in the old days of exclusive runs and roadshows and sellouts, I do not know what they did with the crowd waiting for the next show. I assume that they used the plaza between the theatre and the back of the building facing 6th Avenue, but it was cold and windy yesterday, and this is Spring. I would hate to be the manager who had to tell hundreds of patrons for Cabaret or Barry Lyndon, or Star Is Born, that they would have to wait outside in the New York winter. Layout wise, the lobby and auditorium are almost an exact copy of the old Rialto here in Atlanta, although the seating area is larger and the lobby smaller. I did enjoy seeing the seating chart with the Ziegfeld logo at the bottom posted on the wall leading to the auditorium. Specifically, the very distinctive and in my opinion, attractive trademark Walter Reade Organization logo script.

Although not technically part of this site, I would also like to say what a great place New York is to visit. From the four MTA bus drivers, to the Ziegfeld staff, the Times Square Visitor Center staff, the NYPD officers, and the floor staff of the AMC Empire, everyone I met was not only helpful, but polite and friendly while being so. Even the concierge at the condos now occupying part of the old Taft Hotel building was more than happy to spare me a few minutes to talk about the old hotel and Roxy Theatre. The Delta employees at LGA were good natured, even when dealing with some grumpy passengers when our flight back to Atlanta was cancelled. I have visited New York about a dozen times since my first visit in 1984, and have always thought that it did not deserve its "in your face" reputation especially when putting up with tourists. Since Rudy's quality of life campaign took hold, I have never had even the slightest unpleasant experience in the Big Apple, and I always use the MTA to get around which means I have at least casual contact with many people.

In fact, the only unpleasant experience of the day was dealing with the usual panhandling on the train from the Atlanta airport back home. I guess the reason New York, or at least the Manhattan part of it, is so nice is that all of the undesirables have been shipped to Atlanta where they inhabit the transit system and downtown, and are a protected species.

As for Clearview, I wish you good business at the Ziegfeld, but should you hit another bump in the booking road I hope you will consider putting something like this festival on the schedule again.

Stan:

Go to customer comments on www.clearviewcinemas.com and tell them of your nice visit and Ziegfeld experience, it will go a long way towards ensuring that the festival will be a continuing event. By the way, I've been to Atlanta twice. No complaints-people very nice to me.

Thanks,

Gary

Will there or will there not be a 2:30 p.m. showing this weekend of "Lawrence"? There's no 2:30 show scheduled on the theater's website. Thanks, Gary!

When I saw Independance day the ticket holders line went 3/4 of the way around the block! There really is no place to put the crowd waiting for the next show other than outside.

you're right! I don't see a 2:30 pm show for Saturday, but one for Sunday. This doesn't make any sense, but something may have changed. I'll call the theatre later for clarification. Thanks for the heads-up.

Gary

I wouldn't be surprised if the Ziegfeld is closed to the public on Saturday afternoon for a screening of "Ice Age 2." Not unheard of for studios to hold special preview screenings for family oriented films during the daytime (to attract celebrities with their kids).

Just checked with the box office and, indeed, there is a special screening of something instead of a 2:30 showing of "Lawrence",which will be shown Saturday only at night (I'll be there) and twice on Sunday. She did apologize and own up to the fact that it was advertised wrong in the original flyer distributed at the theater.

Gary

Problems with "Lawrence" last night: the DTS soundtrack was about a half-second out of sync during many scenes. There was also some jiggling of the image during the first half of the film. BUT ... these problems were most likely the fault of the print itself, and not the Ziegfeld. Once the commercials and "The Clearview" promotional reel were over with, the presentation was absolutely perfect, in best early '60's roadshow style. Full intermission, overture, exit music, curtains, etc. Even with those technical flaws taken into account, there is simply nothing else like seeing "Lawrence of Arabia" in 70mm. I can't wait to see it again on Wednesday.

I was at the Zeigfeld last night with Bill. I found the sound problems to be most disturbing, and the image instability to be very annoying. However, like Bill said, the 70mm presentation was awesome. I can't remember when I've seen an image this sharp with that much clarity. The print quality was excellent with great color/contrast and onyy minor lines on the base side. Taking the good with the bad, I would have preferred the sound were in sync, and I do find the theater at fault for that because there are ways to correct for that. The instability was probably print related as a projector with problems like this tends to do it all the time. The manager gave me a pair of passes for future shows as an apology for the faults, but I then found out they were only good for 2 weeks.

Fabulous presentation of "Lawrence" Saturday night- as the "festival" is drawing to a close, let's try to keep the momentum going for the future. What was good about this two month delight? What would you want for the future? A Rodgers & Hammerstein week? Oklahoma in Todd-AO? Jaws? River Kwai? Spartacus? Ten Commandments?
Midnight Cowboy? French Connection? Dog Day Afternoon? send to www.clearviewcinemas.com Have some nice things to say about Craig, Monique, Nikki, Marvin, everybody else. This is your Ziegfeld and we can make it happen!!!

Respectfully submitted,
and thanks for the fun, Ed, Pablo, Bill, Irv-EVERYBODY-AWESOME

GARY

I haven't made to any of the screenings of LOA yet, but I will be there before the end of the week and I will definitely put my two cents in with Clearview for possible future festivals.

A GREAT SUNDAY NIGHT AT THE ZIEGFELD - My parter and I attended the 7:30 screening of Lawrence of Arabia on March 25. Everything was great; sound and presentation, spectacular. Shortly after the beginning of Act II, the film broke and burned. Five minutes later, the manager (sadly, I don't know her name) came out to inform us that Marvin could not fix the problem and offered us passes to return at a later date. That was good customer service.

Suddenly, a gentleman sitting two seats away from us stood up and announced, "I can help fix it." With the audience cheering, he and a few other projectionists in attendance went up to the booth and fixed the problem. Ten minutes later, to more cheers, the movie resumed. The gentleman sitting next to us returned to his seat with the piece of film that broke. To top is all off, we were still given passes to come back. That was EXCELLENT customer service.

My partner and I thought it added to our enjoyment that the audience was allowed to get involved. Who were they that got up and saved the show? You guys were amazing!

I had the oppportunity to attend six screenings since the series began. I enjoyed all of them. I was told that the Classics Series will continue during the slow months. I hope that the next time it happens, the Hollywood Classics series will take off and play to sold out houses.

I've wanted to see a series like this in New York for as long as I can remember. Thank you, Clearview for putting it together. WELL DONE!

Sounds like one of those guys could have been Vito.

A nice balance: an audience member spoiled the "Zhivago" show on March 11th, and audience members saved the showing of "Lawrence" last night.

I'm sure Sony Pictures will be so very happy to hear that the Ziegfeld ruined a reel of one of their expensive 70mm prints of Lawrence of Arabia and then let an audience member fix the problem. Way to go!

Wow! Wow! Wow! INCREDIBLE STORY--LADIES & GENTLEMEN, WE CAN AND ARE MAKING THIS HAPPEN.

IT IS WRITTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


CONGRATULATIONS ALL!


GARY

A note: The Ziegfeld did not "ruin" anything. The film broke. It's a story as old as the art of motion picture projection and one I am sure every licensed (and unlicensed) projectionist can tell.

I'm confident Sony Pictures will not go under.

It's a sad commentary on showmanship when an incident like the one described above is called "A great Sunday night at the Ziegfeld."

Maybe "ruined" is too strong a word. How about damaged an expensive reel of film, thereby spoiling the show. The film had been running for days without incident, other than the unforgivable sound sync issue, it is extrememly unlikely that it simply "broke".

If I were Sony, they'd never get another 70mm print until they demonstrate proper maintenance and training of staff.

It sounds like to me that the problem with the film break was a brain wrap, which is a major problem when running platters. The almost loss of a show would not have happened if they would just run reel-to-reel. Sure the film can break running reel-to-reel, but the show can resume in just a few minutes, a brain wrap can take a very long time to untangle and can cause major damage to both the print AND the projection equipment Why on earth do they insist on using a platter in a single screen with such precious cargo as the classics?
I know all about the "Backdraft" disaster and why the platters were installed, but let me tell you, platters are far more troublesome, and are much more likly to ruin a show than the very rare time a projectionist runs the wrong reel.

Bad sound sync and projector jitter put a crimp on my show. Now the film breaks. More passes are issued, for what TWO WEEEKS again? I hadn't been to the Ziegfeld in years and I had good memories of it. This is what I get presented with, the same old shit presentation problems I expect at the run-of-the-mill multiplex. This was a SPECIAL presentation, in a SPECIAL format. They should have been prepared. While I enjoyed the 70mm presentation in spite of the flaws, there should have been no flaws. To their credit the film was in perfect focus and brightly lit, but the print should have been run in rehersal to check for problems and the sound issue could have been addressed, the jitter could have been looked into. It's inexcusable. What Bob Furmanek and Pete Appruzzese say are correct, it is bad showmanship, and trust me, both those fellows know what showmanship is.

Regarding the sync problem with "Lawrence. As most of you know
DTS (Digital Theater Sound), is a motion picture sound system format that stores a digital soundtrack on separate CD-ROM discs,a timecode is read off the print, and the corresponding digital soundtrack info is retrieved off of the CD-ROM, keeping the soundtrack in sync.
Because the computer is constantly analyzing the timecode and matching the audio from the CD to it, the sound is seldom out of sync with the picture. If the problem was intermittent, or reel to reel, I would say there is a possibility of the problem being with the timecode, if all of the reels had the problem, the more likely is a problem with the DTS processor or 70mm reader, too bad it was not addressed and corrected after the first showing.

It was there the entire show. All someone had to do was adjust the digital offset delay. But the projectionist is probably not allowed (or knows how) to do this, that's for a "tech" to do. Had the film been prescreened, they could have gotten someone in to fix it. I'm sorry, it's inexcusable to run a film out of sync, and for FOUR hours on a SPECIAL presentation of a 70mm film. I tend to notice these things even if off by a few frames because I project myself. When the general audience notices it, it's BAD. First impressions are lasting impressions. This was my first time to this theater in 30 years. I'll remember what I saw and how Clearview doesn't think any more of this venue than they do of the silly little black box screening rooms they run at their other multiplexes.

Oh and one more thing, please tell Marvin the "projectionist", who could not fix the brain wrap, to try and increase the pressure on the film bands in the gate to help with the jitter problem. I would also be sure to match the serial numbers on the gate or film trap to the one on the projector, there are two projectors in the Ziegfeld booth and the gates should not be interchanged, they are machined to each projector. perhaps they installed the wrong gate in the projector they are using with that wonderfull platter.

The sync sound problem was intermittent. The first scene after intermission (the conversation between Jackson Bentley and Feisal's servant) started out in perfect sync. In the middle of the next scene, between Feisal and Bentley, the sync went off again. The last reels of the film ran with no problem.

Good point Jeff, I seriously doubt Marvin would know what the digital offset delay is or how to adjust it. Of course, it should be done by a tech with proper training, this should have been done when the 70mm reader was installed. Most importantly, it should have been noticed by someone other than the ticket buying public.
DTS, HUMBUG! bring back magnetic :)

Jeff and I disagree on the sync problem, and we saw the movie together! The reason I described the scene with Feisal's servant is because Jeff was told by the manager that the second part of the film would be in sync. And so it was - for about 3 minutes.

It is troubling that there was a problem with the film and no one on staff was able to rectify the situation. Kudos to the audience members who were able to rise to the occasion and - just like in a corny disaster movie - help land the plane. That's a nice story that brings a smile to most faces. No one has been happier than I over the fact that Clearview decided to book this program at the Ziegfeld - and then extend it for an additional 3 weeks. But I think Peter and Bob's criticisms are valid. I hope that this incident doesn't hinder the theater's efforts to secure future 70mm prints.

I don't think we'll see Clearview go through the expense to switch back from platter to reel-to-reel, so we should probably shelve that argument and just try to encourage the Zeigfeld to concentrate on providing the highest quality presentations possible with what they have. A test run-through to check for the sort of audio sync and image stability issues reported above should be mandatory for a 70mm presentation, given the rarity of such an event and the higher level of audience expectation that comes along with it. The fact that there were several experienced projectionists on hand in the audience for that screening of "Lawrence" should signify to theater management that they are dealing with a very sophisticated patronage that is far more demanding than the usual multiplex crowd. Something tells me that they already have figured this out and are really rallying an effort to improve with each successive booking. I hope that trend continues with future "Classics" programming and that momentum is not lost during the run of "Ice Age 2" and whatever other mainsteam fodder that might follow.

Well, Jeff and Bill disagree on the sync problem, based on what Bill has written, my experince tells me a problem exsists with the time code, I have seen that before with 35mm, I never ran 70mm DTS but would assume the problems with the time code is similar.
Any techs out there? shed some light for us.
REndres, wanna weigh in on this?

Bill, if anything the second part was more out of sync than the first. I don't know how to explain that. I was told a lot by the manager. Remember the "replacement print" being on the way, only to tell another customer a few minutes later there is no replacement print.

Vito: yea, magnetic. I LOVE MAGNETIC.

Bill, of course we will go to the Ziegfeld again. But they better have better presentation next time.

Regarding the sync problem - Are you speaking about the 7:30 show on 3/25? I did not notice anything out of sync at all, all evening. Was there a sync problem last night?

Ed, unless they have removed the second projector, there should be no real cost to stop using the platter. Have they removed the second projector?

Regarding the sync problem - Are you speaking about the 7:30 show on 3/25? I did not notice anything out of sync at all, all evening. Was there a sync problem last night?

I was at the Friday 3/24 show and you couldn't miss it. I heard from another viewer that the 3/25 show also had sync problems. Maybe you didn't notice it, but that viewer with projection experience did.

The sync problem Jeff and I experienced was during Friday night's 7:30 show (3/24). I'm glad they fixed the problem - one more reason to go back again on Wednesday 3/29!

Bill, I hope for your sake it IS fixed. You have the conveniance to be able to attend multiple shows, where I do not. I'm left with the memory of a bad show.

I'm guessing they did NOT remove the second platter. Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that for classics, a platter should never be used? The prints are rare & the studios & archives don't want theaters to use platters for the rare prints, right? When we retrieved film equipment from the closed Boyd in Philadelphia (to reinstall later in the upstairs original booth), we retrieved the two 35-70 mm movie projectors (and an extra one from an adjoining auditorium) and told management to toss the platter!

I wasn't at Lawrence, but agree that it was unacceptable to run the sound out of sync with the visuals. The paid projectionist should have known how to put the film back on track after it burned, but since he didn't, I see nothing wrong with audience members who were
evidently projectionists helping out. Those of us who aren't projectionists wouldn't have volunteered.

Yesterday, I enjoyed a collector's original 1956 print of The Ten Commandments at the Loew's Jersey in Jersey City. There are comments at that site as to how impressed everybody was. As much as I love the Ziegfeld, it is an even greater experience walking into the Grand Lobby, Auditorium, and other public areas of one of the grandest neoclassic 1920's movie palaces ever built. The Loews doesn't have a working curtain, or side and back sound, so we should appreciate those features even more at the Ziegfeld.

I attended the Sunday matinee of Lawrence yesterday and the first half went off without a hitch. Then as the entre act music was about to begin the curtain opened and the Clearview commercials that were shown prior to part 1 started and played for about 2 minutes. The projectionist must have realized it and shut it off, closed the curtain and started the entre act. Not the end of the world maybe but in a Manhattan house that was once a class act, it was sad to see. Imagaine if a projectionist did something like this in the Rivoli or Criterion in the great years?

Just a quick comment on the out of sync problem. This 70MM DTS print does not have an optical backup like the mag prints did. Therefore, if the DTS reader should go out there is no back up sound source. To guard against this, 70MM DTS is usually run with two DTS readers, mounted one on top of the other. The primary reader would be the top one and the back up reader the bottom one. The delay between reader and film gate would be synchronized for the top reader. If the top reader should suffer a momentary fault the back up bottom reader should engage. If the delay for the bottom reader is set the same as the top one, the distance between the two "exciter" lamps in the readers might be enough to throw off the sync enough to notice. The condition of the discs, and any splices using opaque tape, might have been enough to cause a fault in the reader. Or it could be a faulty reader or any one of a number of other things.

As far as the film break, all I can say is that it is only one screen, one projector, and one platter. What else does the projectionist (sorry Vito) have to do except watch it? If it was a brain wrap, he did not even have to be watching the platter. The change in the sound if the feed platter stops and causes a pull wrap or if it takes off and causes a speed wrap is something that is impossible to miss if you are within hearing distance and paying attention.

As someone who has been so stupid as to have actually stepped on a 70MM print and caused it to break, I will be the first to say that something like this can happen to anyone. At least when I did it it was because I was so paranoid that I kept walking between the viewport, the projector and the platter looking for something to go wrong that I forgot to look where I was walking. I keep the melted frame that jammed in the gate mounted on my desk. (It is Omar at the oasis.) In fact, I am looking at it now. A constant reminder to try to avoid doing anything dumb by being so obsessed over detail that I forget what is going on elsewhere. Such as keeping track of where the film path between the projector and platter is.

As I said in my post on my CE3K viewing, I think the management of the Ziegfeld does a good job. The manager does not "run" the booth the same way they do the "floor." Having once been a manager, I realize that allowing someone from the audience into the booth was a big judgement call that those of you present should be glad they had the nerve to make. Many managers would have just played it safe, refused the offer, and refunded the house secure in the knowledge that fixing a film problem was outside of their job description. The theatre management textbook can not do it all. Sometimes common sense and the ability to think on your feet can make up for a lot, as it evidently did in this case.

I wrote from ignorant assumption, Vito. Thanks for straightening me out on the point. If there is no cost involved, then perhaps suggesting the use of reels over the platter is a point worth pushing with management for future series.

Yes Ed, a while back I asked REndres what equipment was in the booth and I believe he wrote both 35/70 projectors were still in the booth along with a platter and of course a digital projector as well.
This is probably how they are running the commercials, using the second projector set up for 35mm. If that is the case running reel-to reel is something they most certainly should be doing with these valuable prints. It is especially shocking to me that the operator (he's no ptojectionist) could not fix the problem with the film break. The man has no business being in that booth, he should instead collect tickets at the door.
Stan, I hear what you are saying, but sometimes when the print sticks and several layers of film try to pass thru feed plate at the same time, you have to be quick and try to prevent the film from wrapping, it just makes matters worse the operator is not paying
attention to what is going on in the booth. As posted, he could not even start the second half properly but ran the commercials again.
Good grief! Sorry Clearview, you need to clean house in the booth,
and demand local 306 supply you with compatant professional projectionist.

O K guys I am one of the guys that ran up to the booth sunday night, I have been a projectionist for obout 34 years,the other two guys are projectionists/ service tecks, It was not a wrap, it was a patch that opend up right below the intermitted and wraped around the sprocket,Marvin did stop it in time, 2 more seconds and gears would have blown, Poor Marvin could not get the film out of the the projector... IT took my friend quite a bit of pull to get it out!
It was not his fault , it is an old print with a lot of splices, The booth does have 2 projectors (JJ 35/70) one is set uo for 35 for the clearview reel and the other one 70 mm , They can not run reel to reel (W/70mm DTS) because the only have 1 70mm dts reader, by the way 70 mm Mag does not have sound back up...no opical sound on 70 mm. One more thing, only about 10 seconds of film was damaged beyond repair not the whole reel.

I know someone who once saw an imperfect presentation of Lawrence of Arabia, and she died.

Thanks movieman for that info, I was hoping someone could tell us what actually happened. It's like they say, there as always two sides to every story. When film wraps around the intermittent sprocket,especially 70mm, it is very difficult to undue. As to runnung reel-to-reel, I would not think it would be very difficult to pick up another reader for the second projector. The whole 70mm DTS idea never really took off, and I'll bet they have a few readers sitting on a shelf somewhere collecting dust that could be bought cheaply. I too have spent a lot of time in the booth (50 years) and still can't understand why the classic old roadshow movies are shown
using a platter when there are two projectors in the booth. Would you have spliced the two parts to a movie with intermission and allowed the intrermission tag and entre'act music to play in a dark theatre with the curtain open, or would you have gotten up and performed a little showmanship magic? Come on now, that's just a lazy, who gives a darn attitude, that does not belong in the Ziegfeld.
Good one, saps.

Thanks, Saps. As I leave the house to go to work, it's a good feeling to go out laughing.

That print had a fair number of tape splices on it. You couldn't hear them because of the DTS, but I could see the tape on the frames. Somewhere in the second part there was a section that had a very large number of taped areas in close sucession, lasting maybe 10-15 seconds. Is this perhaps the portion that wrapped around the int sprocket? I know what poorly made tape splices that 'hinge' do when they go through my projector and I tend to remake those with a slight overlap to prevent problems. I can only imagine what a hinged tape splice on a 70mm print looks like when traveling faster through a projector can cause. Doesn't the int sprocket on a Century have a 'stripper' to prevent windup wraps? It's good the show was able to continue, but now future audiences have a 10 second jump splice to deal with. That's a big hole.

I am finally glad that Saps injected a bit of humor into this. If everyone can please calm down for a second. I was in the projection booth Saturday night before the screening of Lawrence. it was my second time there. I introduced CE3K back on 3/17, and I wanted to say hello again to thank him for making it such a special night for me. I had seen the posts about the "out of sync" problem, and was about to address it to him, when he said, stopping me, "Gary, I know what you're going to say, the film is out of sync." There was a tech up there on Saturday afternoon working on the DTS decoder-Marvin is not allowed to open it up and touch it-in fact he wouldn't dare. He isa consummate profesional, a man in his seventies, a projectionist for over 40 years--and he knew that even Saturday night's showing was not going to be "perfect", and he was far from happy about it because the print was worn-but it wasn't "alien" which he previewed and was unwatchable.

In mixing technologies, a 70mm print without mag tracks, DTS, brain wraps-I'm surprised shit doesn't happen more often. I looked at the way the film was wrapped around all of those rollers from the platters to the projector, and thought, "Oh my God, what a Rube Goldberg,"but Marvin did not bring the platters to the Ziegfeld. I was not at the "Ten Commandments" screening- I was exhausted from "Lawrence" Saturday night-but my friend, who was there, told me that it was great, but not perfect, sometimes, a focus problem, given the age of the movie. Still a great time.

We are really in a transitional period, the Ziegfeld is installing digital equipment shortly, wihin a month--for it to be a first run house and a revival house is not going to be without problems--I still say that it was ballsy of them to even try such a concept for TWO MONTHS. Yeah, I also yearn for the DeMille and the Rivoli, but it ain't happening.

Remember what Craig said above, "I think it's a great program
that can only grow in time. Let's see what happens...."

Yeah, I would love so see a perfect "Lawrence," but disregarding, for the moment, the synch issues, the print was not perfect. So, can we all calm down, lose the attitude a bit, work towards KEEPING THE PROGRAM GOING, realize and state there are very important issues to deal with, and move on toan even better program next time.

Thanks for listening,

Gary

Gary, what you say is true, but there is still no excuse for poor showmanship and knowingly putting on a show with a graring technical fault such as sound sync. I'm sorry, it's inexcusable. If they knew that Friday's performance would be marred by that, why didn't they say so at the box office and offer tickets at a reduced price? Why did I have to say something to the manager, only to be given a pass good for 2 weeks? I don't live in the city, I don't get there often, a 2 week pass is a joke.

I could deal with a film break. It's fixed, show goes on.

Knowingly showing a film to the paying public with an out of sync track is just piss poor.

I get better showmanship in Suffern NY, and in my basement. Yes, I'm dissapointed, it was my first show there in decades. I don't hold this against the projectionist, I understand "marvin" probably doesn't know how to set the digital delay and wouldn't be allowed to. I hold it against Clearview. They should have had a full staff up there, both projectionist and technical guy for a special show like this. It was a 1 week engagement of a special format, and it was treated as if it was any other 35mm presentation. They should have had the proper people up there all week for this.

They can not run reel to reel (W/70mm DTS) because they only have 1 70mm dts reader, by the way 70 mm Mag does not have sound back up...no opical sound on 70 mm...
posted by movieman007 on Mar 27, 2006 at 8:08pm

Sorry for the omission. I left out the "35MM." I meant to say 70MM does not have optical backup the way 35MM mag does. I am surprised that there is only one DTS reader. Those things are not foolproof, at least in their 35MM versions, and it is not unusual for them to "fault" back to standard non digital Dolby, especially if you are running a print with a lot of splices and / or missing footage. Even though there are evidently a lot of splices in Lawrence, this would only cause a momentary silence while the disc tries to realign itself with the time code. I wonder why they never tried the Dolby Digital format on 70MM. Or did they? I have never seen a Dolby Digital system "fault" from missing footage or anything else. And with the actual DD soundtrack printed on the film there is no worry about damage to the DTS discs, or if the discs will arrive with the film.

As far as the film being printed out of sync, it is strange that Columbia would allow such a thing to remain in release. It could not have gone unnoticed until now as they must have received a lot of complaints from theatre companies about it. I realize that there are a lot of purists commenting on this site, but judging from the descriptions here, the problem must be at least noticible to even the most casual movie goer. If nothing else, you would think that they would have warned anyone interested in booking the print about the problem.

Although I have never run it, I have seen the DTS version of this film twice, with a different print each time. (I believe these were struck for the 40th aniversary a few years back.) There were no out of sync problems with those prints. I do not know how many were struck, but I would hate to think that this is the best one remaining.

There are two sides to every argument, even the ones going on here. Of course you can see better showmanship on display at the Lafayette (or in Jeff's basement, where I've seen many fine shows), but nowhere else in the New York area can you see "Lawrence of Arabia" in 70mm on a 50 ft. screen. Clearview did not spend the money to hire a DTS tech for the "Lawrence" shows, but they did lower their prices for the classics series from $11.75 to $7.50. The theater could have gone dark like it did during the winter months in years past, but instead this year we got to see "2001", "Doctor Zhivago", "Ben-Hur", "Raiders of the Lost Ark", "Close Encounters", etc. I've been to 14 shows during the Classics series. None were perfect, all were great.

Bill... none perfect? My goodness, that's a powerful statement. That's the point here. They should have all been perfect. Attention to details is important. To give credit where it's due, yes they've run a good slate of films, but if you're not going to do it right, don't do it. Is this the kind of presenation they give for regular first run films?

Sadly this is the way most first run theatres operate now, even in a market like New York.

I attend first run films at the Ziegfeld, and do NOT have any problems with the presentation, and I'm picky.

The Godfather was perfect!

It does sound like at least a couple crappy prints were sent by studios: certainly Alien, and possibly this very spliced print of Lawrence of Arabia.

From what I can read, Clearview has learned much & improved for some of these "classics" concerns of intermissions, etc.

So, let's not get down on Clearview. MANY people appreciated the classic film festival. One matter they can improve- those 2 week passes need more time, even if they happen to be good at their other venues. People need time to find something they want to see.

Jeff:

We are exactly on the same page. I am making excuses for nobody. Regardless of Marvin's dedication and good intentions, to see a projection room with 70mm film wrapped around so many rollers, each a potential disaster, was shocking to me. This is state of the art?
Give me a break. Again, I commend Clearview for their programming and taking a chance on getting an audience in the age of home video, but certainly every criticism here is worthy of attention-from the flaws in the screenings to the passes. I do not want to settle for mediocrity, but I also don't want to settle for perfection vs. nothing. Personally, CE3K was my baby and I loved introducing it, and everyone loved the print, but the sound did not blow me away. I wanted it to, but it didn't. And Craig saw to it that we were seeing Spielberg's own print. It was 35 mm; would 70mm 6 track have been better- absolutely. But I still appreciated Craig's efforts, so that we didn't have to see the "Special" edition or see a crappy print.

Here's my point-this is Craig O' Connor's e-mail address: coconnor@clearcin.com Talk to the man-he wants this to work. Send your opinions directly to him. The Ziegfeld should be no less than world class, or at least as close as it can be, and it can be.

Perfection?-given the age of prints, and other factors that I'm not even aware of--there is no perfection. But we can certainly get closer to it-I absolutely agree with you that there is no excuse
for settling for anything less than a great show and a great time-and this whole series while flawed, was far from mediocre. You want mediocre, come to the Malverne cinema near me-great art house, shitty sound, shitty prints, shitty seats- only maintenance-they shut the lights off at night.

I repeat-speak your mind to Craig-you do not have to be politically correct- I criticized about the piss-poor job of advertising this whole series, but I didn't use those words, and I was nice about it.

You don't have to kiss ass, but you do have to talk about the good as well as the bad, because if I were in Craig's shoes, and all I heard was shit, I would say Fuck it, nobody appreciates this-who needs this bullshit!

I guess I'm a bit excited, too

Gary

Having attended 14 classics shows, I'd say the worst thing that happened at any of them was the work of an outside agitator: the lowering of the volume in the second half of "Zhivago" on 3/11. The first half was a thrill to see and hear, in spite of the scratches on the print. Perfection is a very hard thing to come by with old movies like these, but I couldn't disagree more with my friend Jeff when he said, "If you're not going to do it right, don't do it". If the prints were old and sometimes scratched, they were always in perfect focus. If the overtures and intermissions were sometimes badly handled, there were some shows in the series when they came off beautifully. When "2001" played in 70mm in New York at the Astor Plaza, in December '01, the Intermission title card was removed from the print and the second part was spliced right onto the end of the first - far worse than the way the Ziegfeld handled it. I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm glad I attended all these shows, I'll remember them for a long time, and I'm grateful to the Ziegfeld for presenting them and hope they do it again first chance they get.

"We are exactly on the same page. I am making excuses for nobody. Regardless of Marvin's dedication and good intentions, to see a projection room with 70mm film wrapped around so many rollers, each a potential disaster, was shocking to me. This is state of the art?"

Gary, yes, this IS state of the art. In fact in my own home theater I put film around 5 rollers to go from feed reel to takeup reel (this is a necessity to handle large reels). Platters DO work, I don't like them because when used improperly they damage film. When used properly, they are no different than reel-to-reel. The trick is knowing. Myself, I've never used a platter, but I've certainly come in contact with, handled, or seen, enough film ruined by them.

"Again, I commend Clearview for their programming and taking a chance on getting an audience in the age of home video, but certainly every criticism here is worthy of attention-from the flaws in the screenings to the passes. I do not want to settle for mediocrity, but I also don't want to settle for perfection vs. nothing."

Point well taken, and I do commend them for trying and all things considered (I said it earlier) they picked a good slate of films. All things considered I enjoyed the presentation of LOA in 70mm but as I am a perfectionist when I project, little stuff bothers me to the point where perhaps it gets all out of proportion. The image displayed on Friday was outstanding. Sharp, brightly lit, awesome audio....but it was out of sync. Then the image jittered. I've beat these horses enough already, I won't continue.

Perfection is not hard to achieve. They can get it. They had it 30 years ago when I was a regular at that theater.

I will consider sending an email to the address you mentioned, although I'm sure this person is reading here too and has seen all my comments and has considered them in the light they were offered.

"I guess I'm a bit excited, too"

It's understandable. We all love this artform and are very opinionated. They just need to try harder next time, and in regards to 70mm presentation, much harder.

Ziegfeld man, I am discusted by Gary's street talk language in this forum and ask that you please not post such comments again. I would appreciate the moderators/owners delete the post.

I'm gonna have to say it again (based on some of the comments above.) There will not be another series like this at the Ziegfeld if there IS no Ziegfeld. You guys have to see the first run movies they show here. You think most of it's crap? So do I. I'm buying a ticket to the Ziegfeld, not to the crappy movie - yes I know the theatre sees very little of the ticket $$$ which is why I then buy a bunch of stuff from the concession stand.
I have no idea what Cablevision thinks of this venue, but if they're allowing something like this revival series - I don't know - it kinda smells like desperation...
So get yourselves in the seats even for the crappy first run movies - otherwise don't come on here crying that the Ziegfeld is now closed!

By the way, Bill, scratches on film for some reason don't bother me. Even splices don't really faze me. I don't consider that "not doing it right". I'm happy to see a print of any repratory film, and many are quite used. I'll take the scratches, splices, and dirt at heads/tails. The rare out-of-frame changeover. Heck, You've even seen me watch pink film.

"Not doing it right" is running a public show to paying customers you KNOW has problems that people will see. And unfortunately, that's what they did Friday. I can't and won't speak for the other shows as I was not there. I believe you when you say the did a good job.

Focus, sync, and steadiness. Those are my three primary goals to make a film in my eyes enjoyable. Other factors that take away enjoyment (which the Ziegfeld did NOT have) is "travel ghost", which is an improperly timed shutter. You see this as white vertical smears of light objects on black backgrounds (stands out like a sore thumb on titles).

Movieguy718: I appreciate your passion for the Ziegfeld. Believe me, if I was at all interested in "Ice Age 2", I'd go see it there. If they run "The DaVinci Code" in May, I'll be there for that one. I did do my part by going to see "Rent" and "The Producers" at the Ziegfeld last fall. Both flopped there, but they also flopped everywhere else. "Dreamgirls" would be a perfect Ziegfeld attraction this December.

Gary... you have to watch your language on this forum because of the diversity of membership. While I have no problem with a well chosen expletive here and there to drive home a point, not everyone shares that sort of tolerance. And I know that Patrick and Ross like to keep the language free from profanity out of respect to those who might be offended. Just a friendly word of advice.

This is what the screen at the Ziegfeld should be like
http://cinerama.topcities.com/mph052268.htm

Amen, RobertR. The last theater in the NYC area that looked like that was the UA Cinema 150 in Syosset, Long Island. It's now a gym or something, but was going quite strong into the late '90's.

I agree with Movieguy718 last post, and just to add that; I have seen 6 of the films in this series, in hind sight I wish I had seen more. C'mon we've all had are issues here, myself included, about some of the prints in this series, but I have to say that the tone of some of the people on this thread is very..um, disturbing. As Bill Hueblig put so well in an earlier post 'not every film was perfect, but all were great'. This has by far been the busiest thread on the Cinema Treasures for the last month or so with now over 1000 posts. Everytime I hear somebody go overboard with their criticisms it just makes me think that the wrong message is being sent to Clearview/Ziegfeld. I would love for the theater management to walk away from this whole thing and say 'hey, despite a few hitches, that worked out' instead of walking away saying 'this was a good idea at first, but the audience for this kind of festival are a bunch of pain in the a** crybabies, we'll never do a festival like this again'. For me the last two months of going to these films and just KNOWING it was happening was a breath of fresh air in a New York City that is very rapidly losing it's identity. I too, do not want to walk down 54th St between 6th and 7th before the end of 2006, and see a 'for rent' sign hanging from the Ziegfeld. Don't think it could happen? Come downtown below 14th street. After you see the big empty lot that used to be the Variety Theater, and the NYU dorm that used to be the Palladium/Academy of music, look around and see all of the businesses that are going under because their landlords are pricing them out. Developers don't care about neighborhood stores, old theaters, or film revival. In the plainest of terms they want to knock stuff down and build their monuments to cultural mediocrity over what used to be a cool place. So take the good with the bad. Recognize that the Ziegfeld did an overall great job with this series, and keep supporting it financially and critically.

"otherwise don't come on here crying that the Ziegfeld is now closed!"

Well the Ziegfeld Theatre was originally planned to be a Cinerama house during the planning days.

To all:

My sincere apologies for the language. It will definitely not happen again, and I thank you for the criticism, you were absolutely appropriate about it, and I deserved to be taken to task-I am embarrassed and apologize for losing it. And I have no excuses, so I won't even try. I believe that we all want the same thing, i.e, the Ziegfeld to survive, the classics series to survive, and a great experience there. If anything, the ups and downs of this series has shown me that there is a passionate force of individuals out there, and, sorry Jeff, although I respect everything you've said, absolutely everything, I cannot assume that anyone from Clearview is reading these comments. Maybe they are, but there is so much at stake here,that I can't assume it---it is absolutely worth speaking your mind directly to Craig. That's just my way of thinking. It was so important to me that we had the "Definitive" version of CE3K, that I was in touch with first Monique, and then Craig, whom she referred me, too, constantly.

As the festival ends, we now have much bigger issues than this--I see the passion in all these posts, and it's great (except, again for my language). Ed, I miss the UA Cinema 150 so much, I could cry.
I went to see "Hook" there opening night (I know kids seem to love this movie, but I hated it) Regardless, I drove over an hour just to see it in that theater. Now I can't do that anymore.

Again, I am not a movie professional, and there are so many professionals as well as Ziegfeld and movie lovers here, that I believe that you can cut and paste your comments and send them directly to Craig--everyone is articulate and to the point ( well, maybe except me and my foul mouth, Vito, an extra apology to you-I truly am humiliated in looking at what I said)!

Gary

Come to think of it, some of the shows in the series WERE perfect, as far as such a thing is possible. Those prints of "Raiders" and "Temple of Doom" were flawless. They were in sharp focus on a 50 ft. screen and turned up LOUD. In the world we live in, where there are no more Cinerama screens within several hundred miles of New York, what could be better?

I'll be going to "Lawrence" tonight to say goodbye to the Classics series, and I sincerely hope it's not the last time I get to experience classics at the Ziegfeld.

Irv,

The fact of the matter is that the Ziegfeld looses more money operating films than it does sitting in the dark. I don't want to get into the background behind it, but with a company like Clearview (owned by Cablevision) running it, it's not going anywhere anytime soon, thankfully.

Classic films there is all a very interesting experiment, but unfortunately, I don't see it lasting. The economics and red tape behind it all don't seem to have justified the means, even if it is seeing a great film in a great venue.

My best wishes are with the Ziegfeld's programming. After reading what has happened there, I would be slightly embarrassed to run further programming until the bugs in the system have been worked out. Perhaps they will be able to do classic shows once again. Hopefully, by that time, they'll have a staff that is better prepared for this particular form of event.

Some miscellaneous musings on the situation...

Cinematic perfection is something difficult, but decidedly not impossible, to achieve.

When it is achieved, there are generally a number of things that fall into place, or are brought into place beforehand.

A new print is always nice, that has been screened in advance to check for lab defects.

A Tech or techs are always welcome to check everything from the illumination source to the cleanliness of the porthole.

Someone from DTS or Dolby is always a welcome visitor to make certain that all channels of amplification are all systems are properly functional.

And then we have the big one:

Rehearsal.

From the lowering of curtain lights to the end of the show.

But most of this simply doesn't occur unless one is overseeing special occasion.

So some of the questions that should arise for a "non special occasion" might be these:

Should the operator or projectionist open the 13 cases of film and inspect the print on a bench before attempting to screen it? Replacement reels are available if a problem is found in time, and the studio is extremely professional in handling these situations. They want to screening to be as perfect as possible.

Should one time the lights and curtain cues to the film before running the print before the public?

Should prices be lowered for classic films double the length of a normal film? I can answer that one.
"No."

If one takes into consideration a nominal discount for students and / or the elderly, the ticket price for a 70mm presentation twice the normal length of a normal film should not be less than $20 or thereabouts.

And at that price, one can afford to bring in the necessary techs to see to potential problems beforehand and make the screening special.

Proper projection is not brain surgery, but a certain number of things need to be done in advance to make certain that the show goes on in the style befitting a theatre like the Ziegfeld.

I would have been nice if all this went off without a Hitch, but certain things need to be set in motion in advance.

I placed calls to Craig O'Connor toward the end of February and never received a response.

RAH

Seems to me that the Ziegfeld needs Peter Apruzzese in the booth!

While I appreciate the sentiment Bob F, I wouldn't like to commute to Manhattan. Although for the chance to run 70mmm... :)

The things Robert Harris posted about are what I strive for with my film series at the Lafayette and should be what everyone wants to see at any venue. I applaud the Ziegfeld's choice to run a classic film series (and I know a just a bit about what that entailed on their part) and hope they do it again in the slow times, but they can take a few extra steps next time to ensure that things are as close to perfect as possible. I'm glad they've received much positive feedback and I hope they take the suggestions made in the spirit they are intended.

Excellent points, Robert. I'm glad this site and thread has attracted your attention. I'm somewhat dismayed that Craig was not responsive to your calls - especially in light of how receptive he has been to others who have contacted him during this series. While the discount price was nice, I would easily have paid full price to see these great films properly presented at the Ziegfeld. And I would most certainly be prepared to pay a premium for a deluxe 70mm presentation.

Irv... I must take you to task on your suggestion to suppress any criticism about the Ziegfeld's handling of this series, lest we frustrate them to the point that they abandon the concept entirely. As long as we are supporting the series by our paid attendance, we have a right to voice our praise or our grievances. I think the response from this board regarding the series has been overwhelmingly positive and appreciative. Our criticisms are offered constructively, for the most part, and I believe Clearview management has received them in that spirit. In fact, I would venture to say that our criticisms and suggestions have actually resulted in many improvements along the way.

If unquestioning patronage is what they really want with the Ziegfeld's Classics series, without regard to satisfying audience expectations, better they should discontinue the policy altogether and leave such things to the devoted staff at the Loew's Jersey or the Lafayette in Suffern. I don't think that is what they are all about, however. I have a somewhat more optimistic outlook than Jack Theakston in this regard, and look forward to the series' ongoing success and improving quality.

Pete, it may not be 70mm, but you can come run magnetic any time you want at my place :)

Thanks to Robert Harris for lending some credibility to the frustration that I and others experienced at the shows. You can only imagine how Robert feels knowing this treasure was not treated with the proper respect after the thousands of man hours put into restoring it. At least visually Robert, it was perfect at my show, and it was beautiful. Robert's suggestion for a higher than normal ticket price is also an excellent one if it means the proper staff is on hand for a limited 70mm engagement. I would have gladly paid $20 to see LOA.

While it's been suggested I was too critical and that I should be careful that management doesn't just "take their ball and go home", I disagree that negative comments should not be voiced. I've given both positive and negative comments. If you screw up, you need to be prepared to hear about it.

And as for what Ed has said, if the Zeigfeld wants continuing support, they will have to prove they are up to it. I'll go to future shows they offer, but if I get the same lack of showmanship I got last week, then they would certainly loose a customer. I can get lack of showmanship anywhere, I don't need to make a special trip to the city for it.

I sincerly hope the Ziegfeld continues the program, gets their act together, and books some other restored 70mm classics. For when they do, I'm there, and I want them to win me back.

I've been to many shows at the Lafayette and the presentations have always been perfect. Pete takes the time to rehearse the show each week, and always get it right.

It's quite amazing when an 82 year old theater in Suffern has better presentation standards than the flagship Ziegfeld Theater in NYC!

Flagship of what, I wonder.

Attention to detail is when you prerun the show and notice the credits have been spliced together out of order. Then you take the time to open the splices and put it back together the right way rather than just run it. These are the sorts of details the audience never knows about, but this happened at one of last years films at the Lafayette. I forget the title, but I remember Pete reassembling the strips at the rewind bench so it would be right. The other question is what kind of film handler did the splices out of order to begin with? That's a differnet topic entirely, but these are the kind of things you can find and fix when you have your operation fine tuned and know what to look for.

Ah, yes, to go back to the days when I was a manager in NY and we had reel to reel...

The refunds we gave out when the projectionist fell asleep at the Waverly.
The abuse I got from when he passed out drunk at the Bay.
The beating I received when he disappeared from the booth altogether at the Fresh Meadows and that infamous BACKDRAFT World Premiere at the Ziegfeld!

Ah, the good old days...

Vito, an extra apology to you-I truly am humiliated in looking at what I said)!

Gary

Thank you Gary, your apology is appreciated and accepted.
By the way, I miss the D-150 as well.

Some of us have been a little tough on Clearview, in retrospect I am sorry in some ways. I suppose being "old school" I wanted the shows to run the way I remembered them. However, as many have pointed out it was a good effort and I have a feeling Clearview learned a lot on this thread and the next festival will be even better.

Vito: Many of the shows I attended at the Ziegfeld were as good as I'd ever remembered them and, in two cases, better. I'd never before seen "North by Northwest" and "Doctor Zhivago" on a screen that big and at a volume that loud.

Just in case, I left a lengthy voice mail for Craig this morning not only expressing regret that the series was reaching a conclusion but also alerting him that there were many important, articulate comments, both positive and negative, right here, that he definitely needed to see. I also told him to expect e-mails from us, again, both positive and negative, all in the spirit of having an even better series next time.

Thanks,

Gary

To all CT NYC colleagues:

Some of this may sound corny, but now that this Classics series is near its end, I would like to make some comments. Here at no-so sunny California (yes, it rains here from time to time), I just realized that, despite the setbacks encountered by the Ziegfeld and posted here in explicit detail, in many ways you guys had all the luck this time. While our “flagship” theaters were delighting audiences with “Underworld: Evolution”, “Running Scared”, the new “Pink Panther”, and on and on, you guys had “Chinatown”, CE3K, “The Godfather”, “Ben-Hur”, WSS, LOA and “2001”. So, all in all, kudos to the Ziegfeld for doing this, and to all who showed up and supported the program. Not only do we all virtually love the same movies (well, I’m not too crazy about MFL, but that’s beside the point), but we all have the same high standards when it comes to proper film presentation. Hopefully the Ziegfeld will take to heart the recommendations posted by the various CT members and lessons learned during this series, and they will find their way to the next classics presentation. I for one would like to visit the Ziegfeld, the Lafayette and the Loew’s in Jersey in a not-so distant future.

For Craig and Clearview: In the spirit of “friendly” rivalry between the East and West Coast let me propose a challenge. Take note when there is a classic widescreen series at either the American Cinematheque, Cinerama Dome or at Cal State Long Beach. Schedule an “alternative” series at the same time. If we have “Cleopatra”, throw “Spartacus” at us. If they show “Agony and the Ecstasy”, proudly present “Lust for Life”. “The Great Race”? No problem, here’s “Those Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines”. “Magnificent Seven” you say? Show off with “The Alamo”. “Dirty Harry” vs. “Bullitt”. The possibilities are endless. Most important, we all win…

Lastly, I would like to pay my respects in this site to Richard Fleischer (20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, Fantastic Voyage, Tora! Tora! Tora!, Soylent Green), who passed away last Saturday at the age of 89.

Regards to all

JSA

JSA's friendly rivalry challenge is a fantastic idea, and not impossible. Hey, just a few months ago classics at the Ziegfeld seemed like nothing more than a nice dream.

Last night's "Lawrence" show played beautifully. The sync sound problem from Friday night was gone. Curtains opened and closed and house lights went on and off - all properly on cue. The worst thing that happened all night: someone's cell phone went off twice during the near-silent Omar Sharif well sequence.

Bravo! Thank you Bill. Wish I could have been there with you.

To Clearview: Let's get more TRUE 70mm films on screen! Perhaps now the bugs are worked out, and taking all the suggestions and critisisms given it would be an awesome set of shows.

To JSA...

I love the innocence of all this in terms of what to screen.

There are no viable large format prints of either The Alamo or Spartacus to be had from distribution sources.

RAH

Remember the not so long ago days when a distributor would strike a new print for a Manhattan revival? Hell they do it for the Film Forum still with 150 seats, there would be more money to be made from the Ziegfeld with 1100.

Robert Harris... that's a sad thought, but one that I suspected was true. Still, I think we'd all gladly take solid 35mm prints with mutli track audio given a proper presentation with respect to intermission, house lights and curtain cues. I'd love to know what films do exist on viable large format prints - and would love to know that Clearview has an interest in tracking some of them down for future Classics series. I've never seen "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World" on the large screen and would love to see the print that ran on the West Coast a couple of years back playing at the Ziegfeld - complete with police radio calls during intermission. Perhaps we'll never see a complete premier-engagement version of IAMMMMW, but I'll take the general release version in 70mm on a big screen for just once in my life.

In 1991, I enjoyed the restored 70 MM 6 track print of Spartacus on one of the two large (40 foot wide) screens at the Worldwide Plaza, before that theater went 2nd run. It was presented fine there. I had missed it at the Ziegfeld & at the Uptown in Washington. I'd love to see it in 70 MM at the Uptown and I'm sure many people would love to see it at the Ziegfeld. I've not seen the Alamo. On vacation, I did see a 35 MM print of Mad World at the Castro in S.F. More 70 MM prints of classics please!

The current 70mm print of Mad World is a bastardization, using some of the elements which we turned over to the studio for safekeeping. The film is in need of a proper restoration, if not reconstruction, and the print is not recommended.

Regarding the use of 35mm prints for presentation purposes, it should be noted (this is a discussion which recently took up space on another website) that the format affords the viewer possibly 20-25% of the on-screen quality of a true 70mm print.

RAH

Oh boy Robert, you better hope Larry isn't reading here... :)

The print of MW is what it is. It has not been fully color corrected, has faded dupe sections, inclusive of the main titles, and improperly placed radio calls. While it is instructive as a test print or to demonstrate the current state of the original negative, it is a starting point for a proper restoration, and should not be construed of as final release print, which I don't believe was the intent of its creators. It was printed for a special anniversary screening, and its use should have ended there.

There were specific guidelines set up for the running of MW in November 1963. These were printed and distributed to all venues. They are the most specific projection instructions that I've ever found. When a filmmaker places their wishes in writing, they should be followed to the letter wherever and whenever possible, unlike the abortive screenings of MW at the Dome. Little is gained by doing things improperly.

Distributors do strike new prints from time to time on popular titles in 35mm. Like with the Film Forum and other type theatres, use the "Brand New 35mm Print" in their ads. With the sorry state of film projection, those new prints are not very new after a few poorly operated theatres that have had them. I've had brand new prints come in and leave in great shape, to then come back after one screening all banged up and needing repair.

That is sadly true, William. I've received several repertory prints that came directly from their "premiere" engagement in NY or LA that needed cleaning and/or repair. I've also been fortunate to receive a couple of brand-new prints (and newer prints that were immaculately handled). I always ship them back in the same condition, usually with a note in the can that says "Attn Projectionist - this print is new, please treat it with extra care." But I have also had the sad experience of getting the same print back two years later with more than normal wear & tear on it.

Robert, thanks for those illuminating comments on MW and the differences in quality between 35mm and 70mm. I came of true moviegoing age in the '70's and by then actual 70mm cinematography was pretty much a thing of the past, so I can't say that I've really experienced a bona fide 70mm exhibition more than maybe once or twice in my life! Just about all of the 70mm presentations I did attend were premier engagement blow-ups from 35mm negatives. Is there a significant difference when the print is a 70mm blow up or was it primarily the multi-track audio advantages that elevated those engagements?

Thanks also for the info on Mad World. I agree with you 100% on honoring the filmmakers written instructions. It pains me to know that the resources have not been made available to afford you to proceed with a proper restoration of the original full length version of MW. Is it true that elements had been found that were allowed to decompose beyond salvagability due to a lack of proper funding? Where are the outraged Mad World fanatics who have some muscle in tinseltown?

But... I veer off thread. We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.

To Ed Solero...

In answer to your question re: 35 blow-ups...

Yes. One does get a finer quality image for a number of reasons inclusive of the large format print which adds image stability, illumination, etc, but still not anywhere near 65mm origination standards. Unfortunately, this is why (since the blow-ups were derived from Onegs) that many of those original negatives are trashed.

RAH

Robert Harris: Yes, of course there is innocence in my comments. There is also hope, optimism and romanticism as well. With all that comes my ignorance relative to the subject matter, since I would not be able to tell which classic films are in condition to be screened properly. I am aware that many of our classic motion pictures are either in a state of disrepair or presently unavailable for proper widescreen presentation. However, I was not suggesting a program per se, but rather the concept of a large-scale classic revival taking place simultaneously in premier venues at LA and NYC. Logistically difficult? Yes. Risky? Absolutely. Obstacles on the way? More than we can imagine. Will it happen? Probably not. But if a) such an event would ever come to fruition and b) if sufficient financial returns are realized from such an event, maybe this could send a signal to the studios. And maybe, just maybe, instead of spending $ 100 million “adapting” another bad TV show for the screen, someone in the Hollywood executive suites could instead put an end to that insanity. Take that money, invest in the studio archives and budget funds for restoration and preservation with the intent of proper theatrical release.

Robert, I sincerely appreciate the work and effort that has been put into classic film restoration, and have a high sense of gratitude and respect towards everyone involved in that endeavor. And thank you for sharing your insight relative to MW, and the 35 & 70 mm issues. Seeing the restored “Lawrence of Arabia” on the big screen back in the late 80’s was indeed a remarkable and definitive cinematic experience, not only because of the spectacular presentation, but also because up to that time I thought that such an event would have been impossible.

Much regards,

JSA

To JSA

I happen to be one of those who feel that 70mm revivals are not only entirely possible, but with the aid of the proper technical people around the country (or world) not a difficult proposition to put on the road.

Columbia makes LoA and Lord Jim available in 70. Thanks to Fox's Schawn Belston and his staff, Fox has opened the cans of many 65mm origination productions that haven't seen the light of day in decades... and printed them along with preservation elements.

Some others still need to be restored before they go before the public.

DTS, with their timecoded 70mm system has made print production and distribution far easier than it was in the past. I recall situations in which beutiful new prints would be damaged in either striping or sounding. And one doesn't know until you attempt to screen the finished product.

There have been comments made in the recent past that Ultra-Panavision shows carry with them problems endemic to the breed and cannot easily be run. I don't believe this.

With the help of highly trained and impassioned projectionists and technical directors, new 70mm prints can be tracked, inspected and distributed without major fear of the inevitable short life span that wreaked havoc on them over the past decade. Many of those technical people visit this site. Others, like Chapin Cutler and Larry Shaw of Boston Light & Sound, James Bond of Full Aperture Systems, and Steve Guttag of Cardinal Sound, can easily bring what many consider a dream to reality.

All of this must come hand in hand with the thoughtful cooperation of the programmers who must represent their various theatres as quality venues, and see that they are not only up to the task of having proper projectionists in place on quality equipment, but creating a situation via which prints need not be constantly set up and broeken down in 1 or 2 day runs.

With proper publicity and promotion, the public not tuned into CT can be brought into their local high end venues, whether that venue is set up for 70mm or a projector is brought in, set up and run by special techs. The starting point is a theatre with a huge screen and qualty audio.

Again, DTS makes this easy.

My son had grown up watching Ben-Hur on laser disc or via 4 track mag print screened at our home, albeit on a small screen. A couple of years ago, while he was looking at colleges, I arranged for a screening of the chariot race sequence at Panavision via an unfaded C65 print.

The wide-eyed awe and enthusiasm in seeing something like that for the first time need not be a unique experience.

There is a huge difference between Mr. Wyler's work on DVD and on 60 foot screen surrounded by 1,000 fellow patrons, who have been shorn of cell phones.

It can be not only reasonably "portable," but a viable alternative to the norm. But the entire situation must be planned and brought together from the ground up, with everything known in advance.

There is absolutely no reason why 70mm screenings cannot be as successful now as they were forty years ago.

A studio will be much more likely to strike a new print, or go through the expense of newly color correcting a printing element, if they know that ten or twenty or more playdates all await that new print, and that the print will survive the showings.

RAH

Thanks to reading this entire thread yesterday, I changed my mind about skipping Lawrence of Arabia and decided to see it at the last minute last night; I'm glad I did. Seeing a film, particularly of this magnitude, at a place like the Ziegfeld is one of the joys of living in this city. I can't say LOA is one of my favorites, but I did quite enjoy the experience. To my inexpert eye, I thought the quality of the film for the most part was fine, the sound was, to quote Lina Lamont "nice and loud," and the audience, at least toward the front of the theater, was respectful and quiet (I did not experience the ringing cell phone that Bill mentioned). I did notice an odd dubbing situation when the reporter spoke for the first time with Prince Faisal. The volume and synch of their voices was different. This was very brief, though, maybe less than five minutes. Did anyone else notice this?

All in all, I'll add my positive vote to those who have said that this was a great couple of months at the Ziegfeld. I'm sorry was I only able to see North By Northwest, Space Odyssey: 2001 and the aforementioned LOA, but I'm glad I saw that much. My experience seeing Space Odyssey at this theater changed my opinion drastically toward the positive, so for that, at the very least I'm grateful.

Gary, I took your advice and sent feedback via the Clearview website and already received a reply from Craig, who said they will repeat this series some time in the future. It's gratifying to know that your opinion has actually been read by someone.

Beth:

Robert Harris can probably explain better (since he did it), but that was a scene restored back into the film in 1989. The image for the scene existed, but the soundtrack had been lost. The actors were brought in to re-dub their lines, but some of the dialogue was a "guess" because they didn't have a reference to what was actually said. Obviously, their voices had aged a bit as well in 26 years as well.

Beth said:

"My experience seeing Space Odyssey at this theater changed my opinion drastically toward the positive, so for that, at the very least I'm grateful."

For me, that kind of sums up what the Classics series was all about.

Pete, thanks for the info. I don't know much about the restoration of this film, so it's interesting to hear tidbits like this. I'm glad this scene was put back in the film - it was important to see more of Faisal's motives regarding Lawrence.

Bill, I have tried many, many times to sit through Space Odyssey on TV and was never successful. Seeing it at the Ziegfeld was a completely different situation. I had no problems at all with the length or the pacing. In fact, I was so taken by this film, it stuck with me for another couple of days afterward.

P.S. Pete, great job in presenting one of my favorite films, Kiss Me Kate, in 3D at the Lafayette a couple of weeks ago. It was a classy show, as usual.

I am so glad that I've gotten involved with this group ( and again deeply regret and apologize for losing my cool the other day)Reading the comments of Robert Harris right here is an absolute thrill-one of the giants in film restoration and preservation and certainly one of my heroes. Robert, I would like the opportunity to shake your hand one day for all that you have done.

Beth-I really believe that Craig wants this to work, and am happy not only that you contacted him but also that he responded so quickly. There is an old saying that it "takes 15 years to become an overnight success." For me, this festival was a welcome beginning--and I don't think it will take 15 years to reach its stride.

Thanks all,

Gary

Robert,

Thank you for your response. It has completely changed the way I feel and think about the subject. Can't wait to see your next project.

Regards,

JSA

Great show last night at LoA. Image wise one of the best prints I have ever seen on the big screen. The depth, color, and clarity of this film in 70mm was amazing. Sound also perfect. Other than a few splices and minor scratches here and there, it was almost flawless. Definitely one for the history books. I have to confess though, like BethLG I can't say I was as capitivated by this film as I was with 'Ben Hur' and 'Dr. Zhivago' as far as epics in this series. Those two films, which I had never seen before had my full attention from beginning to end. The funny thing is, that after my friends and I had left the theater and were talking about LoA, I realized that I liked it more than I thought. We kept going through some of the quotes in the film and talking about the very unique and eccentric performance by Peter O'Toole. It was one of the more off-beat characters I think I have seen in an epic of this kind. In fact I had to go and rent the DVD today at Blockbuster, just to review the film. Mind you I never had a membership at Blockbuster until today, just so I could get this film. Thank god for DVD which preserves the aspect ratio of the film. The other benefit is that Blockbuster lets you hold on two old films like this for a week, so I can really take a look at this film again at my leisure.

Anyway...what a great series this has been on to end the winter and go into the spring. Overall great
festival despite whatever flaws were noted. PLEASE LET THIS HAPPEN AGAIN!!!!!!!! ILOVE THE ZIEGFELD!

Sorry about those typos in the above post. I just read it and had to wonder where the hell my head was at. Duh!!!!

Irv:

The new issue of Premiere magazine has a survey of the 100 greatest performances in film history. That's over 100 years-including silents, foreign films, etc. Peter O' Toole's performance in "Lawrence" is rated # 1. Obviously, this will be as controversial as AFI's lists, but check out the magazine to see why they picked him as # 1.

I am very happen to see that the spirit here not only has calmed down (that includes me), but also is looking at the series as a whole. I saw "West Side Story," "Ben-Hur," "Raiders," "CE3K," and "Lawrence."
Just a suggestion, if , at this point, you want to contact Craig, perhaps sizing up the series as a whole with a listing of what worked for you and what didn't--that might be helpful. I thought, for example, that "Chicago" was a mistake--the film is too new, and Monique told me that the turnout was not great. I would like to see a few more that parents will bring their children to,e.g. "Mary Poppins." I loved seeing all the children at "Raiders." Also,, it would fill more seats.

Although the prints were not new, I did not see one "faded" one-that's a big issue with me. The "sync" problem with "Lawrence" definitely had to be addressed, but the picture looked great. "Volume" issues, "intermission" issues--all important.

But I really think that there is a nice consensus that IT REALLY HAPPENED!

Let's work to make it better-and how about every performance introduced by one of us. Enthusiasm is infectious. I feel it every time I visit this site.

Thanks,

Gary

I want to see more TRUE 70mm productions on the screen. Ok, the sound was out of sync and I got angry, but the PICTURE! Oh, that picture. It just could not be compared to anything else I've seen recently in 35mm on any screen. More 70mm, and not 35mm blowups in 70, but TRUE 70mm.

Any theater can equip itself for 70mm, heck I know collectors that have 70mm equipment in their basement, but it's not the same. This theater has all the proper pieces of the equasion already in place to put on a show that will let you come away with memories, and it should be utilized as such. I won't make a special trip into the city for "Raiders", "Close Encounters", or even "Ben Hur" in 35mm, but I will do it again for any 70mm presentation.

To Robert Harris: Mr. Harris, I am reading and re-reading your posts here with great interest. I would like to address you privately regarding your comment about the "starting point" for good 70MM presentations.

A link to my e-mail address appears on my member page, accessible by clicking on my name below. Would you be so kind as to send me an e-mail?

You and your colleagues have provided me with hours upon hours of great entertainment. Thank you. I have three home video editions of MY FAIR LADY. The 1994 Laserdisc box set, the 2004 DVD release, and the 1996 Laserdisc that gloriously features Audrey Hepburn's "Loverly" vocals in the film itself.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Gary made a good point that no one else had addressed up to now: I saw 10 different titles in the series, and none of the prints had faded color. In fact, in some cases the color was quite spectacular. "North by Northwest" and "Ben-Hur" come to mind, especially considering how old those prints may have been - we'll leave "Lawrence" out because that was a special case. Anyway, it's just more proof that the Ziegfeld got things much more right than wrong during the Classics series.

Your chances of seeing a faded print at a show like this are low to non-existant. I think the only place that still has faded prints in their libraries is Criterion. Pete A. would know WAY more about this than me. Any self respecting programmer would not show a pink print. The prints you are seeing are all reprints on modern low fade stocks (LPP or Kodak Vision) and are not original release prints. If you were seeing original release prints, only those from 1973/4 through 1984 would have fade, as these would come from what collectors refer to as the "EastmanZone". It's the 10-11 year period between the time that no fade IB Tech/Dye Transfer printing ended and LPP film came on the market. "High fade" Eastmancolor was the predominant film stock used during this period.

The worst faded print I ever saw in a theater was "Lust for Life" (MGM, 1956 - in Metrocolor). It was shown at the Ziegfeld in 1986 and had turned completely pink. It was still worth seeing on a big screen, but what a shame for that particular movie to have faded so badly. It was practically ABOUT color.

Yes, Jeff. There would be no issue with color fading on NbNW or Ben-Hur as they both had prints struck in recent years. Warner and the other majors are very good about not sending out faded prints any longer, but if that's all they have they do give plenty of notice so that a programmer has the chance to change the booking to something else. I do it all the time.

Bill - I was at the same show of Lust for Life in 1986 and it was sad, but the new print of The Professionals they ran on the second half of the double-feature was spectacular.

Does anyone know if the revivals will continue?

I wish it were true that when you leave your house, travel and pay bucks that the rep houses didn't use faded prints. I am a frequent patron of BAM, AMMI, WR, MoMA & FF and often you see lousy prints. Most recently the print of "The Dunwich Horror" which screened at BAM recently was completely pink.

Hardbop: Back in February, before the "Ben-Hur" show, one of the managers announced that they will most likely bring the revivals back during the theater's slow times. I believe she specifically mentioned September or October. Since then, the Ziegfeld has had fairly large crowds even on weekday nights, and one of their friendly employees told me that some of the "Indiana Jones" shows did extremely well. So the chances do look good.

Pete - you're right about "The Professionals" back in 1986. That was a beautiful print, and I was lucky to be seeing the movie for the first time that way instead of on TV.

Jeff et.al:

Thanks for all the "fade" info--in paricular, I was referring to a recent "Barry Lyndon" at MOMA, a few months ago. The redcoats were certainly not pink, but not as red as I remember, and definitely not as good as the Warner's DVD. I hear that there is a big problem with fade on "JAWS" prints-Spielberg has said it himself. I suggested "JAWS" as a title for the next classic series. You can be sure that I would bug Craig for Spielberg's private print, or else, Robert Harris, how about a restoration on "JAWS"?


Gary

Jeff et.al:

Thanks for all the "fade" info--in paricular, I was referring to a recent "Barry Lyndon" at MOMA, a few months ago. The redcoats were certainly not pink, but not as red as I remember, and definitely not as good as the Warner's DVD. I hear that there is a big problem with fade on "JAWS" prints-Spielberg has said it himself. I suggested "JAWS" as a title for the next classic series. You can be sure that I would bug Craig for Spielberg's private print, or else, Robert Harris, how about a restoration on "JAWS"?


Gary

Jeff et.al:

Thanks for all the "fade" info--in paricular, I was referring to a recent "Barry Lyndon" at MOMA, a few months ago. The redcoats were certainly not pink, but not as red as I remember, and definitely not as good as the Warner's DVD. I hear that there is a big problem with fade on "JAWS" prints-Spielberg has said it himself. I suggested "JAWS" as a title for the next classic series. You can be sure that I would bug Craig for Spielberg's private print, or else, Robert Harris, how about a restoration on "JAWS"?


Gary

Wow! I didn't realize that its been 20 years since the Ziegfeld did the "Lust For Life" and "The Professionals" presentation. I remember them well as I was filling in as projectionist for those screenings. I think it was one of the last times I worked at the Ziegfeld, and one of perhaps two times that I worked there after they started showing films with a platter. I also noted the irony that the film that was most based on color, "Lust" was the one that was most faded. Of course our 70mm print of "Exorcist" at Radio City was also almost completely faded as well. I can sympathize with the projectionists at the Ziegfeld who had to patch "Lawrence" together. It took me about two hours to get the "Exorcist" print in (what I hoped) was running condition. We didn't get a chance to pre-screen anything (a departure at the Hall) for the Warner's series, which was probably just as well, as I'm not sure the "Exorcist" print would have survived another screening.

Three times is better than one! This system is really bogging...

Gary, you may be confusing dye fade with just bad printing, or prints being made from elements several generations from the negative (which is the case on lots of these prints). Lots of factors as you know will affect the color.

Yes, pink is pink, and that's faded Eastmancolor for sure. Colors not being as strong isn't fade. When Eastman fades, everything goes at the same rate, all colors look 'off' not just one.

Gary/Ziegfeld Man:

I ran Jaws at the Lafayette back in 2004 and the print was fine, Universal having struck several new prints about a year before. There's no need for a "restoration" on that title as Universal's negative is excellent.

Gary/Ziegfeld Man:

I ran Jaws at the Lafayette back in 2004 and the print was fine, Universal having struck several new prints about a year before. There's no need for a "restoration" on that title as Universal's negative is excellent.

Jeff and Peter,

Thanks for the info, I had suggested Jaws to Monique--hope to see it on the next go round. Would love to do the intro!!

Here's a question-anyone think that a few B and W titles might draw an audience. Anyone remember the Kirk Douglas and Burt Lancaster "Tough Guys" Festival from the 1980's at the Ziegfeld? I saw a great double bill of "Sweet Smell of Success" and "Ace in the Hole" AKA "The Big Carnival." Not too many people there, but I loved it. The second film has long been on the "mosted wanted" list on DVD.
I just don't know if it's feasible today-maybe more Film Forum territory!

Gary

Gary... the posts above by Peter Apruzzese, Bill Huelbig and REndres regarding "Lust for Life" and "The Professional" refer to that Douglas/Lancaster retrospective. Scroll up about half way up the page back to AlAlvarez' post of January 28th 2006, where he lists every engagement at the Ziegfeld from its opening in 1969 all the way through the '80's. On February 8th, Al followed up with all the engagements during the 1990's. Those lists make for a nice stroll down memory lane! And take note of how frequently the theater was closed for short periods especially during the '70's and '80's.

OPENING DAY of Ice Age. 30 people in attendance.

"OPENING DAY of Ice Age. 30 people in attendance"

I love the Ziegfeld and I hate to gloat but...

Was this 30 people total for all 5 shows or 30 people for the show you went too? Being the only theater showing the film in DLP in Manhattan I would expect things to pick up over the weekend. Amd Friday was a beautiful day with temps in the high 70's.
Also the reiews in the NY Times was not good. The film itself is a very weak sequel to the original. The best bits were the scenes with the squirrel and his nut.

Irv:

Thanks, that is a great list by Al--I believe that "Cabaret" was my first Ziegfeld experience. Would love to see that again at the Ziegfeld. If you're a Liza fan-a restored "Liza with a Z" on Showtime (which is supposed to be a free weekend preview) tonight at 8, I believe. (DVD comes out on Tues.) It's a great show-and I only saw it at MTR, recently. It was shown at the Ziegfeld a few weeks ago during one of the closed days of the classics. Nobody invited me.

Gary

Sorry, Ed-you gave me the "heads up" on the list. Too early in the AM!

Gary

You know I agree that everyone needs to "calm down". I've been going to the BigScreen Classics at the Lafayette since it started. They had many kinks to work out from the first showing, but in time, it formed to be the great series it is today. I for one was ecxtatic to see "Ben-Hur" on that big screen..I'm hoping and betting that if Ziegfeld does this series again (I HOPE) they will work the kinks out , plan it more and make the next one bigger and better.

You must know one thing about kid shows in the 'city' , most theaters die with them. Fox wanted Ice Age to run at the Ziegfeld, they do not care if it looses money, Clearview took the Ziegfeld only to have a 'Flagship' theater in the "city" , Thank God Loews, did not keep it , They would have made it into a 15plex

You must know one thing about kid shows in the 'city' , most theaters die with them. Fox wanted Ice Age to run at the Ziegfeld, they do not care if it looses money, Clearview took the Ziegfeld only to have a 'Flagship' theater in the "city" , Thank God Loews, did not keep it , They would have made it into a 15plex

Cineplex Odeon tried to multiplex the Ziegfeld and triplex the National. Their respective landlords would not allow it. Whatever their motivation, common sense prevailed.

HEY GUYS GOOD NEWS IT 'IS WRITTEN' THAT MY GOOD FRIENDS AT 'THE SOUTH BAY CINEMA'ARE GOING TO SHOW 'LARENCE OF ARABIA' IN 70 MM APRIL 7TH TO THE 13TH, THEY HAD AN OPEN SCREEN THAT WEEK AND A PRINT WAS AVAILABLE. BY THE WAY, THE GUYS THAT OWN THE THEATER ARE THE GUYS THAT SAVED THE DAY THAT SUNDAY WHEN THE FILM BROKE AT THE ZIEGFELD. O K SHOW TIMES ARE AT 2;00, 7;30 EVERY DAY, THE ADDRESS IS 495 MONTALK H/WAY IN WEST BABALON 1/4 MILE WEST OF ROUTE 109 PHONE ;631;587 7808 MORE TO COME

Is it a 70MM Mag or DTS print?

I think it will be D T S,mag print does not look like it will be available, They will be running with a Dolby CP200 with the new DTS, with the memory,

Jeff gave me his two free passes from the "Lawrence" sync sound incident, and I didn't want to see "Ice Age 2", so I gave them to my friend Jennifer. She took her 8-year-old son to see "Ice Age", and he was very impressed with the way the Ziegfeld's curtains opened and closed. That was most likely the first time he'd ever seen that in a movie theater.

Cinema Treasures: The Next Generation.

Hmmm. The curtains didn't open and close when I saw "Chicago" there a couple of years back. Nor did they open and close when I saw "The Producers" as recently as this past December. Could it be that the practice has been re-adopted in the wake of the Classics series?

Hi Guys:

I've been feeling post-classics depression, and it's been a little quiet here, and given "Ice Age 2" was #1 last weekend, I figured I would fantasize with enough classics for a few more festivals. I'd really like some input--I think these titles would be great on the big screen, would get an audience (with children for many), are all good films, although not necessarily all my favorites, and I welcome your additions (or deletions) and comments. My top choice would be "The Converstion" but I don't think more than a handful would come.

Thanks,

Gary

The King & I
Bridge on The River Kwai
Psycho
The Guns of Navarone
The Magnificent Seven
The Great Escape
Oklahoma
The Music Man
How The West Was Won
Mary Poppins
The Sound of Music
Goldfinger
The Wild Bunch
The Graduate
Bonnie & Clyde
Funny Girl
The Lion in Winter
Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid ( I hate this movie)
The Sting
Midnight Cowboy
MASH
Love Story ( I'm not joking )
Woodstock
A Clockwork Orange
Fiddler on the Roof
The French Connection
Cabaret
The Exorcist
American Graffiti
The Towering Inferno
The Poseidon Adventure
Jaws
One Flew Over The Cukoo's Nest
The Odd Couple
Network
Rocky
Taxi Driver
Saturday Night Fever
The Deer Hunter
Witness
An Officer and a Gentleman
Amadeus
Fatal Attraction
Moonstruck
Goodfellas
The Lion King
Beauty and the Beast
The Silence of the Lambs
Schindler's List
The Shawshank Redemption
Apollo 13
Titanic
Aliens
Altered States
Dog Day Afternoon
Pollyanna
Young Frankenstein
From Russia With Love
Thunderball
The Dirty Dozen
The Way We Were
Grease
Superman
Back to the Future
Who Framed Roger Rabbit
Top Gun
Bullitt
Romeo & Juliet (1968)

A lot of great choices there, Gary. I would immediately strike "How the West Was Won", however. I just don't feel that a true 3-strip Cinerama film should be projected on a flat screen, no matter what the size. I my opinion, it will only serve to magnify the distortions where the 3 images meet and scream out at the top of its metaphorical throat for a proper 3-strip venue in which to be properly exhibited.

I, for one, like the idea of a "second chance" festival where infamous big-screen bombs like "Heaven's Gate", "1941" and "Waterworld" are given a chance to be seen the way they were originally intended and re-evaluated without the journalistic bias and scrutiny they were unfairly subjected to on their intitial releases.

By the way, "The Conversation" is one of my all time favorite films - a brilliant masterwork from Coppola that is arguably the finest American film of the 1970's... But, I agree that it probably wouldn't generate as much interest as many of the other titles on your list.

Ditto...alot of nice choices Gary. I think I would delete 'Back to the Future', 'Top Gun', and 'Fatal Attraction'. Although they were successful they don't command the respect of a classic, at least not now. Maybe sometime in the future (no pun intended). To me they're just 80s movie fodder. In all fairness I've never seen 'Fatal Attraction' in it's entirety, but I can't stand Michael Douglas and I'm not neccesarily a Glen Close fan either, but to each his own. Hopefully they'll choose some of the other ones from your list. They're are some great ones on there. 'Bullit', 'The Wild Bunch', 'Mary Poppins'? Bring 'em on.

I've seen 'Woodstock' tons of times and own the director's cut DVD. I saw it on the screen about 10 years ago at the Village East Cinema when the director's cut was released theatrically. The screen wasn't nearly as big as the Ziegfeld. This year isn't a milestone Woodstock anniversary (37 years ago this August), but the film is a good summertime thing to watch. I would LOVE to see a really nice print of it at the Ziegfeld. That would be amazing!! If they could get a hold of the director's cut from the early 90s with what I beleive was surround stereo...wow...very cool!

I doubt that the Ziegfeld would consider return engagements of "Funny Girl" and "The Way We Were" --- both played the Ziegfeld in recent years, and despite advertising in the NY Times and other publications (not to mention new prints), neither did very well.

"Funny Girl" was playing at the Ziegfeld on 9/11. A friend went to a matinee on the weekend before 9/11, said the print was terrific (including overture and intermission) but that the screening was sparsely attended. "The Way We Were" played the Ziegeld in 2003; I went to a Friday or Saturday night screening and there couldn't have been more than one hundred people in the audience.

Here's a suggestion. A new version of "Superman II" is being prepared by Warner Brothers for release on DVD later this year, incorporating a great deal of footage shot by the film's original director, Richard Donner. If Warners is considering a theatrical run to drum up publicity for the new version, then the Ziegfeld would be a good choice.

Timing would be key there, ErikH. They may not want to compete with themselves against the brand new "Superman Returns" being released the end of June. However, I'd pay full price for a "Superman" and "Superman II" double feature somewhere along the way!

Ed, I second your "Superman" double feature idea. The film that sprang to mind when I was at the Ziegfeld recently was "Superman." How great would it be to see the trial at the beginning and the rotation of the dome, opening that column of light into space? Gary's suggestion of "Mary Poppins" is another good one. "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers" would be my pick of a classic musical. It's one of my favorites (has Tommy Rall in it!) and I've never seen it on a big screen. Does anyone know if the 1956 version of "My Sister Eileen" is a possiblity to be screened? It's not the greatest musical but still underrated, in my opinion.

A good plan for the Ziegfeld (maybe for their upcoming 40th anniversary in 2009) would be to show some of the great films that had their first-ever New York engagements there. Just a few that come to mind: "Ryan's Daughter", "Cabaret", "That's Entertainment", "Tommy", "Barry Lyndon", "Close Encounters" (even though they just showed it last month), "Gandhi", "Hair", "Apocalypse Now", etc.

How big is the screen at this theater in Babylon?

The screen at South Bay is almost 40 ft wide, Almost wall to wall.

Thanks for the feedback, please keep it coming-I'm looking to refine this list, with all your comments, and then send a revised list to Craig. I received a fund raising letter from Film Forum today, and the following really struck me:

"We select films based on quality, not the bottom line, independent documentaries and revived classics like "The Fallen Idol" do well. However, while most offerings are critically acclaimed, many play to small audiences with a special interest in the director, genre or subject matter."

There are many films that I listed that I don't consider classics (e.g. "Love Story"), but I tried to do a mix of titles that are not only classics but also some crowd pleasers like "Top Gun" which I never saw in a theater. Kind of one for me and one for the sake of filling seats in the hope that a classics festival can continue and be economically feasible at the same time. I really like the idea of people bringing their kids and others to see films that they enjoyed however many years ago-this will fill seats and perpetuate the heritage.


Ed-two questions:

(1) I saw "Waterworld" and really wanted to like it-but after the initial scene with Kostner on his boat "refining" his drinking water-this film did nothing for me. What did you see in it?

(2) I never saw the three strip Cinerama "How The West Was Won," but did see, I guess, a 35mm version in my local theatre, The Crossbay (Ozone Park) and loved it, back in the 60's. So, are you saying that if we can't do the real Cinerama, don't do it at all? just curious.

The "first-run" idea sounds great to me, and "Woodstock"--absolutely cannot be appreciated except at a venue like the Ziegfeld.

Thanks again- more titles, please

Gary

Thanks for the feedback, please keep it coming-I'm looking to refine this list, with all your comments, and then send a revised list to Craig. I received a fund raising letter from Film Forum today, and the following really struck me:

"We select films based on quality, not the bottom line, independent documentaries and revived classics like "The Fallen Idol" do well. However, while most offerings are critically acclaimed, many play to small audiences with a special interest in the director, genre or subject matter."

There are many films that I listed that I don't consider classics (e.g. "Love Story"), but I tried to do a mix of titles that are not only classics but also some crowd pleasers like "Top Gun" which I never saw in a theater. Kind of one for me and one for the sake of filling seats in the hope that a classics festival can continue and be economically feasible at the same time. I really like the idea of people bringing their kids and others to see films that they enjoyed however many years ago-this will fill seats and perpetuate the heritage.


Ed-two questions:

(1) I saw "Waterworld" and really wanted to like it-but after the initial scene with Kostner on his boat "refining" his drinking water-this film did nothing for me. What did you see in it?

(2) I never saw the three strip Cinerama "How The West Was Won," but did see, I guess, a 35mm version in my local theatre, The Crossbay (Ozone Park) and loved it, back in the 60's. So, are you saying that if we can't do the real Cinerama, don't do it at all? just curious.

The "first-run" idea sounds great to me, and "Woodstock"--absolutely cannot be appreciated except at a venue like the Ziegfeld.

Thanks again- more titles, please

Gary

Hi Gary... I only included "Waterworld" in my suggestion for a "second chance" week because I don't think it ever had a shot at being fairly reviewed or given a chance to find an audience on its first release. As with "Heaven's Gate" and "1941", many critical minds had already decided to pan the film based on the film's outsized budget and stories of the star's egomaniacal behavior on set. In truth, I'm not a terrific fan of "Waterworld", but I do think it was maligned for what occured off screen more so than for what appears on the screen. Similarly, I don't think "1941" is nearly as bad as its reputation would lead you to believe and I happen to believe that the full 3 hour and 39 minute cut of "Heaven's Gate" is a work of absolute beauty. I just thought it would be a neat idea to run these 3 alleged turkeys on the Ziegfeld's big screen (and each is spectacularly suited for the big screen in its own way) to give them a shot at redemption at the hands of 21st Century audiences.

Posted too soon.

As for HTWWW... I am indeed saying "if you can't do 3 strip Cinerama, don't do it at all." The way the horizon and other straight lines so obviously slant away from the center at either side of the screen is incredibly distracting whenever I've tried to watch this film in letterbox format on TV. Bad as it is on a 60 inch home screen, I can't imagine that projecting such a broken and distorted image on a flat screen 50 FEET wide would help matters. Perhaps its just me, but I'd rather hold out and give that film its proper due. At least if there was a curved screen, I might be able to live with a single strip 35mm print... but otherwise, I vote "no" on that title for the Zeigfeld. And let's face it... HTWWW is not all that great a movie. It is a bit cornball and cliche ridden, in my humble opinion. Whatever greatness it has, I believe, is due in large part to the 3 strip format in which it was originally presented. Perhaps I'm in the minority on that front.

I'd rather see William Wyler's "The Big Country" at the Ziegfeld.

Another film I'd add to the list, Gary, would be the original "Planet of the Apes". I'd love to know what are the top 25 film titles listed on those suggestion cards they handed out during the series.

I e-mailed the Seattle Cinerama, http://www.cinerama.com/default.asp
to see if they plan on any regular Cinerama programming. The web site is interesting as the theatre was restored with the idea of not only first run but also as a place where HTWWW could be shown in all its glory. I would go to Seattle for that. I've never seen "Heaven's Gate" on the big screen, tried the DVD which is very poor quality, and gave up. So I definitely agree with you on that and "The Big Country." Also would add "Rosemary's Baby" along with "Planet of the Apes." I'm also curious about the top suggestions as well as what didn't work in this last series--e.g. how well did all three Indy films do?

Beth--I've never seen "Seven Brides for Seven Brothers"-would love to! In a few days, I want to send all this to Craig. So the more suggestions the better.

Anyone like-"Midnight Express"-that film really scared me!

Thanks,

Gary

Hello Gary,

HTWWW was shown in 3-strip format at the Cinerama Dome in LA as recently as last November. The next engagement is supposed to be in 2007. "This is Cinerama" may play this year. However, no official announcement has been made for either presentation.

JSA

Gary: After "Lawrence", I asked one of the friendly Ziegfeld employees which classics did the best business, and she said it was the Indiana Jones movies.

What the Ziegfeld REALLY needs is something like one or two week exclusives of BIG blockbuster movies before they go into saturation release.
The huge majority of people don't care where they see a movie - employees at the multiplex look at me like I have 6 heads when I ask "which time is in thatre 13?" (The good big screen at Loew's E-Walk - bigger than the Ziegfeld's btw.) I know people who saw Titanic in one of the small houses at the Chelsea which I think is a travesty.
BUT - if it's a highly anticipated movie and the ONLY place to see it is the Ziegfeld, people will come.
Ice Age 2 made what... $70 million? There were perhaps 30 people in attendance on Friday (opening) night. It was playing to sold out houses at the horrible horrible AMC in Times Square.... I'm just saying...

What Movieguy is describing is exactly the way it used to be at the Ziegfeld in the '70s and early '80s. Most times when a movie opened there exclusively, ("Close Encounters", "Hair", "Gandhi", etc.), there were always lines around the block and a struggle to find seats.

There were lines around the block when "Independence Day" opened in 1996. I had to go to a 10 AM show to get in.

As I mentioned in an earlier post here Oliver Stone's 'The Doors' had huge lines opening night at the Ziegfeld back in 1990-91. I went to to the midnight show. Had to wait in a huge line out side. The show was absolutely sold out, every seat filled.

We are all in agreement--I remember seeing the first showing of "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" at the Ziegfeld. Incredibly hot summer day, the A/C, unfortunately, was barely working, the place was packed--and we all had a great time.

I received my Direct TV statement today with an enclosure for "pay per view" with this pitch--"No cell phones, No loud talkers, No popcorn crunchers." "This May, stay home and have the theater all to yourself."

With that said and what has been said above, I am still amazed that the Ziegfeld even exists today.

If the Ziegfeld could get an "exclusive" on "The DaVinci Code" next month(which it probably won't), the lines would be back. But I'll be there opening day.

Until then, in the hope of more "classics," list some more favorites (Please)and send your comments and appreciations to Clearview.

Movieguy-the only good thing about the AMC 25 is the lobby!!

Thanks,

Gary


P.S. Check this out in Today's Times for the state of the Multiplex:

OPINION | April 7, 2006
Op-Ed Contributor: The Last Picture Show
By NORA EPHRON
Going to see the movies, circa 2006.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/07/opinion/07ephron.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5070&en=325c6f3b5e393b26&ex=1145073600&emc=eta1

Gary - I was there too on the first day of "Roger Rabbit". The air conditioning wasn't working at all, and the ticket taker told everybody that. If it were any other theater, I would've turned around and left ... but not at the Ziegfeld.

I would hope that a filmmaker like Nora Ephron would try to do something more about the sad state of multiplex exhibition that to merely write an op-ed piece in the Times. Why couldn't something like this happen to a Steven Spielberg or George Lucas, who might actually care enough and have sufficient high-powered influence to make some waves over this unforgiveable lack of regard for the product (the very costly product, I might add) manufactured by the industry?

Yeah, maybe it was better when the studios owned the theaters (pre-1947?) I don't have an answer; the last time I went to my local multiplex on L.I. the ticket taker was too busy with her boyfriend to take my ticket. But on a brighter note, I am still impressed that the suits at Clearview took a gamble on a classics program, for two months!! I could use seeing Roger Rabbit tonight at the Ziegfeld!!!

Gary

Yeah, maybe it was better when the studios owned the theaters (pre-1947?) I don't have an answer; the last time I went to my local multiplex on L.I. the ticket taker was too busy with her boyfriend to take my ticket. But on a brighter note, I am still impressed that the suits at Clearview took a gamble on a classics program, for two months!! I could use seeing Roger Rabbit tonight at the Ziegfeld!!!

Gary

Hey Gary, I thought of a few more films to suggest (my apologies for any repeats and lack of knowledge concerning rights availability, etc...):
A week of gangster films, featuring the the tough guys Edward G. Robinson, James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart
For Halloween, the EVIL DEAD trilogy (not classics in the literal sense, but it'll draw out the Sam Raimi geeks for repeat viewings; they're rabid about their Evil Dead). Also classics like THE HAUNTING, THE INNOCENTS, THE OLD DARK HOUSE, the Universal FRANKENSTEINs, DRACULA, THE MUMMY, etc. They could even show the silly Abbott and Costello MEET THE... Another fun A&C film concerning ghosts is THE TIME OF THEIR LIVES (my favorite A&C)
Films by Michael Powell, such as BLACK NARCISSUS, THE RED SHOES, A MATTER OF LIFE AND DEATH aka STAIRWAY TO HEAVEN (these would look great on the Ziegfeld's large screen)
Ealing films: THE LADYKILLERS, THE LAVENDER HILL MOB, THE MAN IN THE WHITE SUIT, etc.
Musicals: KISS ME KATE, GUYS AND DOLLS, Busby Berkeley films, almost any Fred and Ginger films - GAY DIVORCEE, TOP HAT, FOLLOW THE FLEET, SWINGTIME
More Hitchcock: NOTORIOUS, 39 STEPS, etc.

A couple of other films, probably less accesible but a lot of fun:
Any of BUSTER KEATON's silent films - THE CAMERAMAN in particular would be a good film for a general crowd and a couple of scenes were shot on location in NYC. THE GENERAL is his most famous but a lot of his shorts would be great, too, like COPS, ONE WEEK, THE BOAT

The HAROLD LLOYD Trust just released a boxed set of the majority of Harold's silent work. SAFETY LAST would be a good one. Several extended scenes from SPEEDY were shot on location in NYC and in Coney Island.

Beth:
Great suggestions, I especially like the Black & Whites--I think our whole group should be the programming committee. I would go to every one of these at the Ziegfeld. By weekend's end, I'll have about 100 films to send to Craig--so guys keep them coming. Ultimately, there is the issue of art vs. commerce, but so many of these ARE great and were successful and popular, that I think that Clearview could take a chance on quite a few. In other words, is there life after "Lawrence," "Ben-Hur," etc.?--ABSOLUTELY!

THANKS,

GARY

Since there has not been a post here in 5 whole days, I have to presume that many are suffering from "classics" withdrawal. So here's the GOOD NEWS! I e-mailed the above list (including your suggestions for additions and deletions) to Craig at Clearview and received the following response TODAY:

"WOW, this is a great list Gary!

I really appreciate all your help with The Ziegfeld. I am sure that we
will bring The Classics back to The Ziegfeld soon and it is people like
you and the good folks at Cinema Treasures that will make this happen.

Thanks again
Craig"

I take no credit for this because I have drawn my inspiration and enthusiasm from this entire group right here. Again, I would ask you individually to take a moment and send your comments to Craig at Clearview. The concept of the Ziegfeld as a periodic Classics revival house is just an incredible thing to me. Let's indeed make it happen.

Happy Holidays to All,

Gary

Gary, could you please send me an e-mail via the address on the main page of my website: www.geocities.com/crazyforcinema?

Thanks!

I just checked to see which movies will be playing at the Ziegfeld after Ice Age 2 and while I'd cough up the dollars for something I normally wouldn't see at any other theater, I'm disappointed to learn that I have zero interest in seeing these two: Scary Movie 4 and Mission Impossible 3 (I will not support Tom Cruise in any way, the jerk). However, these films will probably do pretty well with ticket sales, which is a good thing for the theater.

I heard from a friend in LA that in May the Egyptian Theater will show Around the World, South Pacific and Patton in restored 70mm prints. Couldn't Clearview make arrangements with the Egyptian management to have these prints shown at the Ziegfeld after the LA showing? Perhaps Clearview could establsh somekind of partnership and bring to NY all these wonderful film series that lucky Angelinos have the opportunity to see. Would appreciate comments and ideas.

Andreco:

Terrific idea--this is exactly what I'm talking about when I suggest sending your suggestions to Craig at Clearview: Coconnor@clearcin.com
Craig is head of marketing at Clearview and the whole driving force behind the Classics series. Speak your mind-HE WANTS INPUT!!

Thanks,

Gary

"Speak your mind-HE WANTS INPUT!!"

To a point... Remember how I was extreamly critical of the LOA issues? Very vocal?

Well, I eventually sent an email with my input/thanks/criticism/suggestions. No reply. Eh...

The Ziegfeld would need to book those 70mm films from the studios, the Egyptian Theatre isn't a distributor. The Around the World is not a new or restored print, the other two mentioned *are* new prints. Very doubtful that Warner, Fox, Goldwyn and the archives involved would let the films go to a platter house such as the Ziegfeld. If the Ziegfeld re-enabled their reel-to-reel system and demonstrated that they could handle the films properly, then they might consider it.

Peter:

To the best of your knowledge, how good is that "Around the World" print? Until I read the Egyptian schedule at the in70mm website, I was not aware that a Todd-AO print was in existence!

Regards,

JSA

Jeff:

We're in agreement. I can't tell you how many voice mails I left for Craig, with no reply either. I just believe in perseverance. Today, I needed to see a foot doctor whose appointment schedule was totally booked. The only other option offered was an appointment in two weeks. I asked if my name and phone number could be held in case of a cancellation (something I do in my office), I was told absolutely NO! Just keep calling his office from 8 AM on to see if a cancellation was called in. However ridiculous this was to me, I had no other options. I called every half hour from 8AM on. By 1PM, I was told that there was a cancellation at 3 PM. My toe was taken care of and I am no longer in pain. I complained (nicely) to the doctor about his office policy and he told me that his office staff is so burdened with insurance nonsense and paperwork that unfortunately, requests like mine cannot be accommodated.

At my first classics visit, "West Side Story," I believe, I was told that the building was landmarked by one of the staff. I called the NYC Landmarks Preservation Board to check this out. It is not landmarked. And even if it was landmarked, it could have the same fate as the Astor Plaza. The beautiful Bowery Savings Bank on 42 St. is now Cipriani's, a beautiful catering hall.

All of which means that I am not willing to settle for "out of sync" prints like "Lawrence" either. To me, keeping an ongoing Classics program going in the midst of drivel like Scary Movie 4 is first priority. By the end of the "Lawrence" run, the comments here were much better. I think we can all work towards making the whole program (if it continues) much better.

I'm sure that Craig has to answer to the "suits" at Clearview and the "Bottom Line." So, send ten more e-mails. Remember what Tim Robbins had to do in "Shawshank" to get his library.

We all want the same thing-the best Ziegfeld experience imaginable.
This is all going to take work until we can all buy the place and run it ourselves.

Thanks,

Gary

JSA - the word on the 80 Days print is that it is slightly faded in color, but otherwise in good shape. Regardless, it's the rarity of seeing the 30fps version that makes the showing important. I believe it's cmoing from a film archive as Warner Bros. no longer has any prints of the film - 35mm or 70mm. The festival sounds great, wish I were near LA and could go!

Hi Everyone,

It's been a while since I posted anything here on the site. But, I wanted to Thank You all for making The Hollywood Classics a nice success at The Ziegfeld.

Although I can not get into any specifics at this time, I can assure you that The Classics will be back at The Ziegfeld sometime in the fall!

This could not have been done without all of your nice comments and suggestions, so please keep them coming!

As soon as I know any details, you will be the first to know.

Thanks again
Craig

Peter: I appreciate your response. Thank you! We agree, it is indeed a rare opportunity. I am going to skip work that day, certainly don't want to miss it! If you wish, I'll let you know how it turns out.

Regards,
JSA

Gary... You inspired me. I just sent this comment to Craig on the Cleariew site and even dropped your name.

"Just wanted to drop a line to Craig. I attended a number screenings during the recent Classics series and I've already completed the survey above about my excellent experiences during the run (and on other first run occasions as well). I just wanted to thank you again for the terrific series and for the promise of more yet to come in the Fall. In the meanwhile, I hope to support the theater with its coming run of "Mission Impossible III" and always look forward to an opportunity to enjoy a film on the Ziegfeld's big screen.

If I might suggest a title for a future Classics presentation... I saw in last Sunday's Times that the Film Forum was running a brand new 35mm print of Terrence Malick's beautiful 1978 film "Days of Heaven". I refuse to do this painterly masterpiece the injustice of watching it in the Film Forum's cramped quarters, but would love to see it spalshed across the 50 foot screen at the Ziegfeld.

I post regularly at the Cinema Treasures site and I know you peruse those comments and appreciate our patronage and suggestions. We certainly appreciate your listening to what we have to say. I'm aware one of our contributors - Gary - provided you with a lengthy list of suggestions and I'm sure he's been in your ear a lot with various praise and criticisms. I just wanted to take the time - now that I'm in Classics withdrawal - to once again thank you for a wonderful 6 weeks of programming. I hope that we can see more 70mm and I hope we can get closer to the kind of presentation and showmanship that was intended for some of these roadshow era films (such as proper lighting and curtain cues for overture and intermission and a true intermission break where intended). I know you guys strive to bring us the best show possible and it was evident that many kinks were worked out as the series progressed. The kind of showmanship that these films demand is an art that has been greatly lost not only on the part of exhibitors over the years, but, sadly, on the part of the audience as well - in the form of lowered expectations and the general acceptance of mediocrity. How wonderful it would be if you could bring that level of showmanship back to your flagship theater. You folks are its curators and the Ziegfeld is your museum. We look to you to remind those of us who remember (and show those who know no better) what a truly grand and magical experience it once was to attend a Broadway roadshow engagement.

Thanks for your time."

Ed:

You have the "tongue of Cicero," I can only aspire to be as articulate and inspirational as you, and I certainly hope that when the Classics return, I hear some introductions that you personally make to some of the screenings. Hell, all of us should be introducing these films. "Days of Heaven"-a title I didn't even think of. I just watched "Pretty Baby" with Brooke Shields-I must have had the DVD for a year and for some reason watched it tonight. I had never seen this film before. A gorgeous, evocative work of art; I have an 80-inch screen with a front projection system-but it ain't the Ziegfeld!!!

BRAVO

Gary

C'mon Gals and Guys:

Way too quiet here-we need something to keep the juices flowing until the Classics come back to the Ziegfeld. So what is a "Classic?"

Steven Spielberg said something interesting about this when he received his first Oscar in 1987, which is a producer's award, the Thalberg:

Steven Spielberg on
Accepting
The Irving Thalberg Memorial Award
March, 1987

"Thank you very much.

Following in the footsteps of some of my heroes: Cecil B. DeMille, and George Stevens, Alfred Hitchcock, William Wyler, Ingmar Bergman, and Robert Wise, this award is truly a great honor for me. The Thalberg award was first given 50 years ago in 1937 which was the year of In Old Chicago, Captains Courageous, Dead End, The Life of Emile Zola, Lost Horizon, Stage Door, and A Star is Born—all having been nominated for best picture that year.

I’m told that Irving Thalberg worshipped writers and that’s where it all begins—that we are first and foremost storytellers and without, as he called it, the photoplay, everybody is simply improvising. He also knew that a script is more than just a blueprint. The whole idea of Movie Magic is that interweave of powerful image and dialogue and performance and music that can never be separated, and when it’s working right can never be duplicated or ever forgotten.

I’ve grown up; most of my life has been spent in the dark watching movies. Movies have been the literature of my life. The literature of Irving Thalberg’s generation was books and plays. They read the great words of great minds. And I think in our romance with technology and our excitement at exploring all the possibilities of film and video, we’ve partially lost something that we now have to reclaim. I think it’s time to renew our romance with the word. I’m as culpable as anyone in having exalted the image at the expense of the word. But only a generation of readers will spawn a generation of writers.

The five films nominated for best picture this year are as much the writer’s film as the director’s and it’s good news that each of these films has found it’s audience because this audience, who we all work for, deserves everything we have to give them. They deserve that fifth draft, that tenth take, that one extra cut and those several dollars over budget—and Irving Thalberg knew that. He would have been proud to have been associated with any of these films as I am proud to have my name on this award in his honor because it reminds me of really how much growth as an artist I have ahead of me in order to be worthy of standing in the company of those who received this before me.

So, my deepest thanks to the Board of Governors of the Academy and the audience out there in the dark.

Thank you very much."


Now, The Writers Guild of America has just come out with its list ot the 101 best screenplays ever written (the new "Premiere" Summer issue has narrowed it down to 25)

From The WGA:

"The Godfather, Casablanca, Citizen Kane, Chinatown, Schindler's List - the greatest films of all time have one thing in common: each began as the vision of writer. Long before the parts were cast and the cameras rolled, a writer gazed upon a blank page and set in motion a classic story. For the first time ever, the Writers Guild of America, west (WGAw) and the Writers Guild of America, East (WGAE) are celebrating the best screenwriters and their timeless works with the release of the 101 Greatest Screenplays list.

101 Greatest Screenplays compiles the finest achievements in film writing, as voted upon by professional film and television writers. In the summer of 2005, ballots were sent out asking WGA members to list up to ten of their favorite produced screenplays. Any film, past or present, English-language or otherwise, was eligible. The resulting list is like a travelogue of the greatest films of the century, with all decades from the 1930s on represented among the rankings.

Like a composer of a classic symphony or an author of a beloved novel, the most memorable and moving pictures would not exist without their principal architect: the screenwriter. Too often classic films are linked only to their stars or directors, overlooking the original artists who first put pen to paper - or more recently keyboard to laptop - to create the kind of enduring works that have entertained and inspired generations of movie-going audiences around globe. 101 Greatest Screenplays will finally set the record straight by celebrating the best in film writing and bringing recognition to the wizards behind the curtain: the men and women who wrote the greatest films of all time.

And now, on with the list..."

1. CASABLANCA
Screenplay by Julius J. & Philip G. Epstein and Howard Koch. Based on the play "Everybody Comes to Rick's" by Murray Burnett and Joan Alison
2. THE GODFATHER
Screenplay by Mario Puzo and Francis Ford Coppola. Based on the novel by Mario Puzo
3. CHINATOWN
Written by Robert Towne
4. CITIZEN KANE
Written by Herman Mankiewicz and Orson Welles
5. ALL ABOUT EVE
Screenplay by Joseph L. Mankiewicz. Based on "The Wisdom of Eve," a short story and radio play by Mary Orr
6. ANNIE HALL
Written by Woody Allen and Marshall Brickman
7. SUNSET BLVD.
Written by Charles Brackett & Billy Wilder and D.M. Marshman, Jr.
8. NETWORK
Written by Paddy Chayefsky
9. SOME LIKE IT HOT
Screenplay by Billy Wilder & I.A.L. Diamond. Based on "Fanfare of Love," a German film written by Robert Thoeren and M. Logan
10. THE GODFATHER II
Screenplay by Francis Ford Coppola and Mario Puzo. Based on Mario Puzo's novel "The Godfather"
11. BUTCH CASSIDY AND THE SUNDANCE KID
Written by William Goldman
12. DR. STRANGELOVE
Screenplay by Stanley Kubrick and Peter George and Terry Southern. Based on novel "Red Alert" by Peter George
13. THE GRADUATE
Screenplay by Calder Willingham and Buck Henry. Based on the novel by Charles Webb
14. LAWRENCE OF ARABIA
Screenplay by Robert Bolt and Michael Wilson. Based on the life and writings of Col. T.E. Lawrence
15. THE APARTMENT
Written by Billy Wilder & I.A.L. Diamond
16. PULP FICTION
Written by Quentin Tarantino. Stories by Quentin Tarantino & Roger Avary
17. TOOTSIE
Screenplay by Larry Gelbart and Murray Schisgal. Story by Don McGuire and Larry Gelbart
18. ON THE WATERFRONT
Screen Story and Screenplay by Budd Schulberg. Based on "Crime on the Waterfront" articles by Malcolm Johnson
19. TO KILL A MOCKINGBIRD
Screenplay by Horton Foote. Based on the novel by Harper Lee
20. IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE
Screenplay by Frances Goodrich & Albert Hackett & Frank Capra. Based on short story "The Greatest Gift" by Philip Van Doren Stern. Contributions to screenplay Michael Wilson and Jo Swerling
21. NORTH BY NORTHWEST
Written by Ernest Lehman
22. THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION
Screenplay by Frank Darabont. Based on the short story "Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption" by Stephen King
23. GONE WITH THE WIND
Screenplay by Sidney Howard. Based on the novel by Margaret Mitchell
24. ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND
Screenplay by Charlie Kaufman. Story by Charlie Kaufman & Michel Gondry & Pierre Bismuth
25. THE WIZARD OF OZ
Screenplay by Noel Langley and Florence Ryerson and Edgar Allan Woolf Adaptation by Noel Langley. Based on the novel by L. Frank Baum
26. DOUBLE INDEMNITY
Screenplay by Billy Wilder and Raymond Chandler. Based on the novel by James M. Cain
27. GROUNDHOG DAY
Screenplay by Danny Rubin and Harold Ramis. Story by Danny Rubin
28. SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE
Written by Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard
29. SULLIVAN'S TRAVELS
Written by Preston Sturges
30. UNFORGIVEN
Written by David Webb Peoples
31. HIS GIRL FRIDAY
Screenplay by Charles Lederer. Based on the play "The Front Page" by Ben Hecht & Charles MacArthur
32. FARGO
Written by Joel Coen & Ethan Coen
33. THE THIRD MAN
Screenplay by Graham Greene. Story by Graham Greene. Based on the short story by Graham Greene
34. THE SWEET SMELL OF SUCCESS
Screenplay by Clifford Odets and Ernest Lehman. From a novelette by Ernest Lehman
35. THE USUAL SUSPECTS
Written by Christopher McQuarrie
36. MIDNIGHT COWBOY
Screenplay by Waldo Salt. Based on the novel by James Leo Herlihy
37. THE PHILADELPHIA STORY
Screenplay by Donald Ogden Stewart. Based on the play by Philip Barry
38. AMERICAN BEAUTY
Written by Alan Ball
39. THE STING
Written by David S. Ward
40. WHEN HARRY MET SALLY
Written by Nora Ephron
41. GOODFELLAS
Screenplay by Nicholas Pileggi & Martin Scorsese. Based on book "Wise Guy" by Nicholas Pileggi
42. RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK
Screenplay by Lawrence Kasdan. Story by George Lucas and Philip Kaufman
43. TAXI DRIVER
Written by Paul Schrader
44. THE BEST YEARS OF OUR LIVES
Screenplay by Robert E. Sherwood. Based on novel "Glory For Me" by MacKinley Kantor
45. ONE FLEW OVER THE CUCKOO'S NEST
Screenplay by Lawrence Hauben and Bo Goldman. Based on the novel by Ken Kesey
46. THE TREASURE OF THE SIERRA MADRE
Screenplay by John Huston. Based on the novel by B. Traven
47. THE MALTESE FALCON
Screenplay by John Huston. Based on the novel by Dashiell Hammett
48. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI
Screenplay by Carl Foreman and Michael Wilson. Based on the novel by Pierre Boulle
49. SCHINDLER'S LIST
Screenplay by Steven Zaillian. Based on the novel by Thomas Keneally
50. THE SIXTH SENSE
Written by M. Night Shyamalan
51. BROADCAST NEWS
Written by James L. Brooks
52. THE LADY EVE
Screenplay by Preston Sturges. Story by Monckton Hoffe
53. ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN
Screenplay by William Goldman. Based on the book by Carl Bernstein & Bob Woodward
54. MANHATTAN
Written by Woody Allen & Marshall Brickman
55. APOCALYPSE NOW
Written by John Milius and Francis Coppola. Narration by Michael Herr
56. BACK TO THE FUTURE
Written by Robert Zemeckis & Bob Gale
57. CRIMES AND MISDEMEANORS
Written by Woody Allen
58. ORDINARY PEOPLE
Screenplay by Alvin Sargent. Based on the novel by Judith Guest
59. IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT
Screenplay by Robert Riskin. Based on the story "Night Bus" by Samuel Hopkins Adams
60. L.A. CONFIDENTIAL
Screenplay by Brian Helgeland & Curtis Hanson. Based on the novel by James Ellroy
61. THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS
Screenplay by Ted Tally. Based on the novel by Thomas Harris
62. MOONSTRUCK
Written by John Patrick Shanley
63. JAWS
Screenplay by Peter Benchley and Carl Gottlieb. Based on the novel by Peter Benchley
64. TERMS OF ENDEARMENT
Screenplay by James L. Brooks. Based on the novel by Larry McMurtry
65. SINGIN' IN THE RAIN
Screen Story and Screenplay by Betty Comden & Adolph Green. Based on the song by Arthur Freed and Nacio Herb Brown
66. JERRY MAGUIRE
Written by Cameron Crowe
67. E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL
Written by Melissa Mathison
68. STAR WARS
Written by George Lucas
69. DOG DAY AFTERNOON
Screenplay by Frank Pierson. Based on a magazine article by P.F. Kluge and Thomas Moore
70. THE AFRICAN QUEEN
Screenplay by James Agee and John Huston. Based on the novel by C.S. Forester
71. THE LION IN WINTER
Screenplay by James Goldman. Based on the play by James Goldman
72. THELMA & LOUISE
Written by Callie Khouri
73. AMADEUS
Screenplay by Peter Shaffer. Based on his play
74. BEING JOHN MALKOVICH
Written by Charlie Kaufman
75. HIGH NOON
Screenplay by Carl Foreman. Based on short story "The Tin Star" by John W. Cunningham
76. RAGING BULL
Screenplay by Paul Schrader and Mardik Martin. Based on the book by Jake La Motta with Joseph Carter and Peter Savage
77. ADAPTATION
Screenplay by Charlie Kaufman and Donald Kaufman. Based on the book "The Orchid Thief" by Susan Orlean
78. ROCKY
Written by Sylvester Stallone
79. THE PRODUCERS
Written by Mel Brooks
80. WITNESS
Screenplay by Earl W. Wallace & William Kelley. Story by William Kelley and Pamela Wallace & Earl W. Wallace
81. BEING THERE
Screenplay by Jerzy Kosinski. Inspired by the novel by Jerzy Kosinski
82. COOL HAND LUKE
Screenplay by Donn Pearce and Frank Pierson. Based on the novel by Donn Pearce
83. REAR WINDOW
Screenplay by John Michael Hayes. Based on the short story by Cornell Woolrich
84. THE PRINCESS BRIDE
Screenplay by William Goldman. Based on his novel
85. LA GRANDE ILLUSION
Written by Jean Renoir and Charles Spaak
86. HAROLD & MAUDE
Written by Colin Higgins
87. 8 1/2
Screenplay by Federico Fellini, Tullio Pinelli, Ennio Flaiano, Brunello Rond. Story by Fellini, Flaiano
88. FIELD OF DREAMS
Screenplay by Phil Alden Robinson. Based on the book by W.P. Kinsella
89. FORREST GUMP
Screenplay by Eric Roth. Based on the novel by Winston Groom
90. SIDEWAYS
Screenplay by Alexander Payne & Jim Taylor. Based on the novel by Rex Pickett
91. THE VERDICT
Screenplay by David Mamet. Based on the novel by Barry Reed
92. PSYCHO
Screenplay by Joseph Stefano. Based on the novel by Robert Bloch
93. DO THE RIGHT THING
Written by Spike Lee
94. PATTON
Screen Story and Screenplay by Francis Ford Coppola and Edmund H. North. Based on "A Soldier's Story" by Omar H. Bradley and "Patton: Ordeal and Triumph" by Ladislas Farago
95. HANNAH AND HER SISTERS
Written by Woody Allen
96. THE HUSTLER
Screenplay by Sidney Carroll & Robert Rossen. Based on the novel by Walter Tevis
97. THE SEARCHERS
Screenplay by Frank S. Nugent. Based on the novel by Alan Le May
98. THE GRAPES OF WRATH
Screenplay by Nunnally Johnson. Based on the novel by John Steinbeck
99. THE WILD BUNCH
Screenplay by Walon Green and Sam Peckinpah. Story by Walon Green and Roy Sickner
100. MEMENTO
Screenplay by Christopher Nolan. Based on the short story "Memento Mori" by Jonathan Nolan
101. NOTORIOUS
Written by Ben Hecht


So-All "Classics"?--What do you think? Which for the Ziegfeld?


Thanks,

Gary

If I had to pick only one out of the 101, one that hadn't played the Ziegfeld yet and would benefit the most from their big sound and screen, it would be "Patton".

Bill:

Saw your letter re:"Around The World..." in Premiere. That would be nice at the Ziegfeld,too.

Gary

It sure would, Gary. I'm glad they printed my letter but they cut out what I thought was my best argument on behalf of "80 Days": that it played 103 consecutive weeks at the Rivoli on Broadway. Quite an achievement for a so-called bad movie!

What's the record holder at the Rivoli?

Just got my Turner Classic on-line newsletter-interesting page on "What is a Classic" with feedback invited see:

http://turnerclassicmovies.com/whatisclassic/index/

Thanks,

Gary

The record holder at the Rivoli is "Around the World in 80 Days" with 103 weeks. Then comes "The Sound of Music" at 93 weeks then 77 weeks for "West Side Story".
In Los Angeles, "Around the World in 80 Days" ran 128 weeks at the Fox's Carthay Circle Theatre. "The Sound of Music" opened and moved over to the Carthay Circle and ran for 117 weeks.

For the in Los Angeles post above: "The Sound of Music" opened at the Fox Wilshire Theatre and moved over to the nearby Carthay Circle Theatre to finish it's run for 117 weeks.

William
What is the record holder at Radio City?

Thanks,

Gary

I think "The Odd Couple" is the all time record holder at Radio City.

I think "The Odd Couple" is the all time record holder at Radio City.

I think as EdSolero posted it was "The Odd Couple" with 14 weeks from May to Aug of 1968.

For all those who envy the upcoming 70MM runs of "Around The World..." and others at the Egyptian in Hollywood, rest assured, there ain't that much to envy. The screen at the Egyptian is just about the same size as the one at the Ziegfeld. I've already made up my mind not to attend another 70MM fest in Hollywood until they hold one at the only theatre worthy of 70MM: The Cinerama Dome. Heck, it's the Dome that needs to take a page from the Ziegfeld and show a classics festival there. Arclight shows a classic or two every week, but those showings are at the multiplex...not the Dome!

Chris:

Does the Cinerama Dome ever show Cinerama?

Thanks,

Gary

Yes. Since they reopened the Dome in 2002, they've run both "This Is Cinerama" and "How The West Was Won". I attended the latter in 2003 - my first true Cinerama experience. I had a blast.

The only other 70MM event I've been to since their reopening is the 40th Anniversary run of "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World" - which quite a few of the folks in here didn't like presentation wise. I enjoyed it, though.

Chris,

I share your enthusiasm for the Cinerama Dome 100 %. And I understand your position regarding the Egyptian, since there are some who feel the same way as you do. However, in the case of the upcoming presentation of “Around the World…”, I am willing to give them and America Cinematheque some slack. In my opinion, this is a rare opportunity to see this classic in Todd-AO. Unfortunately, in all likelihood we will see another installment of “Scary Movie” before “Around the World” is properly restored and presented at the Dome or the Ziegfeld.

Bill Huelbig,

I'm glad to see that someone is taking a stand on behalf of "Around the World". Event though time has not been kind to some of its aspects, I think it is a wonderful picture. Shortly after this year's Oscars, an article in the LA Times Calendar section declared it (and Ben-Hur) as some of the worst winners ever for Best Picture.

Gary,

To follow up on Chris's response on Cinerama, see my Apr. 6 comment on this page.


Regards to all,

JSA

JSA said:

Shortly after this year's Oscars, an article in the LA Times Calendar section declared it (and Ben-Hur) as some of the worst winners ever for Best Picture.

********************************
I'll bet the person who wrote that article would've changed their mind if they'd seen Ben-Hur at the Ziegfeld in February.

If they saw Ben-Hur at the Cinerama Dome during their "closing weekend" back in 2000, it wouldn't have made the list at all! To this day, it's the only time I've ever seen a theatre adjust its left-right masking to accomodate for the tremendous width of the film. Utterly breathtaking!

But I digress...kudos to Clearview for dumping the January-March craptaculars for this Classics series. Flawed prints or not, they deserve tremendous props for their efforts. If they continue this in the fall, they should somehow find a team of "print archeologists" who can track down the most pristine prints of the films they wish to show. I've seen a bunch of folks in this forum making comments who I'd definitely recommend to make the team!

Chris, If you saw regular engagements during the 80's & 90's till they remodeled in 2000 in 70MM at the Dome. The Dome did not use the full width of the screen at that time. There was five pre-set masking stops on the front booth panel. There was Flat, Scope, 70MM (1.85), 70MM (Full) and Cinerama (Full Screen width). The Cinerama botton was disconnected when they got rid of the carbon arc lamps. Another Utterly breathtaking presentation was over at the Egyptian Theatre during their D-150 days. It was fun to just push the masking button on the front panel in the booth and see all pre-set modes.

The Ben-Hur presentation wasn't 70MM - it was 35MM...but the widest 35MM I've ever seen. I didn't start going to the Dome till 1991 and I've only seen 2 70MM shows there.

When it comes to classics such as “Ben-Hur” and “Around the World…” my experience is that people who dislike them fall into two main categories. The first category consists of those who have seen them on a small screen, thus missing essential dramatic impact elements and production values. The second group includes people that have not seen the movies at all, and rely on the judgment of people who happen to fall into the first category. There are variations on these themes, which include “political correctness”, the “it’s too long” factor, and so on. Still, there are some who watch these films in their full glory only to come out disappointed. My grandmother saw “Ben-Hur” way back when, and she hated it. It was too long and perhaps too violent for her sensibilities.

I had the privilege of seeing “Ben-Hur” at the Dome in the early 90’s. William Wyler’s masterpiece is simply spectacular, deserving every single one of its 11 Academy Awards. Since then, I have refused to watch it on TV, no matter what format.

JSA

It was “opening day” at NYC’s Tribeca Film Festival, where many movies vying for box office success are débuting (with the hope that the hype, prestige and exposure the event provides will launch them into popularity with national audiences at “mainstream” venues). The Ziegfeld has done its part as a participating theater, with a gala showing of only one movie – the one considered to be the most controversial of all: “United 93”.

Press reports indicated that during the showing, there was “not a dry eye in the house”.
Many in the audience were relatives of Flight 93 victims, for whom the show was an emotional experience. It was received positively by those who attended.

Congratulations to the Ziegfeld for contributing to the film festival, and for coming through on the first day by taking risks and demonstrating a leadership role in cinematic presentation, with bold and intriguing programming – again.

Note: the Tribeca Film Festival was created largely as a response to the economic impact of the events of 9-11. It was intended to regenerate business activity and public interest in Lower Manhattan. It has succeeded and this year expands its coverage to other parts of Manhattan.

Hi,
New here.
For any interested, I have a few nice hi-rez images of the auditorium interior I shot last year. I'd be happy to share, I'm just not particularly knowledgeable as to how to make these generally available. If anyone has the expertise to facilitate this, please email me directly at phodgson@snet.net and I can forward them.

PH

Boy, I wonder how long the Ziegfeld is for this world. I walked by a dark Ziegfeld on Saturday night and it was sad to see. It won't reopen for films until May 19. Sad.

One way to use this theatre is to use it for premieres. Open the biggest film each week here and move a new blockbuster in each week. I'm surprised MI3 isn't opening here.

According to the Ziefeld's web-site M:I:3 is opening on Thursday at 12:01 AM.
Isn't this theater equipped with the newest Digital Projection equipment I know both Ice Age:The Meltdown & Scary Movie 4 were presented in DLP.

The fact that the Ziegfeld is closed this week is not an ominous sign. The Ziegfeld has a long history of temporary closures, dating from at least the early 1980s.

Given that some major "tentpole" releases are soon to open, the Ziegfeld might be hosting invitational screenings of "MI3," "Poseidon," etc. Clearview would, in most cases, likely earn substantially more revenue from renting out the Ziegfeld for such private screenings than from showing new releases on a non-exclusive basis (non-exclusive runs of the "Star Wars" films did well there, but a film such as "Scary Movie 4" must have been a disaster---DLP or no DLP). BTW, when I was in the UK last week, the Odeon Leicester Square---arguably, London's equivalent to the Ziegfeld---was closed for two days for private screenings of "MI3."

The first showing of MI:3 is scheduled for 12:01 May 4. I'm thinking of relaxing my "no Tom Cruise movie" rule, as I admire JJ Abrams' TV writing. I hope this film generates a lot of business for the theater.

I'd better not go see MI:3. I'd be rooting for the bad guy, Philip Seymour Hoffman. If Superman Returns gets booked into the Ziegfeld, I'll be there for that.

A game show set to air on VH1, "The World Series of Pop Culture" taped at the Ziegfeld last weekend That's why the theater was closed.

LOL, Bill, I'm sure I'll be doing the same thing at MI:3 (PSH was excellent in Capote). It would be great to see Superman Returns at the Ziegfeld (would be cool to see Superman I and II there as well!).

The sign taped to the door said you could buy advance tickets to the big film that opens 5/19. The signs for that VH1 show were still there.

I wonder if the Clearview folks have the marketing clout to even get the big films when they are competing against Regal/UA & AMC/Loew's for product.

In any event, it is an awful sad sight to see this place dark on a Saturday night.

The excellent photos of the Ziegfeld auditorium, mentioned above and taken by PH can be seen here:
http://s18.photobucket.com/albums/b123/dave-bronx/New%20York%20Theatres/Ziegfeld%20-%20New%20York/

How does the Ziegfield compare to other clearview cinemas in the tri-state area?

It is by far and away the nicest and best maintained theatre they have.

To Peter Apruzzese and Bill Huelbig:

Last Friday night I attended the Todd-AO 30 fps presentation of "Around the World in 80 Days" at the Egyptian in LA. According to the gentleman that introduced the picture, this print was struck in 1968. It was a bit more faded than I expected, but still enjoyable. The real minus for me was that the introduction by Ed Murrow was cut short: the "Trip to the Moon" and the rocket firing sequences were missing. I could be wrong, but it seemed that the introduction edit was similar to the one made for network TV. I can only imagine how this picture would look and sound if fully restored. Overall, we had a good time, but I wouldn't necessarily recommend this print for the general public. It all depends on how much fading you can tolerate. Certainly fans and enthusiasts of the film will enjoy it. My 7-year old son got a kick out of it! As an extra before the picture, a recently restored "The Miracle of Todd-AO" was shown. The roller coaster and motorcycle ride scenes were fantastic! The other noteworthy 70 mm presentations during the weekend were “Patton” and “South Pacific”. Unfortunately, I missed those. Next time perhaps!

Regards,

JSA

Thanks JSA - I really appreciate your report on "80 Days", and I'm glad you and your son had a good time in spite of the fading. Just yesterday I was searching around for any comments or reviews in the usual places, and didn't find any.

I believe the first time it was shown on CBS (1972?), the Ed Murrow sequence was cut completely. The movie started with David Niven as Fogg entering the Reform Club.

Does anyone know the status of success of the Hollywood Classic Series? Will Ziegfeld go for it again??

Does anyone know the status of success of the Hollywood Classic Series? Will Ziegfeld go for it again??

Does anyone know the status of success of the Hollywood Classic Series? Will Ziegfeld go for it again??

Rhett: Clearview exec Craig O'Connor said the Classics will be back in the fall. A manager also announced this to the audience right before the showing of "Ben-Hur", which was fairly early in the Classics series. I guess it was a success right away. So when the dud summer "blockbusters" have run their course in a couple of weeks, we'll have REALLY good movies up on the Ziegfeld screen again. I saw "The Da Vinci Code" last night and, believe me, word of mouth on that one is not going to be good.

Hi Bill, Rhett, and all:

Yes, I sorely miss the Classic series and plan on checking in with Craig as summer proceeds to Labor Day. I don't think that there is one film this summer (Is MI:3 history already?) that I'm thrilled about seeing. For the first time that I can remember, Premiere magazine, in their Summer issue, did not list a "top ten" prediction. I think that I'm up for seeing Ben-Hur again- right now!!!

Happy Memorial Day to all,

Gary, the Ziegfeld Man

Boy, do we need it now.

Below is an ad from the NY Post on March 6, 1982 - a time when 70mm and Dolby Stereo seemed to be a pretty big angle to play up in advertising:

Quest for Fire

I love that distinctive font type for the Ziegfeld in that ad. I remember all of the Walter Reade Theaters at the time used that type face in print ads - you can see it for Reade's New Yorker in the adjacent ad for "On Golden Pond". Also note how all the Manhattan showcases used a distinctive type face to set them apart from each other. This was pretty common for the day.

Warren... I know you're interested in getting theater names exactly right... Would you say that these two ads evidence that at least during this period of time the Ziegfeld Theater was actually properly known as "The Ziegfeld"? I wonder if that was a naming convention that Walter Reade applied to its entire chain at the time, as supported by "The New Yorker 2" reference in the "On Golden Pond" ad.

It seems that vanity-driven big budget Hollywood remakes were a part of the scene even 26 years ago:

The Jazz Singer - Daily News 12/14/80

Took my mother (a huge Diamond fan) to see this one sometime later at the Five Towns Theater in Woodmere, LI, for all of 81 cents per ticket when it finally made the discount theater rounds.

I agree with previous posts. Considering myself a movie fanatic (as are many of you)...this is the first time that I can remember that I am not psyched to see any movie this Summer at all. DaVinci-when I get to it....MI3- saw it..ok...XMen- could care less, but I guess I'll see it....is it me or do movies really suck now? Breakup- does anyone really want to see that?? it's no wonder DVD sales are growing and many are buying big screen TV's..there could be a day when more than one theater is playing a big screen classic...

Rhett:

Here's something to cheer you up- MOMA, this month, is running their fourth Preservation festival. Yesterday, saw a beautiful pristine print of "True Grit," which was introduced by the head of preservation at Paramount and John Wayne's daughter in law. All spoke about MOMA's commitment to the preservation of classics and the IMPORTANCE of seeing these films in a theatre, not just on home video. So keep the faith, despite the fact that Loew's E-walk is showing "The Break Up" on five screens. "True Grit" was great after 37 years, who will remember "The Break Up"

Gary

How long will Clearview own the Ziegfeld? I heard that it's showing Cars when it opens this weekend; it will draw crowds; saw a funny trailer featuring one of the characters in cars talking to a cell-phone; that ad was a promo for the movie by Clearview. BTW, do they show the Clearview pre-show at the ziegfeld? If so, do people who go there complain about it because the movie's not on time?

November 1986 "The Nutcracker" in 70mm
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/Nutcracker.jpg

Did anyone here see the 70MM print of Kubrick’s “2001” at the American Museum of the Moving Image (AMMI) in Queens this past weekend? (I know this is a bit off-topic, being the Ziegfeld page, but since so many of you are experts on 70MM presentation I thought I could get a knowledgeable opinion.)

I have only seen two true 70MM presentations, both at the Ziegfeld — “Spartacus” and “Lawrence of Arabia”, in the early 90s. “Lawrence”, especially, was truly the most spectacular film presentation I have ever seen.

I went to “2001” with very high expectations but was quite disappointed, not with the film itself, but the quality of the “restored” print, which I thought was quite a mess. Scratches galore, sprocket marks, very “flickery” image (especially on scenes with lots of white), and much grainier than I expected.

Can anyone here enlighten me?

P.S. This is my first post here. I’ve been reading your posts here and on the RCMH page. You guys are great! I can’t get any work done anymore.

That sounds like it was an old 70mm print, I am not sure if Warner has struck any new prints of 2001.

Warner struck a couple of new 70mm prints of 2001 in 2001, but those have circulated a lot over 5 years, and not always to facilities that handle film properly. Sounds like the AMMI ran one of those.

There was no flickering present on the new 70mm prints (I saw them several times in 2001 & 2002), nor was there any on the new 35mm print I ran in 2004 at the Lafayette Theatre. Any flickering is likely a mechanical/electrical issue at the AMMI.

I was at the AMMI screening of "2001" that Peter T. wrote about. The print did have some flaws and there was some noticeable flickering, especially in the lower corners of the screen. But it was still a 70mm screening of my all-time favorite movie, and you can really see the difference between 70mm and 35mm. Some of the menu items posted on the wall of the space shuttle kitchen were actually readable from the front row (Apricot Nectar, Apple Cider, etc.) And the sound was fantastic: HAL's voice seemed to emanate from all corners of the ship ... I mean, the theater.

It was one of the prints that Pete A. described: it had a Warner Bros. logo at the very end of the credits.

Thanks, Robert, Peter and Bill for your quick responses!

Bill, I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who noticed the flickering. It was driving me crazy, especially during scene on the “Hilton” space station, which is almost all-white, except for those groovy red seats. Could it have been a shutter problem? Perhaps Vito could shed some light on this.

I was also impressed by the soundtrack, especially the use of surrounds. I’ve seen 2001 only on TV (obviously not a legitimate viewing), so I had no idea that Hal’s voice surrounded you. The cacophony made by the apes as they discover the monolith was overwhelming, coming from all over. The female voice on the space station warning about a misplaced blue cashmere sweater – for a second I thought it was an actual announcement coming from the museum’s P.A. system.

I have friends coming to town June 16-23 is anyone aware of any premiers during that week?

Shutter? Typically no. The shutter is a fixed item and interrupts the light 48 times a second (2 blade shutter). This flicker can be seen, but is typically washed out by the film's action. I can see shutter flicker on a white screen (no film) or areas where the frame is mostly white (such as the scene mentioned). A three blade shutter raises the interuption rate to 72 per second, but it also reduces light by 33%. If the shutter were out of time with the intermittent, you get what is called "travel ghost" which is an upward or downward smearing of picture. You'll see it most promanently with white on black, such as titles. The larger the mis-timed shutter error is, the longer the smear. Flicker can also be caused by some fault in the lighting system. In the case of Xenon lighting (which 99% of theaters use) if there is something wrong with the rectifier, and AC reaches the lamp, it strobes. This will cause a flicker on screen as the one strobe rate isn't the same as the shutter strobe rate, causing a beat between the two. Also, the lamp could be near the end of it's service life. Many theaters push the life span of the bulb beyond it's rated life since the lamps are expensive (relatively speaking, if you consider a $500-$800 expense every 6mo to a year expensive).

Other causes of flicker are the film itself, as in bad lab work.

I woulld agree with Jeff regarding the flicker problem. A shutter mis-alignment as the cause is not likely.
I would look for the problem to be either in the rectifier (power supply), possibly a bad diode, or most probably just a bulb that has exceeded it's life. As for cost of a new bulb, I would imagine the lamp in question is at least 2000 watt, which costs about $500. There has been many stories of lamps burning well beyond the average life span of 2000-2500 hours, however, generally the rule of thumb for me has always been to replace them at 2000 hours. A 3000 watt bulb costs about $650.00 and should be changed after about 1500 hours. As Jeff pointed out, many theatre owners run the lamps well beyond the manufactures recommendations, sometimes untill they fail completly. National Amusements, the company I most recently worked for, has a policy of reporting the hours used on every lamp once a
month, bulbs reaching the end of the warranty period are expected to be replaced. Of course, without benefit of first hand knowledge of the problem at AMMI, I can only speculate as to the cause of the problem. Certainly based on what I have read in this thread, an inspection of the lamp source would be appropriate at this time.

Ziegfeld Man...

TRUE GRIT is the ONE film I am dying to see on the big screen.I add it to every list I fill out for "wish" films to see on the big scree..I added it to the list at the Hollywood Classic festival...I can't believe I missed it at MOMA..I am bummed

Rhett, all is not lost-how about TRUE GRIT at the Ziegfeld? Send your thoughts to Craig O' Connor at coconnor@clearcin.com He's the man in charge of the classics festival which will be coming back in the Fall. The Paramount guy had an incredible print that he brought to MOMA. This would look great on the Ziegfeld Screen. When I lobbied Craig for the Special Edition of Close Encounters last March ( the one I introduced), Craig was able to get a print from Spielberg.

Make it happen,

Best,

Gary

Rhett, all is not lost-how about TRUE GRIT at the Ziegfeld? Send your thoughts to Craig O' Connor at coconnor@clearcin.com He's the man in charge of the classics festival which will be coming back in the Fall. The Paramount guy had an incredible print that he brought to MOMA. This would look great on the Ziegfeld Screen. When I lobbied Craig for the Definitive Director's Cut of Close Encounters last March ( the one I introduced), Craig was able to get a print from Spielberg.

Make it happen,

Best,

Gary

how many subwoofers does the Ziegfeld have?

Segask, my quess would be at least two.
The original 70mm six track mag speaker configeration used to be Five (5) stage speakers, #1 Left, #2 left center, #3 center
#4 right center, #5 right, and channel#6 was for surrounds. Later on, when Dolby came along, the left center and right center channels became a mono sub woofer track (two speakers)and the fifth and sixth track became stereo surrounds. The same config continues today with Dolby Digital. Of course that was a few years ago before I retired, perhaps someone knows of any changes since then.

only two? The bass must be awfully thin then.

Craig does a good job.

The first film that I saw at the Ziegfeld was a very forgettable western called SOLDIER BLUE in 1970. To add to my disappointment was my impression of how dismally tacky the interior décor of the Ziegfeld was compared to some of the first run theaters that I grew up attending in Atlanta. Although some of the Broadway movie houses were still in operation in those years, apart from the Radio City Music Hall, I found most of them disappointing as well. Granted, I had missed the glory days of New York’s Roxy, Paramount, and Capitol.

The fact that the current Ziegfeld looked better to me over time was simply evidence of diminishing returns. When I learned about how distinguished the original Ziegfeld Theatre had been, I felt cheated. The original theatre that Florenz Ziegfeld built on Sixth Avenue was designed by the distinguished Viennese designer, Joseph Urban. He designed the stage productions of the Ziegfeld Follies and was the principle scenic designer for the Metropolitan Opera from 1917 until Urban’s death in 1933. The present day Ziegfeld Theatre is a vulgar comment on Urban’s remarkable design sense.

However, I did manage to see many films at the Ziegfeld, among them CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, APOCALYSE NOW, and the restored version of LAWRENCE OF ARABIA. Yet of all the films that I saw at the Ziegfeld, my personal favorite was Bob Rafelson’s little sung MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON in 1990.
Here’s the link to the Internet Movie Database:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0100196/

Check out the comments in which one commenter called it, “One of the best movies that no one has ever seen.” Regrettably, that seems to be true. In it’s original run at the Ziegfeld, the film was very impressive in a 70mm blowup and six track stereo sound. After having seen LAWRENCE OF ARABIA in the restored version at the Ziegfeld three times (as well as seeing it in its original road show version in 1963), MOUNTAINS OF THE MOON is one of the very few films that I would compare to LAWRENCE.

Relatively speaking, films like that made the current Ziegfeld seem better than it really was, especially when compared to most of the surviving movie houses in the New York area. To sum up my opinion of the current Ziegfeld, "Everybody knows its crooked, but it's the only game in town."

When Cannon tried to change it's image and release art films too
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/0a125373.jpg

When Cannon tried to change it's image and release art films too
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/0a125373.jpg

70mm :(
http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a13/ChmnofBrd/Movie%20Ads/WhosThatGirl.jpg

Hi Everyone,

Hope all of you are having a wonderful summer!

Well, I wanted you to be the first to know that Hollywood Classics returns to The Ziegfeld on September 8th!

Here are some of the titles that we have confirmed for this 5 week series:

* Citizen Kane
* Casablanca
* The Good, The Bad & The Ugly
* Gone with the Wind
* Superman - original
* Batman
* Cabaret
* West Side Story (back by popular demand)

We are also working on several other films, as well as a Steven Spielberg Week!

As soon as they are confirmed, you will be the first to know.

Many Thanks for your support of The Ziegfeld!
Craig O'Connor

This is great news! I hope more of us will come out and support this series. I know I'll be there. Well done, Craig and Clearview.

Superman (original). The 1978 version?

70mm maybe?

Only if Warner strikes a new print. Which is not likely and the original 70MM prints are long gone and really faded.

Yes, as far as I know Warner does not have any prints of the original 1978 version - either 35mm or 70mm. The only 35mm prints they have of Superman are the revised "Director's Cut" of the 1978 version (from the limited reissue in 2000), the same version I played at the Lafayette a couple of years ago.

Awsome!!! I will totally be there. Great job Craig and Clearview!

Incredible-

Hey, today is July 31, do you think maybe, we can just skip over August?

Can't wait,

Gary

The way it used to be and OUGHT to be:

We are not alone - Daily News 1/25/78

Super Panavision 70. Sigh... Even though the non SFX footage was blown-up to 70mm from 35mm. You might have noticed that the Stanley Warner in Paramus also advertised 70mm in this run.

Meanwhile, good news for September. I'm actually looking forward to "Casablanca". Craig, will those aperture plates be properly cut for Academy ratio on those pre 1953 films?

Now that's the best news I've heard all summer. "Cabaret" is an especially good choice, since it was one of the biggest hits the Ziegfeld had in its early years. In fact all the choices are great, just like the last time. Thanks, Craig!

No some of the choices are so hackneyed and have been done to death.
No Casablanca, or CK or GWTW. These things have been done to death in the theaters and on TCM. And much of the rest is schlock. Who are these programmers?!!!I'm surprised not to see Sunset Boulevard.

In LA there are so many 70mm festivals. Why aren't they showing Magnificent Men in their flying Machines or Mad Mad World or Oklahoma or Fair Lady or some of the other epics.
Even SOM has not been seen in 70mm in NY in at least 20 years.
Why is it when I see the programming at Film Forum and I always think great films lousy theater.
When I see the classic programming at Loew's Jersey or Ziegfeld I always think Lousy programming.
Also is West Side Story planned for Loew's Paradise in the fall?
I love this film but I'd like to see something different every once in a while.

Many of the 70MM festivals are run with change-overs (two projectors), many of the studios do not want some prints run in platter houses. Many times poor operators keep cutting the leaders and tails to the point that you start lossing footage and the change-overs start looking like crap. yes, I know the Ziegfeld is equipped with two film projectors and one digital projector. But they need to regain the manual presentation part of the presentation. Over the years many projectionists have become platter operators. They put the cues on the film when they build it up on to the platters and just push the button and sit back. That is why many of the other venues get better prints because they still have projectionists that run change-over houses.

Vincent, I respectfully disagree with you. When was the last time you saw "Citizen Kane" on a screen as big or almost as big as the one it premiered on at the Palace in 1941? Probably never. Well, this is your chance. Same goes for "Cabaret" and "The Good, the Bad and the Ugly".

OK, they're not showing the films you want to see, but who's to say they won't show them sometime in the future? If we show them our support by attending some (or all) of these shows, Classics at the Ziegfeld can become a twice-a-year ongoing event.