Boyd Theatre

Actually this wonderful treasure is a now a 4-plex. The last time I was there was to see the 70mm showing of Terminator 2, and it was then a three screen facility. Whether they hacked up the main auditorium, or made a separate theatre in the balcony, I cannot say. But this treasure was in pretty sad shape at my last visit. Certainly a long way from the days of the crystal chandelier and the red tapestry on the walls when my parents took me to "The Boyd" to see Cinerama movies.

It is a shame that this theater is in such poor condition. Everytime I go to a movie there I am saddened by the ever failing state of the structure. There is an ongoing effort by the Philadelphia Preservation Alliance to get the theater recognized as a historic landmark, but I think that what the theater really needs is a developer who is honestly interested in restoring the theater to its former grandeur. The interior is deteriorating at such a rapid rate due to water damage that someone needs to act fast in order to preserve it.

Sad to say, but this theater is now closed. It was closed by it's latest owner, Regal Entertainment (which bought it from UA a year or two ago. It's fate has not been determined yet. A permit has been filed for demolition, even though the building owners are looking for another operator. Downtown Philly is now without a major movie theater. To demolish this theater would erase all history of what Philadelphia was in entertainment and would relegate Philly to just another destination (outdoor) mall.

To Iweigard's comment, no, very fortunately the owners never did split the auditorium - it is intact. The other three screens are in an addition to the building. The layout of the original structure is in an L shape, so from outside you don't really imagine how huge the interior is.

Unfortunately the Goldenberg Group has applied for and received a permit for demolition. The notice for demolition is date July 5, 2002. There has been a strong showing of support for the theatre here in Philadelphia and hopefully it will continue. If you are interested in joining or following the fight to save the theater, check out www.historicboydtheatre.org.

It is a crime that we in America have massacred our architectural history. Bravo to everyone fighting to save these treasures! To all of you theater people, or more specifically "Movie stars" or "star athletes"...Who are being paid millions of dollars per picture, per season...I dare you to for once do something constructive with your fat wallet. Help to save this theater, and others like it...and for all of you every day folks...You have a voice...Use it! Where there is a will there's a way. Don't give up!

Philadelphia Mayor John Street, in his weekly radio address this past Saturday (Aug 10, 2002) has vowed to save the RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd/United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre. The last time I was in the Sameric was in Feb of this year to see "Black Hawk Down". If anything should be demolished on the Sameric 4, get rid of the 3 smaller screens, they are not of historical value. Screen #1 is the original 2500 seats of the Boyd. Thank you

As Chairman of the Committee to Save the Sameric, I suggest you visit our website at www.SaveTheSameric.org and sign our petition, volunteer to help, donate to the Purchase, Restoration, and Reopening of Philadelphia's LAST movie palace. We cannot afford to lose the landmark art deco treasure!

In sunday November 30, 2003 edition of The Philadelphia Inquirer, the Goldenberg Group published an advertisement which states their views on the Boyd/REG UA Sameric 4 Theatre and how they and Clear Channel Enertainment are trying to win support in making The sameric 4 a live Broadway theatre.

The Sameric/Boyd's main auditorium was never divided into a multiscreen facility. A triplex was constructed along Chestnut Street that adjoined the main auditorium. The main auditorium of 2000 seats is intact to this day. The Cinerama booth is intact also. See Howard Haas and the SaveTheSameric.org website.

Does anyone remember the Eric's FernRock Movie Theatre in Philadelphia(Olney) ? I feel like I'm the only one who knows of this old theatre. It still stands next to Fisher's Park on 5th street. It closed its doors in the late summer of 1987. Im pretty certain that the last film shown was StakeOut. Regards, Justin Zaharczuk

The Eric Fern Rock theatre was originaly owned by RKO Stanley Warner, which is now known as Loews Cineplex, and they sold the theatre, along with The Boyd, The Ardmore and the Plaza Moorestown, to The Sameric Co. in the late 1960's to mid 1970's, before being acquired by Century Theatres (Thus becoming RKO Century Warner Theatres)

Thanks for the info Mike. Id love to learn more about the history of The Sameric Co and desperately want to see old pictures of the Fern Rock Theatre. Any suggestions? Best regards,Justin Zaharczuk

JUSTIN Z> FERN ROCK Theatre 6017 N. 5th St. Cap. 1289 opened 07-09-1928
A completely equipped stage and wurlitzer organ. In the early 70's the Eric chain bought and twined the theatre showing second run films. The Eric chain was owned by the Sam Shapiro and partners. The chain was named after his grandson. I may have a photo of this theatre.

Ray, You are the man! Any way I can see the picture. Ive been trying to find out info about this since around 1993..... My email is Justin2rue@aol.com

I have been a contributor to the Save the Sameric Foundation since it first started. Even living in Lancaster, PA, about 60 miles from Center city Philadelphia, I patronized this theatre many many times. From the early Cinerama Days as a child to the roadshow films of "Ben Hur", "Dr. Zhivago," and the 70mm showings of "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones" films. It was worth the trip. Many times making a day of it. Shopping in Wanamakers, dinner somewhere, and then the Boyd/Sameric. I have wondered why they have not used "tours of the theatre" as a fund raiser. I have not been in center city since the last "Indiana Jones" film played at this
theatre. However, to take a tour I would travel in. Also, could not a book be published of pictures and history of this theatre. It is too important not to miss out on any fund raising events. I would also attend the Stanley, Fox, Midtown, and Goldman Theatres to see the big screen film presentations. They are all gone now, sadly missed by any true film/theatre fan.

T2 was never shown at the Sam Eric. It was shown at Sam's Place (19th & Chestnut) in 70mm. The presentation was excellent. It was shown in the large theatre.

The last movie to debut at The Sameric was "The Scorpion King"

I grew up in Phila and remeber the Sameric well. What I can't remeber is them ever showing Cinerama movies. Can anyone give me anymore information about what films played there in Cinerama. It is a shame that all the center city theaters are gone. It started in 1969 when the Randolph closed. The last showing was Tora Tora Tora. Than the Stanley went next a year later. There last film was Viva Max. RKO had promised to build a twin theater,but that never happened. The theater sat empty for many years. I think the next theater to go was the Arcadia which became a Roy Rogers hambugers joint In the early 80's the Fox, Milgram(formally the RKO Stanton) and Stage Door Cinema closed. After I loved to Florida in 1983, the
rest of the center city theaters disapeared.I think the last one to go was the Midtown which is now the Prince Art theater.

The first movie I saw at the Sam Eric was Close Encounter. Although the Sam Eric advertised movies in 70mm Dolby Stereo, the theatre did not have dolby sound system. It did not need it due to it's natural sound. If you ever been in the balcony the back wall is padded. The theatre had a good bass so the sound was deep. You can actully feel it at times. My biggest complaint was it you were down stairs the projection booth block the back speakers. I never saw Earthquake there, but I heard it was great. After the Fox was closed, the Sam Eric was the show case theatre in center city getting all the big movies. I had Star Wars 5 & 6, the Indiana Jones series and the big movie at Christmas. It held the premiere for Philadlphia. One year it showed older movies, including 2001 in 70mm 6-track stereo sound. The down stair was closed off so you had to sit in the balcony. It was billed as see it and hear it the way it was meant to be. It was billed has having one of the biggest screen in PA. It a shame that UA did not want to run it. It wasn't always a pleasure seeing a movie there!! The quality of the picture and sound presentation wasn't always reliable.

In reference to Mikeoaklandpark question above. The Cinerama Screen was installed in the early 1950's. The Boyd showed all the original Cinerama travelogue films - "Search For Paradise", "7 Wonders of the World." Then later with "Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm," "How The West Was Won", "Mad World," "Circus World", "Hallelujah Trail". Then in the late 1960's the Randolph Theatre was converted to the one projector Cinerama process. That theatre presented "Grand Prix", "Ice Station Zebra" and "2001: A Space Odyssey." The Cinerama screen remained in the Randolph till the theatres demolition. However, when Sameric took over the Boyd

Theatre in 1971, the curved Cinerama Screen which extended out past the side exits on either side of the stage, was removed. I would love to see pictures of the installation of the Cinerama screen and the additional two projection booths at the Boyd when that was done. The original Cinerama process required three projectors to fill the screen. My first visit to the Boyd was to see the Cinerama traveloques.

Mikeoaklandpark, The William Goldman's Randolph Theatre actually closed in Janunary 1971, not in 1969.

http://www.robbender.com/photos/philadelphia/buildings/sameric/ here is a link to theater

I am glad to read that the Sam Eric 4 was never a gay-porn house...Not that anything is wrong with gay porn..or porn for that matter..but enough preaching.

I was just under the assumption that since the Sam Eric 4 at 20th and Locust was not located too far from the gay Walnut strip in Center City..where on a Saturday night at about 2am, Walnut between 13th and Juniper is jumping with tranvestite prostitutes and their pimps...I was staying at the Holiday Inn Express Midtown over the labor day 2004 weekend.

I would say that I was lead to my mis-conclusion by Johnathan Demme's Philadelphia film with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington..(for my money two of the best actors that Hollywood has ever turned lose on the world.)

There was that comment that the Jason Robards character made during the trial about the theatres on Walnut (maybe a nod towards Locust) ...so that gave me the fodder for my assumptions...false as they may have been.


Happy Patriots Day

I must retract my false address...it was 20th and Chestnut as opposed to the 20th and Locust.

My deepest apologies.
Happy Patriots Day.

There is one treasure from the Boyd/SamEric theater that is quite well and alive. The theater's W.W. Kimball (opus 7050) pipe organ made its final concert on Washington's Birthday 1969 with Philadelphia organist, Larry Ferrari, at the console. It was the last time an operable theater pipe organ played in Philadelphia. (The next to the last was the Tower theater in Upper Darby.)

After the farewell concert, the organ was removed and became the property of the Dickinson Theatre Organ Society. The Society offers a regular concert schedule on the organ, which is over three times its original size. The link to DTOS is: geocities.com/dtoskimball. There is plenty of information about the organ, some pictures of the Boyd theater and lots of pictures of the interior of the organ at DTOS.

Greenpoint, the official address of the RKO Stanley Warner Boyd Theatre/Regal entertainment Group's United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre is 1908-18 Chestnut Street. The United Artists Rittenhouse Square 3 was on Walnut St., between 19th & 20th St. The back street between the rittenhouse Square 3 & sameric 4 was where the exits are located.

Hi MikeRa,
Thank you for clearing that information up for me.I was not aware of The United Artists Rittenhouse Square 3...but I will be back in Philly and shall investigate.

Thank You again.

The Eric Rittenhouse Square Twin was opened by Sameric Theatres in 1968. The twins were closed on June 12, 1985. When they reopened on June 28, 1985 there was a third theatre added which was previously a furniture store, which was located between the original two theatres. A fire damaged the buildings on Dec 14, 1994 and the theatres were never reopened. I was wondering whether this building is one of the buildings scheduled to be demolished for a parking garage and a multiplex theatre operated by Ritz Theatres?

To DennisZ:
The Eric Rittenhouse was among several buildings on Walnut St demolished not long after the fire. What are proposed for demolition now are three buildings behind these on Sansom St (which face the rear of the Boyd). The Philadelphia Parking Authority's grand vision (NOT!) is of a combined 500 car garage and cinema. That's not to say they've actually signed a lease with the Ritz for the proposed complex.

Why doesn't the Ritz just take over the Sameric 4. I am sure the large thetaer which is preserved as a landmark and can't be split would need some work, but the other 3 theaters shouldn't be that bad since they were opened in the early 80's.

More Cinerama information about the Boyd. To make a tortuous story
short, when the Dept. of Justice granted Stanley-Warner
Theatres the right to produce and distribute films, in particular
Cinerama films, part of the arrangement was that theatres
that SW acquired specifically for the presentation of
Cinerama had to received court assent to show non-Cinerama
productions; on the other hand, theatres which SW already
owned could present non-Cinerama features without any court
intervention. The Boyd fell into the latter category, and
this explains the non-Cinerama portion of the Boyd's history
in the 1950's. The 4th Cinerama travelogue, "Search For
Paradise," proved to be less than successful at the box-office.
Non SW-owned theatres that suddenly had no Cinerama product
simply closed. Example: the Melba in Dallas. On the other hand,
SW-owned houses retooled for "normal" 35mm activity, and
booked non-Cinerama product. The Pittsburgh Warner, for example,
dropped Cinerama in favor of DeMille's "10 Commandments"
in 1957. The following year, with crowds dwindling at the Boyd,
the house closed for about a month, installed 4-track mag penthouses
for its 2 35mm projectors, hung new vertically-rising
masking that could, in conjunction with the screen curtains,
mask out a "flat" or "scope" 35mm ratio. I would bet that
at that time the controls for the curtain motor(s) were
moved from behind the screen to the upstairs booth. At any
rate, in March of 1958, Cinerama temporarily ended; the
house reopened and showed, continuous-performance, popular-prices,
a series of (mainly) 20th Century Fox films in 35mm scope, and that
summer had a reasonably successful roadshow run of MGM's "Gigi."
After that film's end, some enhancements were made to the
3 Cinerama projectors to enable them to show the CineMiracle
production "Windjammer" in Cinerama. This film ran until the
late Winter of 1959, and was replaced by the final Cinerama
travelogue "South Seas Adventure." After this engagement, all three downstairs booths were dismantled, dual 35/70mm projectors placed in the upstairs booth. The curved curtain track was removed, but
the giant red curtain was hung on a straight track that stretched from wall-to-wall across the entire width of the theatre forward of
the proscenium and in front of a flat one-piece screen, with "Ben-Hur" beginning a period of 35mm and 70mm attractions, most of them
roadshown, over the next 21 month period. Some of the films
shown there were "Exodus," "King of Kings," "Judgment at
Nuremburg," and even Fellini's esoteric "La Dolce Vita,"
these 3 being roadshown, along with some "mass" attractions
like "Mr. Hobbs Takes A Vacation" on a strictly "grind" policy.
The house then closed in mid-Summer of 1962 to re-install
Cinerama for the MGM productions. The Boyd, being somewhat
of a "widebody" auditorium was able to position all 3 projectors
in a single large "Baker" booth, and presented a Cinerama
image much larger than the original 76-foot installation.
December of 1963 saw the removal of 3-projector Cinerama and
the switch to 70mm Cinerama projection, the image at the center
being as tall as the 3x35 Cinerama but covering only about
128 degrees of the 146-degree screen. So confident that Cinerama
would last forever there, side masking was never installed.
There is some anecdotal evidence that special wide-angle
D-150 lenses were used for the presentation of "The Bible" in 1966 as I have been told that the screen image of that 70mm release was the same size as that of the 3-panel projection of 1962.
The Philadelphia "Inquirer" in 1953 published photographs of the
original Cinerama installation. I haven't yet checked the archives
of the "Evening Bulletin." I know that Channel 6 covered the 1953
premiere...whether cameras were inside the auditorium, or if any
of the footage is still around for viewing I cannot say.

Did you know that in the mid 60's cinerama was moved to the Keswick theatre in Glenside, Pa. The projection booth was gutted (all 35mm) and the 3 system cinerama equipment install. Do to the size of the screen the stage was closed. It did very well at this theatre. This theatre was not part of any chain so this was a big venture for the owner. rg

When was this? Are you sure you are not speaking of the brief period in 1958 when 3 CineMiracle projectors were installed for "Windjammer." Neither my (fading) memory nor the offical International Cinerama Society list of Cinerama installations has any mention of a 3-projector setup in Glenside. You may be referring to a partial installation at what became the GCC Cinema at the Cherry Hill Mall in N.J. Platforms for the A,B, and C booth were constructed in front of the conventional booth. Closer to Glenside, the then Stanley-Warner King of Prussia house was designed for D-150 projection. The booth was placed at the front edge of the balcony, but the curved screen was never installed. If you have any factual info about a 3-projector run at the Keswick (other than "Windjammer"'s), please inform us.

If memeory serves me right, they installed a new screen sometime between 1973 and 1976. I saw the roadshow engagement of Man of La Mancha there. When I returned the next time to see a re-release in 70mm of Gone With The Wind they has a new screen. Is at in the balcony for La mancha, but rememebr even though the film was flat,they had a large curved screen. When I went back the screen was a normal flat widesceen. It was a very large screen. They had masking that opened across and up and down. By the early 80's the masking on the right side was torna nd never replaced.

Has any progress been made to save this theatre?

Contact Howard Haas at savethesameric.org. They have occasional events, like a tour of the theatre this upcoming December 1, to raise funds for its preservation.

If anyone finds more info on the FernRock Eric Theatre,contact me at justin2rue@aol.com I have pictures to trade as well. Gotta run,J.Z.

Does anyone know the name of the theater that is partially visible from this Philly El?

http://world.nycsubway.org/perl/show?16583

Cypress, the theatre that you see in the picture at the Margaret-Orthodox station of The Market Frankford Line was the former Stanley Warner's Circle Theatre.

Thanks MikeRa.

cypress;
Can you post that link of the photo of the Circle Theatre onto its page here on Cinema Treasures http://cinematreasures.org/theater/9237/
Thanks

Re: Fern Rock Theater. Mike or Justin, I grew up in Olney from '46 to '56 on Nedro Ave, and am writing a book that needs details. I saw Rebel Without a Cause at the theater on 5th Street across from Fisher's Park when it came out, as well as the old serials like Flash Gordon and Tarzan. Where can I find some details about that neighborhood, like what kind of trees grow in Fisher's Park, and was the theater named the Fern Rock back then. I can't remember. I call it the Olney Cinema so far in my book because that's all I can remember. I found this web site googling Fisher's Park. Help. I'm too far from Philly to go take a look. Thanks, SteveG

Re: Fern Rock and Olney. Steve G's email is stephan.geng@verizon.net

I am trying to locate the negative of a photograph I took in the Sameric/Boyd auditorium sometime in the 1980's. I want to give it to Howard Haas at the upcoming Boyd tour next week. I took the shot specifically to show the teaser in the "up" position which was used when the house showed 1:85.1 70mm prints (as opposed to anamorphically derived 2.2:1). Through the 1970's, they ran ALL 70mm prints incorrectly in the ratio of somewhere between 1.9 and 2.0. I remember one sequence of "CE3K" in the electrical substation where Dreyfus and another employee are speaking to each other, each one standing at the corner of the frame. As projected here, neither actor could be seen, as the ratio was so far off the mark. At any rate, does anybody remember which 70mm 1.85:1 films (like THE ROSE, THATS ENTERTAINMENT) ran at the SamEric. As I said, the photo was taken sometime in the 1980s, but I can't remember what the feature might have been at that time. Thanks for your help.

-Stephan,I will gladly assist any way possible. As stated,my family still resides across from the old Fern Rock Theatre. All the best with your book.The excerpt you sent me is rich in detail. Best, Justin Zaharczuk

Philadelphia Business Journal

LATEST NEWS
January 6, 2005

Historic Philadelphia theater to be restored
Goldenberg Group and Clear Channel Entertainment's Theatrical division will restore the historic Boyd Theater in Center City Philadelphia and transform it into a live entertainment venue. The 2,400-seat theater will showcase touring Broadway productions and a variety of cultural and entertainment events.

Goldenberg of Blue Bell, Pa., acquired the Boyd in 1998. Since then, the real estate company has sought a partner that could play a role in reviving the theater. Clear Channel Entertainment increased its equity ownership in the project.

The Boyd Theater first opened on Christmas Day in 1928. In 1971, Stanley Warner, its owner, sold the Boyd to the Sameric Corp., which renamed the theater the Sam Eric. In 1988, Sameric sold its theaters to United Artists.

In 1998, the Goldenberg bought the Boyd. It closed in 2002.

Good news for a change makes me happy.

Yeah,I agree. Good to hear. Nice change of pace instead of finding out the place will be bull dozed like all of the Duece in New York... pick up the book Sleazoid Expess if you want to hear a real sad story. Best, Justin Zaharczuk-- Production Designer(Bubba Ho-Tep, Phantasm)

For those who never seen the Boyd, it is small theatre although it has 2400 seats with a great sight line. It should be good for a legit theatre. It's history as a movie theatre was so so. I hope the future make everybody appreciate the theatre. Lion King suppose to be one of its first show. This Wedneday they are having a tour of the theatre. This should be the last time the public will be able to see the theatre untill it reopens in 07.

Interesting - Lion King is the first show in Boston's Opera House after Clear Channel restored and reopened it last year. It has been playing for six months and departs next month.

I am almost sure from my first visit to see the original three projector Cinerama travelogues until Stanley Warner sold the Boyd to the Sameric Theatres, the curved Cinerama screen was always used. I remember seeing "Ben Hur," "Doctor Zhivago", and even "The Happiest Millionaire" and they were all on the curved screen. Only after my first visit to see the roadshow "Fiddler On The Roof" when it was renamed the Sameric Theatre, did I see a "flat" screen within the
prosceium of the "stage." The 70mm rerelease of "Gone With The Wind" was shown at the Randolph Cinerama Theatre. The Randolph was converted to single projection Cinerama in 1967.

Dennis
When I saw Man Of La Mancha in the early 70's they had a curved screen. When I went back in 75, to see the rerelease of GWTW, the screen was flat and remained that way. The last time I was there was in 1991 to see Hook.

DennisZ, have to amiably disagree with you on "Ben-Hur" at the Boyd. When the final Cinerama travelogue, "South Seas Adventure" ended in Sept/Oct 1959, the 3-panel equipment was removed, and 70/35mm projectors installed in the original booth. The Cinerama curtain (and this is what may have confused you) was retained, but placed on a flat track that stretched across the entire width of the auditorium. I don't know the exact width, but the Boyd (which reopened with BH) was one of the few 70mm houses that used the anamorphic lens for MGM Camera 65 (or UltraPanavision 70) that included a 1.25x squeeze rendering an approximate 2.7:1 screen aspect ratio. The screen, of course, was in front of the proscenium. Now, if the present day width for 70mm projection in 2.2:1 ratio is 56' (verified on a recent Boyd tour), then the 2.7:1 image had to be in the area of 75 feet.(The original 3-panel Cinerama with its 2.7:1 ratio was 76 feet wide.) But it was flat. And stayed that way through "Exodus," "King of Kings," and a number of other 70mm roadshows until Summer of 1962, when Cinerama was reinstalled for the "Bros Grimm" and "How the West Was Won."

Maybe we can get someone else to verify which way it is. I am just as fairly certain that the curved Cinerama screen remained until Sameric Theatres took over. I remember walking in for a performance of "Fiddler on the Roof" in 1972 and seeing the proscenium for the first time. They used the red curtains over the flat screen they installed when they took over the theatre. Even living in Lancaster, Pa. I have seen over 25 films at the Boyd/Sameric. From the first Cinerama travelogues that my parents took me to, to "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." I am/was a big fan of Cinerama and 70mm film presentation. Since Lancaster had no theatres capable of that projection, any "big screen" films playing in Center city made a required trip there. Also, people keep talking about the sign that was added on top of the marquee by Sameric. They expanded on it with the addition of the other three theatres, but the sign was there prior to their taking over. Look at the picture of the Sameric in the book "Popcorn Palaces" during the engagement of "Indian Jones and the Temple of Doom." Even on the Save the Sameric Website they had picture of the premiere of "The Happiest Millionaire" and the sign was above the marquee then. Also their website has pictures from 1969 and later years and even as a single screen theatre there was the sign above the marquee. So, Veyoung, I have to amiably disagree with you about the screen. I remember too many times sitting in the loge section for "Doctor Zhivago," "Ben Hur", "The Bible," and even "The Happiest Millionaire and looking at the curtains opening on that curved screen that covered beyond the proscenium. Is that anyone out there that can help settle this stalemate?! Thanks!

DennisZ, this is relatively easy to check out. First of all, as for a sign above the marquee. There had always been a smaller one during the Cinerama travelogues, but was substantially enlarged for "B-H." Check the newspapers and "Variety." There were many printed reports that Cinerama was being removed at that time, for one reason, by dent of the Agreement between SWCinerama and the Dept of Justice in June of 1953, SW was no longer allowed to show C'rama in most theatres after Dec, 1958, later adjusted to Dec, 1959. Second, there were no more new travelogues to show. The 3 booths were dismantled, 70/35mm projectors put in upstairs, a FLAT screen was hung forward of the proscenium behind the original Cinerama curtain on a FLAT rigging. In contrast to the Boyd, the SW Warner in Washington DC retained the curtain on the curved track, but installed a flat screen behind it . You are right in that SamEric took out a curved screen when it took over operation, but THAT curved screen was not the one that was installed in 1953...it was the one that was installed in 1962. If you remember the size of the 1962 installation, and then go to a library and check out the Phila "Bulletin" photos taken in 1953 and published that Fall, you will see that there was a VAST difference in screen sizes. There is a gentleman who I will try to get to comment here. He lives in Cherry Hill, NJ, and was, along with his father, business agent of the IATSE projectionist local 307, no longer in existence, and has vivid memories of visiting the Boyds booth(s) and backstage.
Back to Cinerama, I dont know where the Philly equipment went in 1959...possibly to Europe. I have published reports of the SW Warner in New York, where the equipment was de-installed and then in a short time removed to the Syosset in Long Island. You can find other clues in "Variety," by checking in the "theatre grosses" section and compare the seating capacities both before and after Nov 24, 1959 when "B-H" opened. As I said in my earlier post, seeing that vast red curtain, hearing the phenomenal 6-track sound system, and memory can trick you into thinking the 11/59-7/62 screen was curved. One other thing comes to mind: like many other theatres, when "Search For Paradise" (travelogue #3) tanked, many houses either closed down (the Houston Melba) or showed non-Cinerama product. From 3/58 to 10/58, the Boyd utilized the upstairs booth, having installed new vertical masking, 4-track mag soundheads, to show 35mm product On The Curved Screen. Opening film was Fox' "The Long, Hot Summer," and this policy continued up through the Summer 58 roadshow run of "Gigi." The downstairs booths weren't touched. After "Gigi," the house returned to 3-projector operation with "Windjammer." Possibly you saw one of those films during that season when the screen, the original Cinerama one, was deeply curved.

DennisZ, more Boyd info. (It's getting late, and I didnt think of just pulling this source...) From the International Cinerama Society, Listing of United States Cinerama Theatres.
"Philadelphia (PA) - Boyd Theatre (Sam Eric I) 3s/70 [meaning it was equipped for both 3panel and 70mm Cinerama). Theatre no. 5. 3s:10-05-53 to 10-25-59. Screen: 76ft x 26 ft. Cinerama removed and Flat 70m installed from 11-24-59. 3-strip restored 08-07-62 to 12-01-63. 70m Cinerama from 12-19-63. Now Theatre I of Sam Eric multiplex. Original red curtains still in use. The remains of a poster for CINERAMA HOLIDAY visible on the rear wall 1993. Theatre has survived two demolition schemes and is now officially protected. Enlarged B booth still in use. Now no sign of A & C booths. 19th at Chestnut."
The above was from the 2001 Cinerama/CineMiracle/Kinopanorama/D-150 theatre listings. I know the author slightly, but am well acquainted with one of his best friends. If you would like, I can find out through Australian contacts if Keith Swadkins, president of the Intl C'rama Society is still operating. But with very few exceptions, his listings are flawless, and his information unassailable. Sorry I didnt think to use this resource until now.

As a boy growing up in Hagerstown, Maryland (approx. 150 miles from Philly), my family made many trips to Phila. because my parents had both lived there before moving to Hagerstown in 1947--I was born in H-town in 1948. So, although Baltimore and DC were both 70 miles away, Phila. became the large city I became most acquainted with.
My father, while going to school at U.of P. (Wharton '35), was a motion picture projectionist in Phila. theatres and an IATSE member.
He taught me alot about projection systems, and his old union card could get us into projection booths.
I have great memories of seeing Cinerama movies at the Boyd including: "How the West Was Won," and "the Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm." I still have my souvenir books that were sold at the concession stand in those days for Cinerama and other non-Cinerama "roadshow" movies. I really looked forward to going to the Boyd--it was/is a great theatre. Although I don't get tp Philly very often, I've joined the "Friends of the Boyd, and made a small contribution--this theatre MUST be saved and restored!
Two questions to whomever may read this: 1) Did "Ben Hur" play at the Boyd? I think I saw it there. 2) What was the name of the theatre a few blocks east on Chestnut where I saw "Spartacus" and still have that souvenir book. I want to say the "Midtown," but I don't see that name on the Cinema Treasures list, and I don't recognize any others.
Thanks for responding.

Glenn
Washington, DC

If I had read the previous responses more carefully, I could have answered my first question about "Ben Hur!"

Glenn
Washington, DC

Glenn M, "Spartacus" opened in Philly in 70mm at the dearly-departed Goldman on 15th Street north of Chestnut. The theatre was demolished many years ago and an office tower stands in its place. Philly was the 4th premiere city of "Ben-Hur." It opened Nov. 24, 1959 and ran until Jan. or Feb. of 1961.

Hello veyoung!

Thanks for responding.

Glenn M.
Wash., DC

To veyoung or anyone else,

My father was a projectionist (IATSE) in Phila. from approx. 1930-1941. He spoke most often of working his longest job at the "Brookline" Theatre in suburban Philly. I don't see that on the CT list of theatres either. Is that another faulty memory of mine or is it not listed for some reason?

Glenn
Wash., DC

I remember the Eric Theatre in Harrisburg,Pa. I ran the sound of music in 70mm. It had a big curved screen,it was later twined. Then they took over the Trans-Lux as well, and they had the Eric twin in Union Deposit, along with the old Keystone Drive-In. I Liked working for them at the time.
Dave Grau (Mungo)
Norelco

Glenn M, i seem to remember a Brookline theatre outside of Philly outside. I would suggest trying to get a copy of Irving Glazer's "Philadelphia Theatres" at the library (very rare). Next time I'm at a the only branch of Camden County libraries that has a copy, I will look it up for you. There are tons of theatres that are not on c.t., simply because no one has posted the information

Veyoung
The Brookline theater was in the burbs in Havertown. It closed in the early 80's and the last time I was there in 1991 it was a gym. Also,The Boyd had the roadshow re-release engagement of Ben Hur sometimes during the mid 60's.

GlennM;
Looking through the Film Daily Yearbook, 1941 for all of PA theatres, the only Brookline Theatre that comes up is for Pittsburgh, located at 1734 Brookline Blvd with a 300 seat capacity.

Thanks for that location info Mikeoaklandpark.

I have located the Brookline Theatre, 34 Brookline Blvd, Havertown, PA listed on the Cinematour.com website. It is listed as closed. Strange that it doesn't show up in any of my Film Daily Yearbooks? eh.

veyoung: I concede to your expertice. I was only 12 years old when my parents took us to see "Ben Hur" at the Boyd. I remember seeing the Cinerama travelogues prior to that, but do not remember much else.I do not have the resource information a lot of the other contributors to this site have available to them. My resource is my memory, ticket stubs, and the souvenir book collection. Maybe it is just that I was not info savy back then. I just remember the curtain and screen always extending out past the proscenium until the Sameric take over of the theatre. We also sat in either the balcony or loge sections. Either way, it was still an awesome experience seeing the many movies I traveled from Lancaster to see at the Boyd!

DennisZ, "I just remember the curtain and screen always extending out past the proscenium until the Sameric take over of the theatre". I understand that there are photographs available of the original Cinerama installation at the Temple University Urban ARchives section. You can "google" that name to get to the site. I don't have time to search their files as I work weekdays, and I believe the archives are open weekends only once a month. The great thing about sitting in the Loge section of the Boyd was that the screen still extended above your head and still nearly completely filled your peripheral vision. Wasn't it grand?

While writing the comment above about my father being a projectionist in Phila. and environs from 1930-1941, I remembered some things he told me:
1) He worked for awhile at a theatre with another projectionist who was the brother of Ed Wynn. Ed Wynn was born Isaiah Leopold in Phila. in 1886. My fahter was born in 1911 and arrived in Phila. in 1930 from Kansas when he was 19 years old. Both brothers were in show business, I guess--one a vaudeville performer, and the other a projectionist!
2) Although a member of the IATSE, my father attempted with others to start a rival (?) union that I believe failed. I remember coming across some old dues books and stamps in our attic of "The Keystone State Moving Picture Machine Operators Association." This would have been approx. 1935.
Does anyone know anything about either of the above?

Glenn M.
Washington, DC

Further to the post of 3/25/04, here is the link to the interior photos:

http://www.robbender.com/photos/philadelphia/buildings/sameric2/

Those were great pictures TC. Amazing pictures.

Just keep firmly in mind that the few auditorium shots do in no way present the Boyd in its glory days 1952-1959, 1962-1971 as a Cinerama showcase, initially with the largest Cinerama screen ever installed. Both the Philadelphia Inquirer microfilms at the public libraries, and the Philadelphia Bulletin collection at Temple University Urban Archives have photographs of the initial installations.

This theatre was featuring the resevered seat performance of "EXODUS"
matinees 2pm & evenings 8pm. What a great theatre to see this movie. rg

Like all other theatres that featured roadshows in the 1950-60's, the schedule could change depending on film length, and time of year. Although it was always customary to have one evening show daily with matinees Wed, Sat, & Sun. Almost always it was matinees every day during the Summer months and holiday weeks. In particular, the Boyd was host to many prestigious roadshows, going back possibly even earlier than the 1939 GWTW. Beginning in 1953, there were the Cinerama and CineMiracle travelogues, with a C'scoped "Gigi" in the Summer of 1958. After the temporary removal of Cinerama equipment, the Boyd roadshowed Ben-Hur, Exodus, Judgement at Nuremburg and King of Kings. After re-establishing Cinerama in 1962: Brothers Grimm, and HTWWW, followed by numerous 70mm projections: IAMMW, Greatest Story, Hallelujah Trail, Khartoum, Circus World...The Bible, Dr. Doolittle..the list goes on. The last semi-roadshow there was the opening attraction as the severely unattractive SamEric: "Fiddler On The Roof," on "modified" roadshow....reserved performances, but not reserved seats. Just a small point: in general a roadshow performance means reserved seats & performances. The 2nd run billings of Ben-Hur and Exodus were not, as was mentioned in the posts regarding the Erlen and Merben Theatres in Philadelphia, strictly speaking, roadshows. They were, to quote the print media, "special exclusive engagements"...seats were not reserved, though in some theatres the performances may have been. And, of course, in those days, the 70mm projection prints were not used at these 2nd-run houses. Other cities used somewhat different tactics: in a racially segregated Washington, DC in 1962, a 70mm print of "West Side Story" was being truly "roadshowed" simultaneously with a 35mm "continous performance-popular prices" ("grind") booking at a theatre in heavily segregated neighborhood.

Excuse me: I forgot that you know everything> The showing of BEN HUR were the complete, uncut with intermission at the two theatres above. The only difference from center city was price and NO resv. seating and in some cases no 70mm. However some theatres were able to feature 70mm.

rg, i don't know everything, and am sorry to have given you that impression. as i recall - and i admit i may be mistaken- the original Ben-Hur run in Phillytown began 11/24/59 (or within a few days) in anamorphic 70m. It is entirely possible that the some of the sites of the initial 2nd run were in 70mm. Excuse me. Fading memories recollect a possible 70mm booking somewhere in the Northeast. This would have been a house prior to the Goldman Orleans or the GCC Northeast, somewhere in Lower Bucks County. I forget the name. Please enlighten me, as I am always willing to learn more history. Vince

I started seeing the roadshow attraction films back in the 50's with my parents. The Cinerama Travelogues, "Ben Hur", "Grimm", "How The West Was Won", "Circus World". However, my ticket stub collection only started in the 60's. Here is a list of the 70mm epics seen at the Boyd and the date I saw them.
"The Greatest Story Ever Told" 5/31/65
"Doctor Zhivago" 5/29/66
"The Bible" 3/21/67
"The Happiest Millionaire" 1/2/68
"Star" 12/22/68
"Goodbye, Mr. Chips" 12/31/69
and at the "Sameric"
"Fiddler On The Roof" 2/26/72 - Which was a reserved seat showing as the ticket stubs indicate our seats were Left Center, Row E, Seats 118 and 120 in the balcony. When "Fiddler" moved over to the Mark 1 on Market street, the reserved seat policy was discontinued I believe.
I have the souvenier programs from "Ben Hur" and the later Cinerama films, but since my Father bought the tickets I was not old enough the think I would really appreciate them in later years! As I have said many times, I still miss the movie going experience of the reserved seat Cinerama/70mm presentations. There was something magical about them, especially the movie palace surroundings. Thanks to this website, I realize I am not the only person that feels this way!

Speaking of the souvenier books, in my collection I have FUNNY LADY,JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR,BLUE MAX, hard covered books AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS, BEN HUR, KING OF KINGS, JUST TO NAME A FEW. Do you remember the little containers of orange drink some of the theatres sold during these shows. I would see these great movies in center city and waite for them to come north. The BEST theatre of them all was the MASTBAUM. I made a point of going to the last show when it closed. Unfortunately it was domed from opening day.

rg, interesting. it may be that i saw "fiddler" after the hard-ticket, roadshow run had been discontinued. this often happened, and the house would go continous-"popular prices" midway through the run...i seem to recall (and this is dangerous) that i sat my self down front row center with my friend without having to have had reserved seats. btw, i went to the last show at the Fox.

"Fiddler On The Roof" premiered at the "New Sameric" (AKA Boyd) on
Dec. 14, 1971. It moved over to the Eric's Mark 1 on June 21, 1972. At that time it changed from a Reserved Seat Engagement to a Reserved Performance engagement. It was still separate showings, but not reserved seats. It closed at the Mark 1 on Sept. 26, 1972. Can anyone tell me where an "outsider" - not living in Center City - get any pictures of the Boyd during its times of using the Cinerama screen. The pictures on the Save The Sameric website are great. But they are either from the opening years of the theatre or after the 1971 change to the Sameric. I am more interested in interior pictures from the 50's and 60's showing the screen and interior. I would also love to have some interior pictures of the Stanley, Fox, and other long gone center city movie palaces. I have many pictures of their marquees that I took when attending those theatres. But have none of their interiors. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks!

Dennis, there are pictures of the original Cinerama auditorium head-on installation at the Temple Univ archives site. These were probably from the "Bulletin." There are other pictures from the "Inquirer". If you wait a minute, and be sure to remind me, i can get you the date of the Inquirer photo. The one i have is a reprint from an article that appeared a little while back when the restoration program began..the "Bulletin" photos i know exist because someone in the current SavetheSameric program showed them to me, but he refused to let me know the dates. But they do exist. If you find them before I do, I would hope you would share them. Yes, they are alive!!!!
vince

To avoid serious litigation, I will try to hold my tongue here as much as possible, but the group of people (and I am seriously holding tongue here) who are trying to
turn the SamEric/aka Boyd in Philadelphia from a former formidable Cinerama venue into some artsy-fartsy performance venue have just
announced gleefully the following:

"The orchestra level projection booth was built for Cinerama in 1953 & expanded in 1962. The booth is an ugly intrusion on the Art Deco
showplace, and takes up prime seats. Once the delay in changing theater owners
was over, demolition began on the cinder block booth. I quickly
assembled a team to rescue the two 35/70 mm MOVIE PROJECTORS & SOUND
EQUIPMENT. Brian Hartman, 1990's projectionist at the theater, has assisted
us
for 3 years. After having knocked down half of the booth, the sledge
hammers paused just long enough so that amidst the rubble, Brian could
disassemble the projectors & sound equipment. Professional movers took
them from the theater. Once renovation is complete, film equipment will be
in the original, upstairs booth."

I was fortunate enough to take a tour of the Boyd with these people (tongue
still held in cheek) a couple of months ago and got a
chance to explore the stagehouse, both booths, offices, dressing rooms, etc.
These people (tongue squirming now) want to turn
this place back to its original state, even removing the 1953 Cinerama
marquee and replacing it with its ugly-a** 1928 white-lettering-on-black
original.

They haven't a clue about how to return this theatre into one of the East
Coast's most fantastic single-screen theatres. Now that the DC Uptown
has begun its ride into Hell, and the D-150 house in Long Island now gone, and the Music Hall too expensive to distributors to show films on a regular basis, thiswould be - for a forward-thinking business person - the perfect opportunity for a top-grossing house, like the Dome(s), like the Seattle Cinerama, etc. Instead, what we're going to have in Philadelphia is a building which has
gone from GWTW to TIC to Britney Spears!!!!!!
I should let you know that these statements about the circumcision of the Boyd were made by a person who debated me about whether the original booth had ever been used since 1953. Some idiot who was often mistaken about the history of Philadelphia theatres (no, I'm not saying his name) stated in a published book that the Boyd's original upstairs booth had not been used since 1953. I guess those prologues and breakdown reels were projected from across the street.

Unlike the Hollywood Dome's main auditorium or the Seattle one, the Boyd is a 2400 seat theater in downtown real estate. It is TOTALLY IMPOSSIBLE to operate the historic theater with a single screen on a daily basis for movies, as downtown exclusives are over, and suburbs & megaplexes are in. I have spent 3 years now volunteering to save the Boyd, seeking authentic restoration, permanent preservation, and a program to include classic films, film festivals, film premieres, organ concerts, public tours, and exhibits of the Boyd's history. But, it can't return to being a daily moviehouse anymore than Radio City Music Hall could, and for the same reasons.

As to the current marquee, it looks appropriate for a midcentury building, not a French Art Deco movie palace. The original Boyd marquee was beautiful, just as the original ticket booth was beautiful.

I could only be aware of any use of the upstairs projection booth from historical accounts, in this instance Irv Glazer. Vince says otherwise, and that was informative. As to his apparently being upset with the demolition of the orchestra projection booth, well, we hope to return film including 70 MM to a decent standard from the upstairs booth that he tells us was used after 1953.

Broadway musicals will be the primary use of the theater. That's a respectible use. The Boyd will be gorgeously restored, unlike the fixer upper that Vince saw on his visit with me. If Broadway musicals or other live events were not interested, then Philadelphia would have lost its last premiere movie palace forever. The building
would have been demolished. Instead, the movie palace will be returned to its original glory as built.
Howard B. Haas, Esq. President, Friends of the Boyd, Inc. www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.Inc next film fundraiser to restore the Boyd, and film to the Boyd, May 6, the original Rocky, at International House, see our website for details

I understand. And I appreciate your efforts. However, I do think - and I am not the only one who thinks this - that the Boyd could be...again... a magnificent "movie theatre." The problem is with the distributors who will willingly book films into tiny boxes like the Sansom Street Roxy, and apparently dont give a damn about audience appreciation. I absolutely and totally disagree about your theory that Boyd's not being possible to be operated as a single-screen first-run downtown theatre. But that's just my opinion, Howard, as a patron of the Boyd since October, 1953. I will continue to support your efforts, but as a member of a large Cinerama-loving-and-supporting group, I am SURE it can be saved as as a "destination" first run house, much like the ones I mentioned earler. It can be done! Again, I appreciate your efforts, but I would like to see the Boyd restored to its 1953 glamour and glitz, not its 1928. Vince

This isn't realistic. Built for 2400 seats, there are enormous costs such as heat and air conditioning. The Hollywood Dome is very small compared to the Boyd & survives with a megaplex attached to it. Single screen houses like the DC Cinema, the New York Astor Plaza & Beekman are closing, and others like the Ziefeld are struggling. The Boyd prospered with first run exclusives, but there are no more 1st run exclusive mainstream films! They open nationwide, and throughout the Philadelphia area on many screens.

Fortunately, movie exhibition has improved from multiplexes with small screens, small rooms, lousy sound, lousy chairs, and no decor. Philadelphia's Bridge has 2 decent sized screens, decent sound, plush seats. The screens are not huge like the Boyd's and they don't use a curtain, but those 2 are more than tolerable, and the theater has pleasant decorin the common areas.

Many movie palaces were built by Hollywood studios, or in the case of the Boyd, sold to them shortly after being built, to showcase product. The studios were forced to divest of their movie palaces, one reason for the decline in the movie palaces. The distibutors- studios- today care about a return on their investment in movies. The theaters make their profit from concessions. The wonderful new book with the same title as this website tells the story quite well, and one of its co-authors, Andreas Fuchs, will be our Guest Speaker on May 5 at International House at our VIP Reception before our
1970's Philadelphia themed film, Rocky. Our Guest Speakers take Q & A.
Howard

As to 1953 glamour and glitz, I am puzzled. The exterior lost its gorgeous Art Deco marquee & ticket lobby. The round marquee is big but most people don't think it very handsome or lavish, and we've heard from many people.
The Grand Lobby of the Boyd lost its main Art Deco chandelier & 2 adjoining pendant chandeliers, as well as four marble pedestals with Art Deco vase light fixtures and ornate metal railing on the Lobby Mezzanine.

Art Deco ceiling fixtures in the Foyer and Auditorium were replaced by a more modern metal fixture, which though interesting, doesn't fit quite well with the French Art Deco decor.

In the Auditorium, the huge screen covered much of the ornate decoration. The Monel figures of 6 ladies around the world, and other figures, were overpainted or covered over. The original paint
colors were overpainted in much of the theater. And, yes, that big ugly box intruded into the orchestra seating.

Philadelphia should be proud to have entertained many with Cinerama at the Boyd & to have kept the movie palace due to the innovative film process. We should celebrate the Cinerama history in writing, and on exhibits in the theater with programs, ticket stubs, posters, etc.

But, if you want to see a movie on a really giant screen, Imaxes do that. The Boyd can't function that way on a daily basis. What the Boyd can do is return fully to its Art Deco beauty, and be one of the few most impressive Art Deco movie palaces in the nation. With its fantastic Mural, Monel figures, glass & metalwork, Art Deco fabrics, and a restored exterior, it will be faithful to the intent of its original builders, architects, and decorators, and "knock the socks off" of everybody who enters.

And, yes, we will work to return film to the Boyd.
Howard

We are

I too would love to see the Boyd restored to the days of the Stanley Warner ownership and see the three panel Cinerama films again, in addition to all the 70mm epics shown there over the years. However, I also know that even though there is a great many of us who feel that way, it would not be enough to keep the Boyd Theatre operating. I look forward to some day in the not too distant future walking back in the Boyd and seeing whatever Broadway touring show they are presenting. And maybe, just maybe, entering again sometime and taking our seats in the "loge" to watch an epic film. At least we will be able to enter this theatre again! That is more that what


can be said for the Stanley, Fox, Randolph, Goldman, and even the

Midtown. One restored movie palace is better than none. It is unfortunate that we cannot go back again. New York City does not even have one of the Times Square area movie palaces still taking up space, except for the Mayfair/DeMille which is sitting there rotting away. The number of people who remember what movie going was like just thirty to forty years ago are dwindling. For most people the megaplexes are what they have grown up with. It's a shame. But shopping in Center City USA is also history. Time marches on and maybe not always for the better. Sitting here waiting for the opening day of the Boyd!

I'm really thrilled that the Boyd is going to be saved and restored.
I also understand that it would not be able to survive only showing film. One of the things that the Boyd has going for it as a multi purpose venue is the width of the auditorium and proscenium. I would think that a very large movie screen would still be able to be maintained for screenings and would do justice to scope and 70mm films. The screen at the Prince (formally Midtown) is small for that size theater as it must be able to be pulled up for live events. I am
guessing that at least a 60 foot wide screen would be able to fit
within the arch and still be able to be pulled up for live shows. It may not be a 76 foot wide, deeply curved, Cinerama screen, but with good projection and sound it potentially could be far and away the best movie experience in the area. A note about IMAX as a venue for seeing mainstream films: it stinks. The scope and 1:85 to 1 movies are cropped to be shown at 1:33 to 1 and also the IMAX versions are many times edited and shortened. I'd love to know more about the plans to restore the Boyd's capacity to show film. If anyone knows, please feel free to comment.

The Friends of the Boyd, Inc are working on film equipment issues, and certainly want the best movie experience in the area. Our aim is to have a huge movie screen within the prosecenium arch. Like the Prince's it will need to fly to get out of the way for live shows, but the arch as you know is much bigger than the Prince's. We also wish to have 70 MM in addition to scope, flat, and pre-1953 dimension classic films, and of course, excellent sound. The auditorium is indeed very wide. When restored with its original decorations, paint colors, plaster, etc. there will be no other movie experience like this in our region, considering the huge screen, huge auditorium, glorious lobbies, lounges, and foyers, and ornate features.

The Boyd's balcony is quite nice, too. Currently, the Colonial Theater in Phoenixville, and the Newtown are the only 2 area theaters where you can experience a movie from the balcony.
Howard B. Haas, President, Friends of the Boyd, Inc.

Clear Channel has announced plans to spin off its live-entertainment division. Will this affect plans for the Boyd in any way?

I passed by the Sameric 4/Boyd yesterday, and the "Sameric" name on the 1953 marque has been removed, revealing the original 1953 "Boyd" name on the marque, with holes it it from where the Sameric name was attached to.

After 33 years, the 1953 Boyd name is seeing light, but for only a short while, as the marque is slated to be removed within the next couple of weeks, along with the Sameric 4 lighted marque above the 1953 marque. I took some pictures and will be getting them developed soon.

Also interested in getting a photo of the Fern Rock Theater in Olney.

Does anyone know how the renovation of the former RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd /Regal Entertainment Group's United Artists Sameric 4 is going?

Was by there recently and haven't seen any work going on. This was a few months ago. The front was still all boarded up. Hopefully work begins soon on it.

Here is a link to a recent picture of the REG United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre: RKO Stanley Warner Boyd Theatre / REG United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre

I saw many, many films at this theater in the early 1980's. It was a single large theater to which they added a few small screens while I was still living in Philadelphia. I saw Rocky III on the large screen in 1982.

I believe the Sameric Theatres Corp. opened the addition that housed auditoriums #2 and #3 in late 1982 or early 1983.

When ROCKY III opened in 1982, it was still called "Sameric Theatre" When Return Of the Jedi opened in May 1983, it was now called "Sameric 3 Theatre".

By the time ROCKY IV opened in 1985, it was "Sameric 4 Theatre", with the original RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd Theatre, now called "Sameric 4 Auditorium #1" still intact.

I not sure if this was mentioned, but seating for the Sameric 4 Theatre was as follows:

Auditorium #1 (RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd): 2350 seats, with 1349 seats on the first floor.
Auditorium #2: 363
Auditorium #3: 363
Auditorium #4: 200

By chance I stayed in a hotel down the street from the Boyd last month. I hope efforts to restore this building are successful. I understand that it is the last standing movie palace in Philly, and it looks like the interior is fabulous.

Did they ever use the balcony section for seating when it was the Sameric?

Here is an old photo of the Boyd and an article about Clear Channel Entertainment and the Goldenburg Group renovating this theater and using it as a live entertainment venue.

During the 80's the Sameric used the balcony for the big pictures ( the Star Wars, Raiders type movie. Weekend it was opened. They once showed 2001 (70mm 6track stereo version and I went on a Saturday afternoon and the orchestra section was closed. You had to sit in the balcony. It was a great presentation.

I've passe by the Boyd a couple of weeks ago, and the front of the Boyd still looks like it hasn't changed since I took a picture of it back in May. The Boyd still has, in damaged condition, the 1953 "Boyd" cinerama marquee with the 1985 "Sameric 4" vertical marquee above it. I can't wait to see, when completed, the original 1928 marquee on this great palace.

Clear Channel has pulled out of the entertainment theater business. I know they are not going to book broadway shows anymore. Wonder what will happen to the theater now?

Clear Channel is spinning off its entertainment theater business into a separate company which will continue to book Touring Broadway & concerts. The new company will restore & reopen the Boyd. Friends of the Boyd emails out a free Weekly Update email, enter your email at wwww.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

Here is a website with another article about the Boyd Theater.

For those interested in Cinerama, "true" Cinerama, requiring 3 projectors, played at the Boyd from 1953 and into early 1960's with breaks for other films including Ben Hur. The Randolph played "one strip" Cinerama, not with 3 projectors, really more like 70 MM as far as I understand. The Boyd was the only true Cinerama venue in our region. Because it would require a huge curved screen in front of the Proscenium Arch, and 3 separate projection booths on the orchestra floor, real Cinerama is unlikely to ever return to the Boyd. I'm not saying that's good, merely reality.

If you want to see cinerama (3 projector) tickets are on sale for HOW THE WEST WAS WON at the Cinerama Dome Theatre later this mo. See web for details. Reserved seating, 2 shows daily 1:30 & 7:30.

The Sameric 2 and 3 Theatres opened on July 16, 1982. The Sameric 4 Theatre opened on June 12, 1985. According to what I have in my records theatres 2 and 3 each had 450 seats. And theatre 4 had 225 seats. I believe I would have gotten this information from Variety back then. At one time, Variety listed each theatre in the cities it covered. Of course, back then, movies did not open in 3,000 theatres at one time! When "Fiddler on the Roof" reopened the Boyd Theatre as the Sameric Theatre, the balcony was in use. Our reserved seat tickets for a Saturday night performance were in the balcony. However, most times when we attended other 70mm presentation films at the Sameric - "Star Wars", "Indy's Films," we were seated on the main floor. I know at one of those films, two of us went up to the balcony to see what it was like prior to the film starting. We were asked to leave by some theatre staff that were sitting there drinking beer. That was one of the last times we ever drove from Lancaster to see a film there. Of course, 70mm films eventually become a thing of the past.

When the Sameric 4 closed, the seat counts for House 2 and 3 were at 363 seats each, down from the 450 when they opened on 7/16/1982, and House 4 was at 200 seats, down from the 225 when it opened on 6/12/1985. Some of the seats were removed for wheelchair patrons.

The seats count for the main floor in Sameric House 1 (aka RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd), in March 2002, was at 1349 seats.

The main (orchestra) floor did not sit 1349 in recent years no matter what the fire sign or literature says. I have a count & a chart, but will tell you it sat more like 800. I know that from seeing movies there, and doing inventory of ALL features in the theater during the 3 years since it has been closed.
Seating was likely about 1500 in 1928, greatly reduced for Cinerama in 1953, and maybe added in 1971 when Cinerama screen removed. Now, I'm not saying you couldn't have put in temp chairs to reach that total, though I don't think that was ever done. All the chairs on main level are gone now. New chairs with same design as originals will return, and the seating capacity will greatly increase.

I remember seeing films at the Boyd when they still had the curved screen they installed for the later Cinerama films. The along the wall balcony section seats on either side of the balcony were curtained off and not used. So when Sameric Theatres took over and removed the curved screen which extended past the proscenium, the entire balcony seating was reopened and used.

Went by the Boyd on Friday 11/25. The old SamEric circular marquee is gone. You're able to see slight remains of the "Boyd" logo. It was a surprise to see. Wish I had my camera. I'll have to take pictures next time I go.

Hdtv267, the old "SamEric" circular marquee has been gone since at least the beginning of May. I posted a picture here. This picture was taken in May of this year.

Here are 2 closeup photos of the 1953 Boyd letters on the Cinerama marquee. The Sam Eric letters were removed as part of exploratory work for replication of original 1928 French Art Deco marquee, which will replace the current one. The Boyd letters are corroded so the photos aren't too impressive, and we didn't post them on our official site (www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org) but somebody asked so I placed them on a site of mine.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/howardbhaas/

How well an historic theater's restoration is going I consider to be an important measure of the political clmate of where this important historic theater restoration is taking place. For all told, there is no higher art form than a well-produced motion picture exhibited in a well-run theater, as was the case when I saw the Philadelphia premiere of "Ben Hur" at this theater - the Boyd - back in 1959. For the theater in this or that community says it all really. If it's packed to brim with patrons - as was the case with the Boyd back in 1959 - it means that the economic climate is especially good combined with the atmosphere of a strong sense of togetherness, or a wanting for togetherness, among all those attending the theater. And all of it seems were very much unified as one people back when the Boyd was packed to the brim back in 1959. And maybe it's just me, but I far prefer that than all of us going off our separate ways while the highest art form there is is in ruins...

CORRECTION:

Should read: "And all of US it seems were very much unified as one people bsck when the Boyd was packed to the brim in 1959."

Tommorrow (12/25/2005) will mark the 77th Anniversary of the opening of the Boyd Theatre by The Stanley Company of America.

12-25-1928 marked the 77th Anniversary of the opening of the Boyd Theatre by ALEXANDER R. BOYD. He sold the theater soon afterwards to the Warner Bros, who were also buying the Stanley Theater, and so it became a Stanley Warner theater. Boyd left Stanley Warner, where he was pivotal, to open his own movie palace and chain of theaters. Evenutally, in 1934, he had a chain, though not including the Boyd on Chestnut Street. Why did he sell the Boyd? Maybe with Warner Bros. moving in, he was afraid he couldn't get "product" (the Warner and Paramount films he was booking in the Stanley theaters), maybe he ran out of money, or maybe Warner Bros. paid him enough he was happy with the profit.
Visit www.FriendsOfTheBoyd for more fascinating history.

Here is a 1947 photo:
https://secure.phila.gov/PhotoArchive/detail.aspx?ImageId=7767

Now that I've reviewed all the facts with regard to the Boyd, I see no excuse whatsoever why it cannot become a topnotch movie palace again, especially given the fact that it's the last movie palace still standing in the heart of what continues to be a major U.S. city. Some might point out that it has 2,350 seats to fill if it's to be successful, while I say, "Is that all?"

For not only is the population of Philadelphia today well over a million people, but add to this that Philadelphia's surrounding suburbs are all heavily populated now, unlike how it was when the Boyd Theatre last was in its heyday. And let me point out that many many Philadelphia suburbanites would love to come into Philadelphia far more often than they do now, if, in fact, they still come here at all, if only there were very good reasons to. And the fully restored Boyd Theatre could become one very good reason to. But right now instead of their getting that when they come here instead they are told the Boyd Theatre can never hope to be a glorious movie palace again. And that, I ask, is supposed to make those who reside in Philadelphia's suburbs want to come here?!

As a single-screen movie palace in the heavily trafficked portion of a major U.S. city, the Boyd Theatre most certainly can work, but it sure as heck can't if those currently in charge of it say, "No can do," and let that total lie override the actual reality.

For this is not a matter of practical considerations preventing the Boyd Theatre from ever becoming a world-class movie palace again. Rather, it's a matter of shear shortsightedness and lack of will. In fact, more effort is currently being poured into preventing it from ever becoming a world-class movie palace again than any to try to resuscitate it. For the theater itself is all waiting to breathe new life once more and to have new life breathed into it. There's absolutely nothing lacking in the theater in that regard. But to be sure, there's a great deal lacking in those who are currently holding it hostage. With them it's all "no can do" this and "no can do" that. And prove them wrong and all they do is get mad rather than learning a thing or two. And those of us who know better are supposed to be impressed by this!? We're not impressed.

There is nothing I'd like better than to see the Boyd as a daily moviehouse again, but it isn't possible! I was a customer until it closed, but too few were for the last couple decades! You just can't keep a movie palace built for about 2400 open daily as a single screen in the US except Los Angeles. It has been my honor to lead a group to save the Boyd from demolition, and to assist the current owner who is pouring money to restore and revitalize the Boyd. Its survival, like that of hundreds elsewhere in the US, depends on live events. The Friends of the Boyd are working to ensure film (classics, festivals, premieres) can return as well. Now perhaps the above correspondent can return to haunting the pages of various closed theaters in NE Philly with the same unrealistic rant.

"Unrealistic rant"? Folks, when we're talking about the last movie palace still standing in a major U.S. city, and in a superb location within that major U.S. city at that, it would require far more effort to prevent in from being a success than to simply allow it to be succesful, and naturally so at that! During the period when Mr. Haas was a customer of it regularly, it was not being run properly at all, hence why customers, other than Mr. Haas apparently, were avoiding it like the plague. Just to give a good for instance, given how the Boyd can be described as an event theater rather than a typical neighborhood one, it would be totally out of sync with what it's truly meant to be by trying to fill its 2,350 seats every single day of the week. But that's exactly what its last operator tried to do: To apply a neighborhood movie theater formula to a movie palace. And of course this strategy failed. To borrow Mr. Haas's favorite word, it was totally UNREALISTIC! But let it be noted that the Boyd Theatre fared extremely well when it was run in accordance with how it was meant to be. Back when it had been the Boyd, Ben Hur did extremely well there, and it's a shame Mr. Haas apparently wasn't around to witness that back when it occured. If he had, no doubt he'd see things a whole lot differently in how it needs to be restored. And all he's telling us now is that it can never go back to being the Sameric again. And that I fully agree with, no arguments whatsoever. But its returning to how it was back when it had been the Boyd is something else entirely, while to this Mr. Haas remains fiercely determinedly blind. I saw Ben Hur at that theater back when it was being run properly, as did many of the rest of you, and like the rest of you, I, too, can remember that theater operating beautifully at that time. In brief, it worked. And not in the context of some fantasy or pipedream, but in ACTUALITY. Yet this Mr. Haas insists we should have no memories of, as apparently it complicates Mr. Haas's ambition to whittle the Boyd down to far less than it's meant to be.

Labor costs have risen so high that studios can't afford to film a movie with Ben Hur quality anymore! But, even if the could, one difference is that there were no megaplexes back then! MOST people on this site prefer movie palaces, but we aren't most people in America. Most people in America visit megaplexes, and once they find one they like, return again and again.

As to filling the Boyd daily, United Artists Circuit didn't expect huge crowds Monday to Thursday. In the glory days of movie palaces, from before TV, and also during Cinerama in the Boyd's case, they were filled seven days a week, and scheduled movies from early in morning to late at night. TV killed many downtown moviehouses, and 90% of neighborhood moviehouses. What TV didn't kill was killed over time by the mass move to the burbs and the development of multiplexes and megaplexes.

There's no effort to prevent the Boyd from being a success! The new owner operator is investing more than $30 milion to revitalize the movie palace!

I've never met the above correspondent at one of our film fundraisers so far, and we've had six at International House (which is single screen, though not a daily moviehouse). And, I didn't meet him at any of the many tours of the Boyd that I led, to show people what it looked like, and discuss the plans. Nor was he in our Saturday afternoon Vigil protests in 2002 EVERY Saturday from May to the end of the year, to protest the then owner's plans to demolish. Numerous of our volunteers have generously donated their time to assist to ensure that the Boyd will be a tremendous asset to Philadelphia! Where's he been?

Just take a look at the November 13th post for
http://www.cinematreasures.org/theater/9141/

that will show his "involvement" in saving these theaters he just rants about. If he put as much time in posting these rants as people who want the theatres saved, something might be done.

On the other hand, this "rant" he just posted on January 20 at the following link should help to clarify things more:

http://cinematreasures.org/theater/8257/

Your "involvement" , Mr. "Buff" is to libel people including city and church leaders, but not to show up at meetings. NO business expert, planner, or anybody agrees with your "theories" Go away, already, plague our house no longer.

Anybody doubting the libel can review Holme theater Philadelphia postings on this site, where Mr. Buff goes so far as to say that Northeast Philly is run by "America's Taliban" and goes on and on about every politician, civic leader, and others, in the area.

He also asserts the politicians "scared" Disney from 8th and Market. That site was and is owned by the same developer who when he owned the Boyd obtained a demolition permit for the movie palace, but not to place blame where it doesn't blame, Disney wasn't scared away by politicians. The company tried "Disneyquest" elsewhere, it didn't work, they discontinued interest in trying it in Philadelphia.

I know I mentioned it in an earlier post to this thread, but I would like nothing more than see the Boyd Theatre operated as the first class first run roadshow house that Stanley Warner operated. It would be thrilling to once again walk out the walkway from the balcony mezzanine to the balcony seating sections and see the lights shining on the red curtain covering that curved screen. To once again sit down and see the lights dim as the overature to "Ben Hur", "Doctor Zhivago," "Lawrence of Arabia," etc, etc. begins. I would love to travel from Lancaster as in years past. Spend the day in Wanamakers, have a nice dinner at one of the center city restaurants and then take in an evening performance at the Boyd. The last time I was in Center City to see a movie was at the "Sameric" to see the last Indiana Jones adventure. Since the days of 70mm presentations has past, there is no need to travel into Center City because I can see the same presentations at our local multiplexes, unfortunately. Last year my wife and I did make a trip into Center City for the Flower show. While there we checked out the Lord and Taylor store - what a disapointment! I think there are many film fans who would still travel any distance to see a 70mm film presentation in a true movie theatre. However, is that enough to support the theatre 365 days a year? Unfortunately, I do not think so. What got me started traveling to C.C. to the movies. My parents taking us there to see the Cinerama films and other 70mm roadshow presentations at the Boyd - Stanley - Goldman - Randolph -
Midtown and even the Cinema 19! At least some time in the future we will still be able to walk into the Boyd and see a stage show. Instead of walking past a parking lot where the Boyd was, the CVS where the Sam's place was, and the many office buildings where most of the other palaces were. There could be a lot worse things than a live theatre Boyd. I seriously doubt whether films - especially the wide screen 70mm presentations - will ever again be shown at the Boyd. I hope I am proven wrong. But that is my feeling. Well, I have rattled on long enough. I do think if the Boyd Motion Picture Palace was promoted correctly, it could or might work. Back in the roaring days of the 50's and 60's they advertised the roadshow engagements in even the Lancaster papers. I know many people who traveled the Route 30 into C.C! And anyone my wife and I took to the Boyd or Sameric (ugh what a name), was more than willing to make the trip again! I am sure that is at least part of the reason why movie attendance is down now. Give the audience the proper films and the proper surroundings and presentations they will attend!

I miss John Wanamaker's, too, and wish the huge department stores were still here, too!

There's lots of reasons why studios don't relese most movies with downtown exclusives or roadshows anymore. If studios did so release in major cities throughout the US, then surely, the Boyd would be in contention. But, they don't.

We are working hard to return film, including 70 MM, to the Boyd.

There's many reasons why film attendence is down now, but one might be that this year's films don't exactly equal Ben Hur, Doctor Zhivago, or Lawrence of Arabia!

Of course, it is true that many chain theaters have lousy environments. I prefer single screen theaters, but will note that the two biggest auditoriums of the Bridge are good venues, certainly compared with other multiplexes of our area.

This website discusses the pending classic series at the Ziegfeld in New York. 35 MM, but they are films that belong on the large screen. I hope people attend, to encourage more there.

Just to clear up any misunderstandings and to reset the focus on what's supposed to be most important of all - restoring Philadelphia's classic theaters in the best possible way - at no point have I ever libeled anyone. "Libel" is the spreading of false statements, and though there's not one instance anywhere on this site where I have done that, there have been a number of occasions where the above correspondant has with regards to me and comments I've posted, and I respectfully request that he refrain from doing this further. And a formal apology on his part wouldn't hurt either.

For let it be noted that I do credit the above correspondant for having saved the Boyd from demolition, and I have nothing but the highest praises of him for that. But not to the degree that he should have a full monopoly on how it should be restored from here on. That should be up to consensus, given how the Boyd is Philadelphia's last movie palace to speak of.

Anybody who wants to help Friends of the Boyd with our mission for the Boyd Theatre can visit www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

To answer recently asked frequent questions, the Boyd will likely reopen in 2007. What used to be 3 small auditoriums next door has been gutted to become a big space for retail or restaurant, still owned by the former owner of the Boyd, the Goldenberg Group.

The Boyd Theatre is owned by Live Nation, the spinoff company from Clear Channel. Friends of the Boyd are helping in any way we can.

This New York City area movie fan (Weehawken NJ actually) is eagerly looking forward to seeing a big screen epic at the Boyd in 2007, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. And I'll bet many of us will be traveling a lot further than 90 miles. Thanks, Friends of the Boyd!

I can't wait for the opening either and am delighted that this palace has been saved! Philadelphia seems to have had so many wonderful theaters, many of the best and biggest now gone..I picked up a copy of Irvin Glazers' "Philadelphia Theaters" (paperback) at the Philadelpia Museum of Art...It's a fantastic book filled with
photos and info of the city's glorious theater architectural history up to and including the enormous MASTBAUM which resembled Boston's present day WANG CENTER but was 1,000 seats bigger at 4,800.

Hello all, my name is Tim Luzak. I am the lead artist for mr. John Canning of Canning studios of Cheshire Ct. I specialize in the decorative restoration of historic buildings. I am happy to say that I am currently at work on your beloved theatre.
I arrived at the theatre this morning at 7 am. sharp. I had heard, from a few of my co-workers, that this was a beautiful job.I was unprepared for the true grandeur that this theatre had in store for me. I didn't realize that it was a movie palace!!! This place is SPECTACULAR!!! Honestly, it just blew my mind. I was all over the site, from the stage house, through the old dressing rooms, up to the projection booth....just everywhere. Unbelieveable.

You all have a true treasure here. This decorative sheme is fantastic. There are so many layers of color that you just don't see in very many palaces. I can't tell you in strong enough terms what you have here! I've worked on a lot of other theatres...The New Amsterdam, The Fox in Stockton CA. the Pantageus (sp?) and a beautiful one in Redding Ca.....but nothing compares to this one!! This is something else all together. WOW! Every square inch of this place is decorated!!!I got online to research the date of the "refresh". I still havent found any info as to when that was done. Can anyone help me out on that account? There is so much happenning under that 'new'layer of paint.Justgorgeouse

Please forgiive all of the above typo's... there is no scroll function on the comments box. I seem to enjoy leaving the 'c' out of scheme.
Enough of my yakkin'...I will be done with the decorative sample by the middle of next month. It will be a 20' section of the ceiling which will also incorporate the wall down to the floor. This is at the house right side of the auditorium near the procenium (stage left). This is an area which has the greatest amount of decoration, and should give a very good idea of the overall color scheme for the building.
It is a wonderful project. You all are in very good hands. Rest assured that we will be entirely faithful to the original. It will be EXACTCTLY the same as when it was first painted.

Hi, Tim. The most recent repainting was of the Grand Lobby, the Foyer adjoining the auditorium (all that green & like) and a litte bit of the auditorium, especially lower part of Proscenium Arch, in 1993, for the world premiere of the movie Philadelphia. Tom Hanks arrived and remarked "Oh, wow, a real movie palace!"

We know Rambusch did some repainting 1945-46 because it is on their index card. We know there was a considerable remodel for 1953 when Cinerama was installed. There was some touch up in 1971 when the Boyd changed hands. The non-original "arch" murals in the auditorium appear to be mid-1930's, and correspond with much else repainting in the Auditorium. That makes sense, becaue the original "air conditioning" was "ice chilling" and in early Depression summers, even that probably wasn't used, since the Boyd was closed. And, heat was by coal, as original paint was peeling due to lack of A/C, it was probably also getting dirty.

Visit our website (www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org) and scroll all the way to the bottom for an email address for us, or find one at How to Help link at same. Would be glad to further discuss.

And, THANKS for the compliments to this wonderful Art Deco movie palace that the prior owner obtained a permit to demolish before our citizen activists said "NO."

I have to keep submitting my posts, as I am unsure of my spelling etc. Bear with me.
I can tell you with some fair inside info that there are no plans for films in the future. I am as saddened by this as you all are. I tried to put a bug in someones ear today about this, but I think it fell short. I am referring to the Redding,CA. project here... That project was funded largely by NPR. They wanted to make it a mixed-use space. Like the Boyd it was at the tail-end of the vaudeville era. You have the same 12' backstage as they have, as well as the filled-in orchestra pit(that curved area in front of the stage). In they're case they re-instated the pit and are working on expanding the stage.

To clarify, Mr. Luzak is referring in the above post regarding films to a project in Redding, Calif (which one?), not the Boyd. Friends of the Boyd DO plan for a film series at the Boyd.

From my understanding, ClearChannel is in a state of flux. They have sunk quite a bit of money into this project, but are unsure of where it is headed. Now, you didn't hear any of this from me....but you may want to try a co-operative ownership of your space. Try to involve public radio and public television in your cause. They have many shows which could be broadcast from your new space. In Redding they are going to do that as well as show all of the films that were originally shown there as first runs. Clearchannel seems to have undergone a shake-up. If I were in the used theatre business...I may try to come up with a few good suggestions for joint ownership...thats just me though, and what do I know.

Sorry Howard I was unclear, there is only one in Redding. It's a cow-town. I believe that it is a Warner.It was a few years ago..so many projects... I can give you a few juicy tidbits on that one if you would like them.

Tim, I'm not sure you are aware that you are writing on a very public website. It is NOT a private website that belongs to Friends of the Boyd. It is a very public website. We know the Boyd owner has changed recently from Clear Channel to Live Nation, but I seriously doubt you wish to place any discussion of the financing of this project in the public realm. Thanks again for the compliments to the Boyd!

Mr. Haas,
You seem to be the most influential person on this board. I would be happy to share the decorative side of the theatre with you. I am most comfortable with Church decoration, but will take on a theatre when business is slow :)

Ah, Tim was referring to the Cascade theater in Redding, Calif,
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/670/

The Friends of the Boyd are very excited about the dazzling, multicolored, and multi-patterned original Art Deco paint that has been discovered in every "public" space of the Boyd and look forward to its return! From the Exterior to the Ticket & Grand Lobbies, from the Foyer and its upstairs and lower levels, and including the Auditorium and right into each individual restroom lounge, the entire Boyd was, and should again be, a gloriously ornate showplace!

Because of limited availability, until March 6, 2006 only, Friends of the Boyd are offering you original CHAIR BACKS from 1928 from the Boyd!

These original chairs are from the Balcony since the chairs from the orchestra floor were replaced in 1953. These are the BACKS only, which are WOOD in the back with UPHOLSTERY in the front, NOT THE ORNATE ENDS or sides or armrests.
The WOOD on the back has what realtors call "character." The top layer of UPHOLSTERY is RED, interwoven with BLACK, and we think it dates from the 1953 Cinerama remodel. http://www.savethesameric.org/photos/evans/4620-balcony-chair.jpg/view If you strip that away, there's a layer of ORANGE upholstery. Finally, there's the original Opening Day 1928 ART DECO upholstery as seen in our Auditorium photo gallery.
http://www.savethesameric.org/photos/rgb/P8070457.jpg/view
Naturally, the original upholstery doesn't look new, and is darker than the photo, but on some or all the chairs, there's a little bit of original upholstery at the sides that's brand new looking. Of course, you don't need to strip to the original upholstery. You could leave the red upholstery in place. You might want two chairs, strip one, and then decide to display one or both.
There's also a bit of METAL at the sides of each chair back, which is how they connected to the rest of the chairs.

Since they are only backs, they aren't for sitting on. They are SOUVENIRS of the historic Boyd Theatre! They can be displayed, on the floor, or on a big shelf. We convey these chairs "as is" with no guarantees.

$25 DONATION to Friends of the Boyd FOR EACH chair, in advance or at the time of pickup of chairs, and you need pick them up from a Center City Philadelphia location that we will specify (not the Boyd).
The tax deductible donations will be used for our mission of a comprehensive Art Deco restoration of the Boyd, and a program of film, organ, tours, and exhibits of the Boyd's history.

New chairs in the Boyd will again look like 1928 chairs, including new Art Deco upholstery. New chairs may be wider since people are bigger, and for many such reasons, these backs won't be used again. The surviving ornate ends will be reused.

If you want one or more chair back, then email us SOON. Email address is at the very bottom of our website, www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org
Remember, we can only make this offer until March 6.

I am very interested in information regarding the premiere of 2001: A Space Odyssey at the Boyd. If any readers would care to share memories, photos & souvenirs (such as the 3D postcards sold in the lobby during intermission) PLEASE CONTACT ME DIRECTLY. I'd really appreciate it. Thanks to all.

philnoir@earthlink.net

To avoid spam filters, write BOYD in the subject line. Thanks!

The Randolph page says 2001 played there. So, the local premiere was at the Boyd, but the run was at the Randolph? Do you have a date for the premiere being at the Boyd? We are working to document the Boyd's history.

Yes, I remember watching "Cinerama" at The Boyd for the first time. What an experience when that screen opened up from the little postage stamp of Lowell Thomas announcing, "This is Cinerama!" And then taking that amazing roller coaster ride for the first time. I also remember seeing "La Dolce Vita" at The Boyd.

"2001" did not premiere at the Boyd. It had its premiere at the Randolph Theatre on May 22nd, 1968 and played its Cinerama roadshow engagement at the Randolph through Dec. 17, 1968. It was replaced with the Cinerama roadshow engagement of "Ice Station Zebra" on Dec. 18, 1968 which continued until Feb. 25, 1969. During this time
"Doctor Dolittle" was playing on roadshow at the Boyd from Jan. 24, 1968 to Aug. 13, 1968. "Doctor Dolittle" had replaced "The Happiest Millionaire" which had a roadshow engagement at the Boyd from Oct. 20, 1967 to Jan. 17, 1968. "2001" replaced the 70mm roadshow engagement of "Gone With The Wind" which played at the Randolph from Oct. 10, 1967 to May 21st, 1968. "Gone With the Wind" then moved over to the Midtown Theatre from May 22nd, 1968 to July 30th, 1968.

From my records are the following reserved seat engagements at the Boyd:
10/20/67-1/17/68 - "The Happiest Millionaire"
1/24/68-8/13/68- "Doctor Dolittle"
11/6/68-2/11/69 - "Star!"
2/12/69-3/25/69 -"War and Peace" the Continental Releasing Corp. 2 Part Russian film.
6/25/69-8/26/69 - "BenHur" Reissue Showing
11/12/69-3/17/70 -"Goodbye Mr. Chips"
12/13/71 - 6/20/72 - "Fiddler on the Roof"
12/14/72 - 4/3/73 - "Man of La Mancha"
70MM Regular Engagements:
6/26/74-9/24/74 - "That's Entertainment"
11/8/79-2/14/80 - "The Rose"
And there were also: "Close Encounters of the Third Kind"
"Star Wars""Empire Strikes Back""Quest For Fire", "Raiders", "Return of the Jedi", "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom," and "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade."
The Sameric in it's golden days, played all the "biggies."

"Star Wars Episode IV", in its original run in 1977, did not play at the Boyd/Sameric Theatre. It opened at Eric's Place Theatre. During the 1997 Special Edition reissue, Star Wars Episode IV finally did play at the Boyd, then known as United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre.

"Empire Strikes Back", "Return Of The Jedi" and "Star Wars Episode I" all opened at the Sameric (Empire Strikes Back), Sameric 3 (Return Of The Jedi), and United Artists Sameric 4 (Star Wars Episode I).

3 more great movie that opened at the Sameric were: ROCKY III, ROCKY IV, and Philadelphia

Thanks, Dennis, and Mike.
"Philadelphia" had its premiere in the historic Boyd, then known as the Sameric, but its actual run was at Sam's Place I and II, where I saw it.

Listed below are the dates I saw other 70mm film presentations at the Original Boyd/Sameric Theatre. I only went to this theatre when I knew the film was showing at the original theatre and not one of the added on "shoeboxes."
1. "The Rose" 1/20/80
2. "The Empire Strikes Back" 6/21/80
3. "Raiders of the Lost Ark" 7/25/81
4. "Quest For Fire" 5/1/82
5. "Return of the Jedi" 7/9/83
6. "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom" 8/4/84
7. "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade" 7/15/89
Which was the last time I ever traveled from Lancaster to Center City to see any films.

All of the above named movies were good movies in and of themselves, but very few merited being exhibited at the Boyd. And to be sure, the Boyd Theatre's importance as a movie palace was very much undermined when they were shown there. With Ben Hur having proven itself as having been the perfect type of movie for the Boyd, it should have also set the stage for what type of movie should, and should not, be shown there. But in the years following Ben Hur, the Boyd Theatre was classified too much as a "business" for this to have been possible. Imagine, for instance, how much the Philadelphia Museum of Art would have to compromise if it were categorized as a "business." It wouldn't be long in coming that it would become a total mess. Which is exactly what did happen in the Boyd Theatre's case following Ben Hur.

There has to be certain criteria that determines what film is an epic, and what isn't, with Ben Hur having been a clearcut example of what is. And the number one criterium is a timelessness. For instance, if done properly, Ben Hur could be shown at the Boyd Theatre today with all the power and impact it had when it premiered there in 1959. But we could hardly say this of The Rose, Quest For Fire and so on seen on the immediately above list. Next, the movie in question should have a certain majesty to it. For instance, It's a Wonderful Life may well have a timeless quality to it, but as films go it is hardly "majestic." Third, although it heavily ties in with timelessness, the movie must have an historically accurate credibility. In the case of Return of the Jedi as a good example, not only did it totally lack historic credibility at the time it premiered, but it was doubtful that any who watched it at the time of its premiere seriously believed it was an accurate insight into what the future would hold, given how that was what was being depicted.

Needless to say, it isn't very often that the true epic comes along. But when it does, there should be the special theater in place just for it. And here in Philadelphia the Boyd is that theater. But to be sure, the Boyd Theatre cannot possibly live up to that challenge if it's classified just as a "business." It tried to following Ben Hur, but it wasn't able to do it. But heading into the future it can accomplish this goal if it acquires a much higher status than simply being a business. Businesses are just for the here and now. But movie palaces, if they're run properly, are for all eternity. And such, the Boyd Theatre proved with the showing of Ben Hur, it has it in it to provide.

I respectfully disagree with the post about what the Boyd should and shouldn't have screened. This is my perspective (and I work in entertainment...) It's *all* a business. The artistic side of cinema is (I hate saying "just") a by-product of the merchandise made by those who bankroll & distribute movies. Please believe me when I say that the general studio perception is that movies are no more important than selling shoes.

Sure, they make all kinds of self-aggrandizing public statements to the contrary. That's just the surface. (ex: One of the key reasons the new Superman movie took so long to get into production wasn’t about who was “right” for the role, or writing the best script… all the fighting over how much junk they could merchandise. At one point Peter Guber wanted Superman to fight Polar bears for no reason except to make stuffed animals.)

Now, all the statements about criteria are totally subjective. (Although I'd agree that any movie with Streisand is landfill.) I saw all the aforementioned films there and found that many of them could be considered epic – and on what scale is "epic" defined? By how many extras that can fit on the screen, or...? IMO historical accuracy has nothing to do with proportion or aesthetics. How the West was Won is certainly an epic -- but it's pretty darn inaccurate, historically and in dialogue.

I am at a total loss as to see how a science *fiction* film can even be expected to contain historical accuracy. Perhaps you meant believability? In that case the Star Wars films aren't even science fiction, they are fantasies. Nobody expects the future to look as they do. (Least of all Lucas.) Blade Runner -- an epic IMO -- is true science fiction; many of its details are becoming a reality. That's scary… but wholly irrelevant to how entertaining it may be or why it deserves the biggest screen possible.

Back in the day when MGM was making "prestige" adaptations of the classics, those films were expected to put butts in theater chairs just as much as their standard fare.

BTW, don't get the impression that I am fronting for big business. I left the world of commercials to make independent, personally satisfying films. But be realistic -- no studios make movies solely for their artistic value. Cinema *can* be art... and I'd wish it were more so... but that is not the reality.

I am not in disagreement with you in the least in how you say the big studios view their output. What you say is both true and a sad commentary on the big studios. But this is not to say that a great deal of movies do not fall in the category of being art, or that those who direct them and all else to help bring them about on the creativity end of things do not see them as being art. Call it the other reality, for lack of a better way of putting it. But please don't say that this or that movie is not art because the big studios don't see it that way and are blind to this fact. That is, don't give the big studios far more power to dictate what is reality than what they rightfully deserve. It's bad enough that too often they act as filters in exchange for what it takes to get a film produced and distributed, very oftentimes ruining what would have been art otherwise. But what is very beautiful about certain films is how they made it through the big studio filtering process with that which is art still fully intact, movies that have a timelessness especially. And rather than what is timeless being subjective, only time itself can determine what is timeless, of course. And the same with regard to what is majestic, or credible or accurate.

When it comes to business, all business is just for the moment only. The big studios who fortunately failed to get their way, wanted to cast Shirley Temple as Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz because she was the hottest child star at that moment. And the big studios of today are no different regardless of what that almost blunder taught. And had it not been for a business technicality, Temple would've gotten the part, and the movie The Wizard of Oz would be relatively worthless today. But little can business recognize this, or appreciate it, since it does exist just for the moment.

As for science fiction films taking on a timelessness, it has happened, but it's extremely rare. I can list certain sci-fi films of the past that have certain scenes that are timeless -- The Fly, War of the Worlds, The Day the Earth Stood Still, etc. -- but not necessarily consistently timeless throughout.

But in contrast, when you take a film like Ben Hur, what elements can you find in that movie that would only have made sense back in the late 1950s when it was released but that totally fail to connect with today's audience in terms of their making much sense now?

Now in all fairness, we don't always know what's going to hold up as an epic over time at the time it's first released. And certain films of the past that are being promoted as epics today, such as Star Wars, are only being propped up by the big studios to seem as such. For take that propping up away and I feel it would be revealed just how very dated and stale they are as opposed to being "timeless." For there has to be the true underlying artistry to make a film timeless, and that's not something that can be bought. Rather, this is something beyond the studio's control and on a far higher plane of reality. The big studios can block the release of what is art, but they can't dictate what is and isn't art.

And the Boyd Theatre, despite the rough times it suffered when it was the Sameric, survives as art. As I see it, it is a great work of art that was simply put to bad use for a time, totally due to business for the moment. But business for the moment comes and goes. But art, if it's true art, endures because it exists on a much higher and far more solid plane of reality. And because the Boyd Theatre IS the last movie palace still standing in Philadelphia, I feel it deserves now to move up many notches in terms of its being recognized art for all times sake, rather than just a business of the moment.

Hi, here I am to address your points.

<But please don't say that this or that movie is not art because the big studios don't see it that way and are blind to this fact.>

I wasn’t trying to imply this. Generally speaking, all I mean to say that art is subjective. (Andres Serrano’s controversial work being an example.)

<Don't give the big studios far more power to dictate what is reality than what they rightfully deserve.>

Again, “rightfully deserve” is relative. What do the studios deserve? As a business in a [relatively] free market they deserve to exploit their properties to the fullest. If said films contain any elements of artistic merit the studios deserve [a portion of] credit, because they had the choice to greenlight the project or pass on it. What percentage of credit? Well that’s debatable.

In my own way, I don’t reward the studios for making crap by withholding my attendance. I won’t consent to be patronized or bamboozled by publicity hype; I am selective of the films I patronize—as well as the actual venues. Nine times out of ten I refused to see a film that was conveniently playing in my neighborhood multiplex because the screen were too small, the projection and sound barely attended to. I guess I considered it a badge of honor to travel to a venue like the Boyd.

<It's bad enough that too often they act as filters in exchange for what it takes to get a film produced and distributed, very oftentimes ruining what would have been art otherwise.>

Very true. But that is the nature of the beast. Everyone makes their deals with eyes wide open. (There are too many overpaid lawyers making sure of it.)

<But what is very beautiful about certain films is how they made it through the big studio filtering process with that which is art still fully intact, movies that have a timelessness especially.>

How true! I find it even more amazing that so many got through the system relatively unscathed; although I truly believe that cinema would’ve matured much sooner without the Hays office interference. What Kazin and Brando achieved in the 50s probably would have happened much earlier.

<And rather than what is timeless being subjective, only time itself can determine what is timeless, of course. And the same with regard to what is majestic, or credible or accurate.>

Well you’ve got me there. People will be listening to Beethoven and the Beatles for centuries. I doubt if history will be as kind to Porky’s and Cannonball Run.

<When it comes to business, all business is just for the moment only.>

If you define “moment” as many generations this is true. As long as they hold the copyright(s) they control the content and distribution. Then again look what happens when some films fall into public domain: colorization or terrible prints being passed off as a resemblance to the original.

<The big studios who fortunately failed to get their way, wanted to cast Shirley Temple as Dorothy in The Wizard of Oz because she was the hottest child star at that moment. And had it not been for a business technicality, Temple would've gotten the part, and The Wizard of Oz would be relatively worthless today.>

This may be heresy -- but I think Wizard could have been just as good; or at least as interesting with Temple. Of course we can recast all the films in our minds but it’s an academic point.

<As for science fiction films taking on timelessness, it has happened, but it's extremely rare. I can list certain sci-fi films of the past that have certain scenes that are timeless -- The Fly, War of the Worlds, The Day the Earth Stood Still, etc. -- but not necessarily consistently timeless throughout.>

In theory I agree with you that those films cited (and many others) contain thoughtful themes and scenes of greatness trapped within dated, formulaic format. I’d say that about *any* genre.

<But in contrast, when you take a film like Ben Hur, what elements can you find in that movie that would only have made sense back in the late 1950s when it was released but that totally fail to connect with today's audience in terms of their making much sense now?>

I don’t mean to rag on Ben Hur, I really like the film… but it is (by compassion to the execution of contemporary films) very dated in style—mostly the dialogue and acting, which seems hammy to the current generation. Hell, it seems hammy to me too. ;) But unlike the kids, that doesn’t get in *my* way of enjoying it. I also think its pace (which never bothered me) is well out of step with today’s films… Gladiator being an example of current fast-paced “epics.”

<Certain films of the past that are being promoted as epics today, such as Star Wars, are only being propped up by the big studios to seem as such. For take that propping up away and I feel it would be revealed just how very dated and stale they are as opposed to being "timeless.">

Come on, Ben Hur was promoted to death too. I would absolutely say that Star Wars is a timeless film—far moreso than Ben Hur in the way it influenced an entire generation; not just movie patrons. That doesn’t mean I think Star Wars is better; more artistic etc. But if timeless means it lives through the ages, I have no doubt that it will be considered a classic.

I was just showing some silent films to my eight year-old daughter, and of course she remarked that the acting was so theatrical, the sets so fake, etc. 15 minutes later she was hooked and completely immersed in their unique world. Silents are timeless AND dated! It’s not a mutually exclusive concept. (Of course, there’s nothing inherent about silent films per se that make a classic.)

<For there has to be the true underlying artistry to make a film timeless, and that's not something that can be bought.>

It can’t be bought on command, but if they finance a project and step away from interference in production, the results can be similar. In 1965 MGM gave Kubrick about 10 million based on a sketchy outline (it may have even been verbal; I’d have to check) and look at the result.

<And the Boyd Theatre, despite the rough times it suffered when it was the Sameric, survives as art.>

Is that high art or low art? Personally, I’m a huge fan of Deco -- but it was not considered high art by any means at the time it originated. My feeling is that the Boyd should be preserved because it’s a swell-looking building that reflects innumerable happy memories of the patrons who passed through its doors. But Notre Dame Cathedral it ain’t. ;)

Here in LA The Wiltern theater, a deco classic, exists to host live rock shows. Although I feel these have lesser aesthetic value than movies, I wouldn’t try to convince the audience of that. Because it wasn’t torn down, they are experiencing their own happy memories there. Perhaps, in a few decades The Wiltern may be cited for demolition… and the people who grew up with it as a rock venue will protest just as loudly as we who grew up in the Boyd.

It’s been very invigorating to discuss this subject with you; please feel free to have the last word.

My two cents.

I started going to the theatres in center city in 1977. Seeing a movie at the Fox or SamEric was sometime better experience than the actul movie. Seeing the first Star Trek @ the Fox was unbelievable, but the movie was OK(at best). The SamEric did get some of the big movies and it was still an event to go there. Around the time of Quest for Fire, the SamEric showed 2001. The way it was ment to be shown, 70mm, 6 track Stereo. The Saturday I saw it there, the orchestra leval was closed, so you had to sit in the balcony.

There is nothing like seeing a movie, in an old theatre.

I know I'm going to really get shot down for my saying this, but on a smaller scale I feel there's a core to the Boyd Theatre that ranks every bit as much as "high art" as does Notre Dame Cathedral. But it's hard to see that clearly in that throughout its history it has had to function as a business. Without motion pictures having the full recognition of being art, it had no other choice but to exist and function as such. And imagine if you will, what Notre Dame Cathedral would look like if the only way it could exist was as a business. For such is what the Boyd Theatre was put through all these many years.

And not to condemn anybody too much for this mistreatment, I think a lot of it had to do with many seeing film itself as not being something of permanence. For many years film was seen as a "disposable medium" in league with paper towels and tin cans and candy wrappers and so on, as something that cannot keep for very long, and therefore it must be worth not trying to keep. So how much could a building that is specifically designed to exhibit films be worth therefore? For that is pretty much how many looked upon theaters all throughout that period.

However, motion picture technology has come a long long way since then, and the digital revolution needless to say is fast transforming the art of filmmaking into a very permanent medium indeed! Which I feel should put movie theaters in a whole new light now, but full awareness of this has not caught on just yet. We're still thinking of movie theaters the same old way we once did, as buildings that exhibit temporary things. But now that there's digital technology, what motion picture is there that cannot be classified as a work of permanence provided it's in digital form?

And I feel that the advent of digital should revolutionize the spirit that goes into motion picture creation as well. For it's now possible to make a movie that we can know for sure will look and sound the same a thousand years from now as it does now. As media goes, it is now a more immortal medium than say sculpture, or painting or great architecture itself. And many have not quite caught onto that yet.

As for the Boyd Theatre, it went through many various stages of evolution. In the beginning, it was viewed as little more than a large-sized nickelodeon. In fact, the man who it was named for didn't even think all that much of it and didn't hold onto it for very long. But later, master architect William Harold Lee greatly reworked it, completely transforming it into the magnificent movie palace we so fondly remember today. But with film itself not seen as all that permanent a medium, I'm sure many "experts" thought this extravagant addition was overblown. Thus in the Sameric years it was watered down a bit and brought more in line just to be a business once more. And was run strictly as such. And like I say, we can't fully condemn the "experts" at the time for this mistreatment, since it was during a stretch of time when it was very difficult, and costly, to keep motion pictures a thing of permanence. And what good is a movie theater in itself if not for that which it exhibits? (Just as what good is an art museum in itself if not for the paintings and sculptures it displays?)

Up until now it seems that whenever we applied the term "movie palace" we were only speaking figuratively, not seriously meaning that a movie palace is up there with Versailles, Buckingham and so on. But now that the digital revolution is starting to transfer the motion picture medium into a thing of permanence why can't we start to say, "Why not?"

The Boyd was built, and viewed from the start, as a downtown showplace movie palace, not a "large-sized nickelodeon" Hollywood stars regularly arrived with the films. Alexander Boyd intended it to be the flagship of a movie circuit empire. He probably had to sell it to Warner Bros because the national studio also was purchasing the Stanley Co theaters, and he couldn't compete against a nationwide firm- same problem many companies have today.

When the Boyd reopens with many of the magnificient Art Deco features that it originally had, people will once again enjoy its true glory!

As to W. H. Lee, he was a great theater architect who didn't get to design a downtown Philadelphia movie palace. Much of the Boyd was simplified in 1953, a common post-WW2 trend, but that didn't make it better. Many remember a huge curved screen in front of the Proscenium Arch, but that-like the 3 orchestra projection booths- likely was built for the specifications of the Cinerama company. I've always liked the circular marquee, but it seems more appropriate for a 1950's Penn Center building. The original French Art Deco marquee will fit better at the Boyd.

W.H. Lee designed both Center City Philadelphia's Goldman Theater (in combination with David Supowitz) and the Palace, which, though not as large as the Boyd, would qualify as being movie palaces if they were still standing today. Sadly, both were demolished, being viewed strictly as businesses at the time of their closing and unable to keep pace as such.

Meantime, as for the Boyd and its long and evolutionary history, to the best of my knowledge its highest peak came with the showing of Ben Hur not that long after W.H. Lee made various changes to it. And most who attended Ben Hur at the Boyd at that time (including me) came away with strong memories of the theater as well as the film. And would it have been the same if not for Lee's several major alterations?

The theater's original proscenium arch, while no doubt architecturally impressive, was not designed with the foresight of wide-screen Cinerama, which must be taken into account when looking at a theater as a whole by today's standards and more innovations yet to come. A theater's architecture by all means should enhance the movie going experience, but not to the degree that it gets in the way of it. The thing that patrons come to a theater first and foremost for is to see a movie in the best possible way. And it's a clearcut case where the larger and wider the screen the better. I doubt if there's many theater patrons who would dispute that.

Had it not been W.H. Lee's alterations I would probably be saying that the Boyd Theatre's original proscenium arch should be preserved at all costs. But since that alteration was made, and it proved to work out well, little sense would it make to bring the theater back to what it originally was now, at least in terms of how its screen should be.

As for the circular marquee that W.H. Lee introduced to the Boyd's exterior and whether that should have been kept intact or the theater's original marquee reintroduced, that decision should be based totally on the architectural trends taking place all around the Boyd Theatre at this point in time. Particularly the architectural trends occurring around the Boyd Theatre at this point in time most likely to endure. The theater must be able to harmoniously and complementarily blend with all that surrounds it rather than clash and appear confrontational. And if what most if not all that surrounds it is residential, or trending more and more in this direction, then it should lean towards being an artistic complement to that, and look as little business-like as possible.

The Cinerama screen was taken down in 1971, revealing then & ever since then, the beautiful Proscenium Arch. Fortunately, the auditorium was designed very wide, so that a large Cinemascope screen entertained audiences since 1971.

Buildings especially movie palaces, do stand proudly on their own. They don't try to ape their neighbors. The original marquee will blend with the rest of the Boyd architecture, exterior and interior.

Yes, but since 1971 the Boyd has never seen a repeat anywhere near as successful as Ben Hur, meaning that the number one reason why people come out to movie theaters is to see the movie, not the architecture, however beautiful it might well be. And as much as I fully agree with you that the Boyd Theatre's original proscenium arch is beautiful, I'm just stating the simple straightforward, and sad to say, unchangeable fact. People do want the theater's architecture to be beautiful, on a subsconscious level at least, if not the conscious. But not to the point that it stands in the way of enjoying the movie itself. And whether you and I agree on that or not is not going to change how it is.

And up to a certain extent, if they're designed especially well, movie palaces DO stand proudly on their own. Which, of course, is true of all great architecture. The Parthenon at the Acropolis in Athens, Greece, which had been built over a hundred years before the birth of Alexander the Great and more than three-hundred years before the birth of Christ, stood perfectly intact straight up until the time the Turks used it for storing gunpowder in the 1700s during the Ottoman Empire occupation. And in more recent times we can see a mark of great architecture quite similar in the Holme/Pennypack Theatre designed by William Harold Lee in Northeast Philadelphia that, despite its many many years of various abuses, has held up very strong, and continues to despite the abuses it's still suffering today. Like the enlightened ancient Greek architects, William H. Lee was gifted with the rich understanding of "built to last" and incorporated it into his work. And leave it only to fickle man to be able to undo it. As was the case when one of his masterpieces, the Victoria Theatre in his hometown of Shamokin, Pennsylvania was torn down to be replaced by, of all things, a Rite Aide. Can you imagine?!

But let it be said that wherever W.H. Lee's work still remains, the owners of such are extremely lucky and should regard it with the utmost respect. For W.H. Lee's work is such that it will return the favor in kind -- as was proven with the Boyd Theatre when Ben Hur fared so well there.

As for your saying that movie palaces don't "ape their neighbors," surely you're not trying to tell me they should stand out like sore thumbs! For what I was saying is that Center City Philadelphia is home to much great architecture, not simply the Boyd, and that the Boyd should league itself with this as much as possible. Which doesn't mean imitation, per se, but it does require harmonization. In an orchestra the oboe is a totally different instrument than the violin, but it doesn't mean the two should clash therefore. For if the two do, the audience will just get up and walk out, all demanding their money back as they do. Need I say more?

The Cinerama screen, the circular marquee, and Ben Hur were all products of their time, half a century ago, as movie palaces sought to survive in the TV era. We're in a different era now. The Boyd, with its original Art Deco features restored, will once again entertain audiences.

Howard, to give credit to William Harold Lee, when he made certain changes to the Boyd Theatre's interior, he took special care not to destroy the theater's original proscenium arch designed by Paul G. Henon, and which you think so highly of. Rather, he chose to place the wide Cinerama screen in front of it, as I'm sure he felt it would have been beneath him to destroy the work of a fellow master architect.

Now with that said, in your April 19, 2005 post above you spoke of the possibility of introducing a fly-up screen, in the instance you cited within the proscenium arch. But many are saying that for a theater that size a movie screen within the proscenium arch would be too small. And clearly W.H. Lee felt this way when he made the decision to place the screen in front of the proscenium arch so that narrowness wouldn't be a problem. So what I'm suggesting is, why not have a fly up screen that, when it's brought down, is to be brought down in front of, rather than within, the proscenium arch? For that way you'll have the best of both worlds -- the full visability of the beautiful proscenium arch when live performances are held there, plus the proscenium arch not playing a restrictive role when movies are exhibited there.

For the way I see it, these days especially, epics don't come along very often, while I feel it would belittle the Boyd for it to exhibit less than that. So it makes perfect sense for the Boyd to present live performances as well as it now heads into the future. And the beauty of its proscenium arch will certainly play well to that. At the same time Philadelphia needs to have a movie palace in place for when the epics do come along. And the Boyd, of course, IS the only movie palace left. So with that, I hope you will give some thought to the fly up screen in front of the proscenium arch idea. Also, it's rather obvious that you're never going to be exhibiting movies plus having live performances in the course of the same day. So it's not like you'll ever have to switch from a live performance set-up to a movie exhibition set-up while the audience is sitting there watching. Which, in turn, opens the way to all sorts of possibilities regarding what it would take to go from the one set-up to the other.

When the "Sameric" as it was then named, closed in 2002, there was a sign in the Grand Lobby leading to the historic auditorium which proclaimed "Philadelphia's largest movie screen." Having seen numerous movies there, I can attest to the fact that the screen was large enough to truly excite any cinema lover. I say "was" with some hesitation because I understand the screen is still there, but we no longer see it since the Fire Curtain was lowered a year ago. The screen could not be reused, and its removal will happen when major work starts. In the meantime, the Fire Curtain with its triangles and original paint colors, is much more fun to look at than the screen, which became torn & written on after the theater closed.

I have seen screens in front of proscenium arches, though I think only in places still used as daily moviehouses. There needs be a place for the screen to go, whether in the floor or the ceiling. It won't be the ornate ceiling. And, it would be expensive, complicated, and take some room, no doubt, for it to go into the floor.

Fortunately, the Arch is wide and big enough for a very large movie screen. It wasn't wide enough for Cinerama, but for other format films, 35 mm- incuding Scope, and 70 mm, the Arch will house a screen big enough to impress film audiences. I've seen movies in numerous historic movie palaces from Boston to California, and Europe, too, so I do believe I can say that the screen will be appropriate.

And, I'm not saying that we have no appreciation for an even larger screen. I love the Uptown in D.C. and can only imagine that the Boyd with its Cinerama sized screens (at least two different sizes says Vince Young above) compared. However, the Boyd can have a movie screen within the Arch that people will very much enjoy. And, perhaps in the future, people can figure out an affordable way to have an even bigger screen present itself, if that's what they want! As you say, the critical need is the survival of the last movie palace.

I fully agree with you that the mobile screen to be in front of the proscenium could not go upward as there's absolutely no way that this could be possible while preserving that beautifully ornate ceiling at the same time. It would have to come up from below floor level therefore. And to be sure, the cost of this wouldn't come cheap.

One possible way of meeting this cost, though, would be if the Boyd were to consent to go digital. For as I'm sure you're aware there are several digital equipment manufacturers at this moment who are offering to fully finance both new projection plus screen costs, while at the same time there's not a single digital theater anywhere in all Philadelphia -- a major east coast U.S. city -- at this moment. And the major reason why seems to be that because there's several variations of digital, and which are not compatible, nobody knows yet which one will prevail or fall by the wayside. While no doubt, given how the Boyd is Philadelphia's one and only movie palace to speak of, and in a choice location at that, all the digital equipment manufacturers would be falling all over one another to be the one chosen to equip the Boyd. At least as it all stands right now.

At the same time I need not have to tell you that Philadelphia at the present moment is home to many live performance venues as it is. Meaning that the Boyd's one big advantage in addition to its being this is that it is a world class movie palace, and again I must emphasize, Philadelphia's ONLY one. And as such it must be able to live up to this to the fullest degree. It cannot risk being second to anyone in terms of its over all screen size and so on.

On the other hand, as a live performance theater the Boyd has to be unique in relation to Philadelphia's other live performance venues now in existence. Hence the invaluableness of its lavish architecture that many of those other competing live performance venues could not even aspire to begin to have, whether it be the Kimell Center, the Tower Theater, the Trocadero and so on. In brief, there are some types of live performances or special Philadelphia showings for which only the Boyd's beautiful interior decor will do -- the same as it is when it comes to certain films.

And how to position the Boyd to best handle both of course is the big challenge. For in the end it must be able to do both. And needless to say the two goals must not be in conflict with one another. At all times the transitions must be smooth and totally professional.

The 66' curved IMAX screen at the NY Museum of Natural History Lefrak Auditorium retracts into the stage revealing the full proscenium and stage which includes a "regular" screen. It has been operating in this fashion since the 1970s. This venue is theatre #11020 on this site. There were also plans a few years back to be able to "fly" a deep curve screen forward of the proscenium at the Imperial in Montreal. AFAIK, these plans have not yet been implemented. And, of
course, in Seattle, the opposite is accomplished: the retractable screen is the "regular" screen which sits in front of the deep-curve Cinerama screen. For a very short period in 1956, the Philadelphia Fox used a roll-a-way screen for the presentation of the dual-projector Thrillarama process. The 72-foot wide curved screen
sat in front of the stage and was installed (and removed) overnight. The installation "kit" also included screen curtains.

Howard
I saw Man Of La MAncha at the Boyd aka SamEric and I remember the screen being curved even tho it was ont he stage. Was this the original Cinerama screen than? Years later when I went back and saw GWTW in 70mm the screen was large, but the flat screen that remained for years.
Mike

Mike, many of us confuse the Boyd (aka SamEric) with the Randolph, usually because at one time both theatres presented 70mm Cinerama (advertised as such) or 70mm presentations on most of the full screen. The curved Cinerama screen was removed from the Boyd in December of 1971. A curved screen has not been used at that venue since then. "Man of La Mancha" was a 1972 release, a full year after the curved screen's removal. You say "...years later when I went back and saw GWTW." AFAIK, GWTW had no 70m engagements in the Philadelphia area during the 1970s. The deep-curve screen that was in place at the Boyd/SamEric until 12/71 was actually not the original Cinerama screen, though it was much larger. This particular screen was installed in August 1962 for the run of the Loews-Cinerama features, the original Cinerama screen having been dismantled in the Fall of 1959 after its original installation in October of 1953.

I cannot wait to attend a performance at the BOYD when it re-opens. What a satisfying occaasion to have this old palace spared!

And then, the next challenge is to re-open thePhiladelphia Metropolitan Opera House (constructed by Oscar Hammerstein in the 20's, in a hurry, a lavish 4,000 seat house.....)up at North Broad and Poplar Steets......

The great information that veyoung puts forth above regarding the screen at the NY Museum of Natural History Lefrak Auditorium, etc., certainly takes most if not all the guesswork out of what the Boyd Theatre can and should do so as to have the best of both worlds, that is, to become a great venue to see live performances, as well as its re-becoming the best movie theater in the tri-state area to see epics at their absolute best.

With all this talk of movies at The Boyd, was it ever used as a legit theatre? It does have a stage, orchestra pit and dressing rooms. All the pictures show it as a movie theatre.

The orchestra pit was used, I believe, only once, and that was back in 1928, when the Boyd Theatre was opened by Alexander Boyd.

In 1928 movies weren't far enough along yet for it to make sense for the Boyd to be a movie palace exclusively. So it had to be able to provide for live entertainment as well. I'm just surprised it didn't do more live entertainment during that earliest stretch, for it is quite amazing to learn that its orchestra pit was possibly used only once. On the other hand I presume that exhibiting movies as they progressed further was the theater's ultimate aim from the onset, and it did arise to meet that challenge very well in the years that followed.

BTW, at what point do we begin placing motion picture exhibition in the category of "legit theater"? Wasn't that mile stone reached when Ben Hur premiered there in '59? For live performances are very nice to be sure. BUT, when it comes to presenting fiery sea battles and breathtaking, edge-of-the-seat chariot races in the absolutely best possible way, live stage presentations, er, are a bit limited. When it comes to putting across material such as that, or the burning of Atlanta, or the dramatic sinking of the Titanic, or the raiding of Europe by the Mongel hordes, or the parting of the Red Sea, or the Martians invading our planet in flying saucers, or Godzilla terrorizing Tokyo or what have you, clearly motion pictures are the far higher art form. It would be totally laughable to try to put such material across through live performances. And to be sure, those whose specialty is live performances have every good reason to feel totally jealous. But that's not any of us, is it? Which is why I say becoming a world class movie theater once more is the Boyd's highest calling. That Philadelphia needs. The rest we already have plenty of.

Sorry to say Philly is not a movie city. Look at the exhibitors that we had over the last several decades. Budco and porn, Eric with the run down theatres. Even UA has no respect for Philly. Is UA at Riverview a world class theatre? I saw Shriek there and the vocies were coming from all speakers, the theatre was dirty and seats were either rip or broken (and it is not a center city theatre!). If wasn't for the Ritz, we wouldn't have any good theatre, but these theates do not show popular Hollywood movies. We had some decent theatres in center city over the years, but if recent history hold true can the Boyd present big picture movies, with possible reissues of older movies, like the Zigfeld in NY. I think of NY for a big movie first, then I see it in Phiily. Why see a Star Wars type movie, with bad picture, poor sound or bad reel changes. Most of the area theatres I saw movies at over the years have been hit or miss.

Yvgtspike, The world class theatres that we have in the Philadelphia area now are:

AMC Neshaminy 24 Theatre, in Bensalem
REG King of Prussia Stadium 16 and IMAX Theatre, in King of Prussia
REG Marketplace Stadium 24 Theatre, in Oaks
National Amusements The Bridge 6: Cinema De Lux

These theatres are to today's generation that the RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd, RKO Stanley Warner's Stanley Theatre, Milgram's Fox Theatre and Stanley Warner's Mastbaum Theatre were to those who grew up in the 1950's and 1960's, and the Sameric Theatre, the William Goldman's/Budco/AMC Midtown Twin Theatre to those who grew up in the 1970's and 1980's

Regal Entertainment Group is the sucessor to United Artists Theatres and Eric Theatres, and AMC Theatres is the sucessor to Budco Theatres, General Cinema Theatres, William Goldman Theatres, and Loews Cineplex Entertainment Theatres (doing business in Philadelphia as RKO Stanley Warner Theatres, Stanley Warner Theatres and Stanley Company of America from eratly 1900's to 1977.

Does anyone know when Ben Hur last showing was at the Stanley Warner's Boyd Theatre, during its initial run, and what movie replaced Ben Hur?

The same thing also for Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back and when Empire Strikes Back left the Sameric Theatre?

"Ben Hur" opened 11/24/59...closed Jan or Feb 1961, followed by "Exodus" and then (in approximate order) "Judgment at Nuremburg", "King of Kings," and "La Dolce Vita". Vince

Where was the survey or documentation that has those theatres being called "World Class"?

That's your opinion, right? Has nothing to do with your employment status with one of those complexes, does it?

While you're parrotting off the geneology of Philadelphia theater ownership as though it were the first passage of the bible, you might also take the same amount of time listing your bias.

Just sayin is all.

Is such nastiness necessary because someone has an opinion?

Everyone is entitled to thier opinions. No question about it. That is the beauty of the internets and boards like these.

That being said, when folks make posts that are either opinion or clouded by a preference it should be stated as such.

If they state thier opinion as a fact, they should expect to be called on it.

Regarding the size of the screen at the Boyd after restoration-
As long as the new screen fills the arch, it will be at minimum, more than adequite; with state of the art sound and projection it has the potential to be breathtaking. As far as I can see based upon the many knowledgable posts on this site, the screen in front of the arch was installed for Cinerama. A screen that size, unless being used for large format projection (Cinerama, 70mm, etc)would have to be masked down for other formats (including 35mm scope) or the projection might appear grainy blown up to that extreme size and ratio. I have seen 70mm blow-ups presented at the Boyd on the flat
screen (Indiana Jones and The Temple of Doom, Empire Strike Back)and the screen size was fine, however the projection and sound were not
always up to high standards. I hope the restored Boyd can bring back those high standards of presentation we saw in days gone by.

That is great news. Thanks for that. I hope that some 70mm films come to the Boyd once its restored. Then some hope for Cinerama as well. But right now just keep at the task at hand of restoring this theatre back to what is truly a world class theatre.

I agree that the Bridge is a great theatre. The staff is good and the presentation of the movie have always been perfect. I look at this theatre to see a "big"movie. They have only one theatre in this market, so they have a better chance of doing it right. Regal/UA have several theatres, and some are the old Eric. I go to the Grant Ave. and I seen everything that can go wrong with showing a movie happened. Bad spicing, a reel change resulting in bad sound, Nardia sounded like it was dragging throughout the whole movie, projector buld going out etc. I would never say Neshaminy is world class theatre. It's good, I do not hestitate to go see a movie there. The UA at Riverview was always consider to be a "showcase theatre". This is from their mouths when they talked about their theatres. Riverview and the KofP are the ones that they are going to put the best equipment in. I am assuming this based on pass history and news stories about U/A. Regal is still U/A, the only ones that are not are the ones that Regal built.

But Phiily theatres have always been OK and it's shame for a city of this size.

I use to see about 100 movies a year in both the center city theatres and the ones in the burbs. I still see quite of few movies. No matter what it still like going to the movies. Seeing a movie in an old theatre is an experience. I hope that the mangement of the Boyd remember the experience of seeing a movie in the future of this once great movie theatre.

The Boyd didn't have live shows because it opened with Paramount's 1st talkie. Talkies being ten times more popular than silents, so they didn't need stage shows to help draw in patrons. The Boyd also didn't have a huge stage. Most of downtown Philly's stage presentation movie palaces were on Market Street, and they had much larger stages.

The Friends of the Boyd do plan 70 mm classics. We can't do 3 strip Cinerama do to the need for a wider screen, and 3 projector booths on the orchestra level. We have said since we organized in 2002 that film classics, film festivals, and movie premieres can, and should, be held at the Boyd. For the theater to survive, and to entertain, musicals and concerts will be presented by the theater's new owner. Musicals and concerts will be a great reuse of the Boyd. Movies are an art form, and we will strive to present them as discussed above.

The Bridge deserves its feature in the Cinema Treasures book, and is world class for what it is.

The problem today is lack of showmanship. Today its get you in and get you out. How many shows can we get in a day. As a manager your job was many things not just walking around. First check the marquee, stand back and look at the front of your theatre. Next the box ofice, lobby, candy stand (snack bar) and the rest rooms. Go to the booth and check equipment. When the doors open check the auditorium (lights, music, seats, screen. When the show starts sit or stand in the back and check sound, picture. Take pride in your theatre. Surround yourself with good help. Hire people that want to work in the theatre because they like the theatre not because they want to watch free movies. I could go on and on but I'm dreaming because those days are gone. Today there is No Showmanship, just get them in and get them out.

hdtv267, that was just my own opinion of whjat the "world class" theatres in the Philadelphia area are today.

Howard Haas is right on target when he says that uniquely large screens can only work with certain cinema formats geared specifically for this purpose. Which, of course, is not all movies. While it is not clear as of yet to what degree the advent of digital will revolutionize this. Certain films, because of their nature, and regardless of resolution, it would seem rather out of place to see on an unusually large screen, while with others an unusually large screen is an absolute must. But when we're talking about the Boyd, which is Philadelphia's last, and one and only, movie palace, it's understood that when movies are shown there it's not just to be any movie. Meaning that when movies are exhibited there it should only be those specifically made to be seen on an unusually large screen -- both in terms of resolution and their very nature. Which is why I feel the Boyd's adapting the LeFrak model remains a very good idea, if and when it can be done.

As for "Philly not being a movie city," that at best can only be summed up as a statement of the moment. For despite all and any stereotypes, this city is always constantly in a state of change. And the fact that this city is dotted all throughout with movie theaters of the past -- currently being used for other purposes -- lays testimony to the fact that its not being a movie city wasn't always the case. And only a total fool would try to predict that it will never become a movie city again. At the present moment Philadelphia is swept up in all sorts of varying cross-currents, with a small but perhaps growing number coming to it saying, "Hey, where are the movie theaters?" And if the demand for this grows strong enough, there will be movie theaters all throughout this city once more I can fully assure you. And what will spur that demand will be movie theaters run in the right way. Which is why I'm all eager to see the Boyd restored in the best possible way.

To the degree that it aspires to be like it was when it was at its absolute height -- which was when it was in its Boyd days -- I have no doubt it will be very successful. On the other hand, if it attempts to replicate the Sameric era, history will just repeat itself. The Boyd by its very nature, special location and so on, demands to be a premiere theater. And at this moment there's no other theater anywhere in this city, in its surrounding suburbs, or even in this entire tri-state area for that matter, that can claim that same stature. And you can't just go ahead and build something like that fresh and new out in King of Prussia or wherever. Anything such as that would only be makeshift and temporary while awaiting the Boyd to make its big comeback.

Veyoung
I saw GWTW at the Randolph in 68 on the great cinerama screen even though it was in 70mm. I am positive I saw GWTW at the SamEric in 75 in 70mm. HOward will u verify that .
Mike

I don't know. GWTW was often reissued, so if you are positive, you are probably correct. In 1971 the Boyd's Cinerama screen was taken down, but 70 mm projection was used.

Many of the movie theaters on this site in NYC, DC, and elsewhere, have a list of movies that played, from newspapers. The list seems to be from one gentleman. I'd love such a list to be posted on this site, of all movies that played at the Boyd, and the dates they played!

Also, the email address HowardB isn't me, that's another correspondent.

Still not sure about the GWTW run in 70mm in 1975. At that time I lived at 2101 Chestnut St - 2 blks from the Boyd - and passed it every day. I might be wrong, tho. BTW, Im sure you know that GWTW originally premiered at the Boyd (and simultaneously at the Earle) in 1939. As far as a earlier post noted about screen size..,go to the rec.arts.movies.tech group...there are a number of articles about D-150 lenses (and other high-precision short-focal length lenses) still available.

Quick question: Does anyone know when "On a Clear Day You Can See Forever" was released to the Boyd Theatre? I think it was around December 1970.

A controversy is fast unfurling in the state of Pennsylvania that I have no doubt will detrimentally impact theater restorations all throughout the state, while I believe the Boyd Theatre is no exception. It all has to do with gambling that was recently legalized in this state. Among the first places in Pennsylvania that is being targeted with a casino proposal -- despite overwhelming community opposition -- is Gettysburg, site of the historic battlefield, and also where the Majestic Theatre was just recently restored to its former glory. In response to this I have created a special Cinema Treasures webpage which can be reached through the following link: http://cinematreasures.org/news/14515_0_1_0_M/ where I invite you all to discuss this issue in greater depth in terms of how it will impact our state's movie theaters.

Meantime, action is currently underway to bring five casinos to Philadelphia where the Boyd Theatre is located. So it's not like the Boyd is fully out of the loop on this.

For right now, at least to the best of my knowledge, no consideration whatsoever on the part of those who favor gambling in Pennsylvania is being given to what impact it will have on this states movie theaters and those currently in the process of being restored.

At the Loews Jersey on Friday eve, volunteer usher Myron told me that in early 1968 he saw GWTW in a "pan and scan" 70 mm version on the Cinerama screen at the Boyd. It is possible his recollection is confused with the Randolph?

Yes

A "Mary" wrote that "My mother passed away a couple of years ago, and last week my dad gave me the trunk she used to store all her special treasures. In going through it tonight, I found a ticket stub for seat U 101, Good Only Wed. 8:40 P.M. June 16, 1954 at the Boyd Theater, Orchestra, National Ticket Company. The seat cost $2.60 and is torn so I can't tell what the show was. Is there anyplace I can get this information?"

I answered "This is Cinerama" which ran for one or two years at the Boyd? Her ticket price works out in inflation adjusted dollars to $17 or $18 today. Were road show features in the 1950's & 1960's also just as expensive?

The Cinerama films that where Roadshown during the 1950's averaged with admissions like:

Matinees Wed, Thur, Fri

Orch. & Loge $1.75 Bal. $1.20

Sat & Sun

Orch. & Loge $2.40 Bal. $1.75

Eve Sun thru Sat

Orch. & Logo $2.65 Bal. $1.75

All Prices include Tax

Howard, to answer your question concerning prices for roadshows in the 50's and 60's, there were always numerous factors to be considered., theatre configuration and type of film generally being uppermost. Houses with three separate sections like the Boyd and the Stanley and Stanton could have three or more price “levels.” Single-level venues were a different story. The Midtown, for instance, had its screen way "up there" above the exit doors at the front of the auditorium. Therefore, the first half-dozen or so rows, the “neck-strain” section, were most often priced lower than those situated in the rest of the orchestra. On the other hand, a very small single-level theatre like the Trans-Lux had, IIRC, a single price for all of its
seats when it roadshowed “Those Magnificent Men....” Next, type of film played a big role, Cinerama, being a prime example. When the Goldman opened "Sleeping Beauty" in 70mm on a continous-performance basis, the ticket prices were raised greatly, but even the Boyd's admission price by the mid-1950's was not that much higher than non-roadshows, with the center city evening-show general admish for non-reserved seat attractions having been set at $1.80. Then comes the attraction itself. Fox's contract with all exhibitors booking “Cleopatra” on roadshow in the Summer of 1963 stipulated significantly higher prices than other roadshows. Hope this helps.

Thanks William & Vince for the very informative and interesting postings as to the ticket prices. Now, I'm curious as to what were the most expensive tickets? The (3 strip) Cinerama shows because they were uniquely only ever at the Boyd in 3 strip? Or, road shows of epic films like Cleopatra? I'm wandering whether there was any one particular film (such as The Sound of Music, Lawrence of Arabia, Ben Hur, etc) that had the most expensive of the high end tickets?

Veyoung
I was not aware that Those Magnificent Men played at the Trans LUx as a roadshow engagement. I remember it being there,but not that it was roadshow. If I remember back 41 years the Arcadis next door had Woody Allen's What's New Pussycat.

Yes, Mike, and I was thoroughly p.o.'d that it was only a 35mm scope print, most other cities running it in 70mm. And, Howard, I dont feel like pulling out my stacks of ads right now, but I would think that in 1953, the Cinerama tickets were the highest relative to other films, the operative term here being "relative to." And, this can be easily checked, but I'm not going to the library this week, but I believe that "Cleo" had a blood-curdling $5 top. This would have been a record. If you want to go back even more, it would be interesting to see how the admish for GWTW at the Boyd on roadshow (as opposed to its concurrent run at the Earle on "grind") compared with other fare at that time.

Vince, how interesting on all counts!

I knew GWTW was at both, but didn't realize the prestige showing was at the Boyd.

Both the Trans Lux and the Arcadia have recently "reopened" as stores, after decade long closures. I've been meaning to link my photos to those pages, and will eventually.

I just added this picture to my Flicr account:
www.flickr.com/photos/mrambojr/140884765/

It is a recent picture of the marquee of the Boyd/Sameric Theatre, taken on 5/4/2006.

In looking at this photo link MikeRa has given us, I can't help but wonder what the Sameric people were thinking when they stuck that horrible stacked marquee sign over the Boyd Theatre's historic upper facade. I mean, talk about tacky tastelessness taken to the maximum extreme! In fact, at this late stage -- roughly four years into the Boyd Theatre's acquisition and restoration effort -- why is it even still up there? For what's right behind it, which looks to me like it had been a stained glass window of some kind, is obviously begging to be brought to public view once more.

The SamEric people were never known for their artfulness or showmanship. Actually, beginning with "Ben-Hur" in Nov. 1959, the space that is now in this photo as the "3" and "4" was occupied by a large front-lit horizontal sign, blazing the name of the current attraction which could be seen for blocks away. But, at least we have one thing to be thankful for...it was the SamEric crowd, not the Budco that took over the theatre. Budco could easily trash the Pyramids in the twinkling of an eye!

Very little of the original decorative glass above the marquee survives. We've said from the start that all missing should be replicated and return. I've seen wonderful drawings for this to be done, if there's sufficient funding. As I said in my interview this morning on KYW radio, Friends of the Boyd are fundraising to ensure that original but expensive Art Deco features like the 1928 ticket booth and marquee, can be recreated. The new owner can only invest so much with any hope of breaking even, but we in Philadelphia who view our last movie palace with pride, can make a difference, and can return film to the Boyd, too.

The four movie signboard above the current marquee will be removed when major renovation starts. The marquee also will be replaced with a replica of the 1928 Art Deco version, far more beautiful and consistent with the movie palace's exterior and interior.

As Vince says, we are grateful that the Sameric Corporation rescued
and reopened the Boyd in the same year that the Randolph was being demolished, and two years before the Stanley was demolished.

Please join us at International House on May 12 for our presentation of Brian De Palma's "Blow Out" in an archival 35 mm print on the big screen at 3701 Chestnut. Movie begins 7:30 PM for $15 including After-Party with Yards beer, food, 1980's DJ Chatty Cathy spun music. Splurge for $50 VIP ticket including also 6:00 PM catered reception with 3 who appeared in the film: Channel 6Action news' Dave Roberts, actor Tom McCarthy, FM radio personality Michael
Tearson. Funds raised will help restore the Boyd, and help ensure a film program.

Ouch! It would have to be on a Friday, especially this coming Friday, which will be totally out for me. Nonetheless I'm looking forward to it all going well. Meantime, any chance of getting the Philadelphia Art Museum involved in this, or the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts, or the University of Art? For with the Boyd Theatre we really are talking about a great art form here. Meantime, what's up with the University of Pennsylvania? Are they just sitting silent through this restoration effort despite the fact that it's not all that far from there? Plus the fact that W.H. Lee attended there?

By the way, Philadelphia's Channel 12 ran Ben Hur tonight (Saturday, May 6, 2006) and as I watched some of it I just thought uh-uh, this is no way to see that film! It's got to be seen at the Boyd!

Restoration experts who have restored movie palaces nationwide have been consulted, and are bidding for the restoration work.

The Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts let us use their facility rent free in 2003 for our illustrated slide show on why the Boyd Theatre needs to be saved.

W. H. Lee wasn't involved in 1928 at the Boyd and so is not relevant to its restoration to its original Art Deco elegance.

It will be impossibile for me to go out to the "Boyd/Sameric" event this Friday, since I will be working at my theatre (AMC Neshaminy 24 Theatre), with the opening weekend of "Poseidon" this weekend. (weekend of 5/12/2006)

I added this information the other night, but it was during a time when the comments were not coming up automatically. So that technical problem eliminated my earlier comment to be added. So here I go again.
Yes, "Those Magnificent Men" was a roadshow attraction at the Trans Lux Theatre. It was the first time I was ever in that theatre. After driving from Lancaster to attend this "roadshow presentation," I was extremely disappointed in the size of the theatre and screen.
My ticket stubs were for Row V, Seats 2-4-6-8-10 for the 2PM Matinee on Sunday, Aug. 29th, 1965. The tickets were priced at $2.25 each.
I would like to submit the following information for various roadshow attractions at the Boyd Theatre:
"The Greatest Story Ever Told" Cinerama - Loge Row BB Mon. 5/31/65 2PM Matinee = $2.50 Each Ticket
"Doctor Zhivago" 70mm - Loge Row AA. Sun. 5/29/66 2PM Matinee - $2.30
"The Bible" 70MM - Loge Row BB Tues. 3/21/67 8:30PM Eve show - $2.50
"The Happiest Millionaire" - Loge Row AA Tues. 1/2/68 8:30PM Eve Show - $2.50
"Star!" - 70MM - Loge Row AA Sun. 12/22/68 2PM Mat - $2.50
"Goodbye Mr. Chips" Loge Row EE, Wed. 12/31/69, 8:30PM = $5.00 (New Years Eve)
"Fiddler on the Roof" - Balcony Row E, Sat. 2/26/72 - 8:30PM - $3.00
Unfortunately, the earlier Cinerama travelogue films and the 3 MGM Cinerama films - "Grimm," "HTWWW", etc. I do not have the ticket stubs for. I was a bit younger then and did not even think about keeping the stubs since my Father was taking us during that time.
At least this gives some idea what prices for "roadshow presentation engagements" were during the 60's.
Even if tickets today would be $25.00, it would still be worth the money to see these epics again on the super sized screen! Still better than most of the films released today as "entertainment!"

Excellent. Loge seats will be $25.

If it can be said that 20th century theater architect William Harold Lee gets little respect right now (2006), this appears to be even moreso the case for Paul G. Henon who designed the Boyd Theatre back in 1928. And much of it has to do with how one of his outfront masterpieces -- Philadelphia's Mastbaum Theatre, with a seating capacity of 4,717, and which stood at 20th and Market Street -- had senselessly been torn down in the late 1950s. Had that theater remained in existence there's little doubt that Paul G. Henon would be regarded today as one of the 20th century's greatest theater architects, right up there with Rapp & Rapp, Thomas W. Lamb and so on. Nonetheless, for all the skill and artistry he poured into the design of the Mastbaum, it appears he didn't do so quite as much with the Boyd when he designed that theater in 1928, which is why William Harold Lee was called in to rework it back in the early 1950s. Prior to Lee's intervention the Boyd didn't have the look and feel of an epic theater (at least going by all the old photos, news clips, etc.), but it sure as heck did after Lee reworked it. And to be sure, the one thing the Philadelphia area is totally lacking right now is an epic style theater. And an epic style theater is not determined by high admission cost but rather, what it actually is. For any theater could be given a $25 admission cost, but there's a day and night difference between that and its being an epic style theater per se.

Out here on the West Coast, we still have many of the most beautiful theaters in Hollywood and downtown Los Angeles! Its a movie palace lovers dream just to see them up close and go through them.

In the 1950's America was "modernizing" so the Boyd's original Art Deco ticket booth, marquee, and some ceiling light fixtures were replaced. The ticket and grand lobbies were simplified. And, for Cinerama, a screen was installed in front of the Proscenium Arch and 3 projection booths appeared.

The screen was taken down in 1971. The orchestra's 3 projection booths are gone. The 1953 ticket booth and marquee will be replaced by replicas of the 1928 originals. Art Deco character will be restored to the lobbies. W. H. Lee's modernization will be gone.

Enjoy W.H. Lee in the movie theaters he designed, some of which still survive for entertainment in Pennsylvania.

A point that must be remembered is that when the Stanley-Warner chain got the OK from the Dept. of Justice to show Cinerama films, the chain went on a wholesale renovation of theatres about to show the process. The exterior (and interior) changes at the Boyd were made at the behest of Stanley-Warner. The same thing happened at the Century in Minneapolis, where the theatre received a virtually complete makeover of the exterior. Documentation shows that much of the confusion over the costs of installing Cinerama came from the fact that, depending upon who was doing the accounting, the non-Cinerama-related expenditures may or may not have been included.

A question for someone: Since the Boyd opened. How many owners has it had and what were their time spans when they own it?

Our website gives much of the history of the Boyd at the history link, FAQ, etc.
Briefly, Alexander Boyd built it but as it was being completed he sold to Warner Bros which were also acquiring the Stanley Co. to become Stanley Warner.
I believe in 1953, consistent with what Vince says above, that due to antitrust litigation, the Hollywood studio (Stanley Warner) had to sell. New York City interests bought it, and then or later it became RKO Stanley Warner.
In 1971, the Sameric Corp. bought the movie palace. Sameric sold their entire chain about 1988 to the United Artists Circuit. UA sold the movie palace in 1998 to the Goldenberg Group but leased it back until 2002. Last year, Clear Channel purchased the Boyd, but spun their theaters off until a new corporation which is now called Live Nation.
I'm not absolutely sure between 1953 and 1971 if the ownership entity changed control but the public knew the theaters as Stanley
Warner.

Now contrast to the Forrest Theatre in Philadelphia, always legit, always owned since construction in 1928 by the Shuberts.

It was around 1967 when Pacific Theatres' Stanley Warner Theatres division and RKO Theatres merged and became Pacific Theatres' RKO Stanley Warner division. In 1981, Pacific Theatres sold RKO Stanley Warner to Almi/Century Theatres, thus creating RKO Century Warner Theatres. Today, RKO Century Warner Theatres sucessor, through mergers, is AMC Theatres.

Even though the original Boyd Theatre had its ticket booth positioned adjacent to the sidewalk, and while I fully understand and respect the goal of restoring the theater to its original splendor, replicating the Boyd Theatre's original ticket booth would also imply that patrons will stand outside the theater along the sidewalk while awaiting to buy tickets rather than in the comfort of the theater's lobby. And not only that, but in this day and age it would seem a bit demeaning to hire someone to sit in a cramped little cage of sorts to sell the theater's tickets. Back in 1928 that might well have been the norm and no one would've thought twice about it. But how well this can go over now that we're into the 21st century is totally questionable. It's one thing to restore some of 1928's charm architecturally, but something else entirely to replicate how many thought back then and what at that time was fully acceptable job-wise. In a small, laid back town perhaps I could see it. But in the context of a major modern city? Although what I'm saying now might seem like I'm throwing a wrench in the works, I say it's better to think about this now rather than after the fact. For simply put, 2006 is not 1928. And yes, we do have to recognize this with regard to the theater patrons as well, many of whom I'm sure are not looking forward to going back to standing out along the sidewalk once more while awaiting to buy tickets. Meaning that restoring the Boyd Theatre's original marquee is one thing. But replicating the theater's original outfront ticket booth? That aspect I feel warrants a big, "Hmmmm..." For banks, hotels, museums, etc. all have lobbies where people stand inside while awaiting to be served. And why would that be willing to accept different from a movie theater? For it's 2006, not 1928...

The movie palace was the house of the people, all the people. Outside the theater, you opened your wallet, took out a small amount of money, and even though you may not have had much money, you put away your wallet by the time you entered the theater itself. You were now a king.

The current ticket booth sits there from 1953, having replaced the 1928 original, but having none of the architectural majesty of the original. The original was gorgeous Art Deco, and the drawings do it justice. It returns to help bring back the beauty of the Boyd at street level, and its history. A modern box office will be inside the building.

In the early days of cinema, when automobiles weren't all that prevelant as of yet and folks weren't ashamed of getting around on foot or via public transit -- which, believe it or not once had been a very classy experience -- standing outside a theater to buy a ticket fit in very well with that. In fact, traveling into town by train was still very fashionable all throughout the 1950s when my family and I went down to Center City Philadelphia by train to see Ben Hur at the Boyd. Which is how we all went. In those days as I recall there were far fewer automobiles on Center City's streets, as at that time it just wasn't fashionable to go anywhere near Center City in a car itself. For going to Center City by train in those days was a far more luxurious experience. And if it were up to me I'd love to see all that brought back again. But it's a hard if not impossible sell to those who never got to experience it firsthand, plus Big Oil would never stand for it. So the question is what would Paul Henon, and W.H. Lee and all the other theater designing greats of the 20th century do if they were around today?

If it wasn't for the fact that the Boyd directly and abruptly faces upon what these days is heavily trafficked Chestnut Street, I would say by all means bring the whole theater's front exterior back to what it was originally. But that stretch of Chestnut Street these days is a miserable mess, let's face it! It was never designed for all the SUVs that pour along it now. So the theater has to offset from that somehow. Either that or buy up and privatize that particular stretch of Chestnut Street, and good luck doing that! So the only alternative I can see is to have it so all theater patrons get to stand inside the theater's gorgeous lobby while awaiting to buy tickets. And my suggestion is, rather than replicating the Boyd's ticket booth where it was originally positioned, why not have it to the far inner side of the lobby?

If you study the Boyd Theatre as it appeared in an early rendering of it that can be seen at the following link -- http://www2.hawaii.edu/~angell/thsa/boyd1-lg.jpg -- is it all that hard to imagine the ticket booth being st the far back of the lobby? For it appears that Paul Henon (who I assume drew this rendering) originally conceived of having the ticket booth in the middle of the lobby rather than up at the theater's front. For we've got to get the theater patrons away from Chestnut Street as much as possible in order to heighten the over all theater-going experience for them. And it appears that back in 1928 Paul Henon was already thinking this way.

QUICK CORRECTION: It appears that rendering was drawn by someone named D.E. Lidton, or Sidton, it's hard to make it out exactly. But whoever he was I assume he was part of the Hoffman & Henon firm.

As we stated, a modern box office will be used. The historic 1928 ticket booth (set in about the same space as the current 1953 booth) we be replicated for historic accuracy. The idea has always been to save Center City's last movie palace, restore it, and reopen it.

I have a question for anyone out there.

I saw a site that offer pictures of movie theatres. I like to buy one. Can someone give me a site (or two) where I can get one.

Thanks

If that entire area right around the Boyd Theatre were earmarked for historic restoration -- which I myself would love to see, by the way (that is, a real Headhouse Square kind of thing) -- then fully restoring the Boyd Theatre to how it had been originally would make total sense. But right now to do this I feel would be setting it up for all kinds of vulnerabilities. One really great thing the Boyd currently has going for it is its closeness to Rittenhouse Square. But right around the Boyd Theatre itself things are a bit messy, and I don't see much if anything currently being done to correct this; it's just being allowed to default to whatever. Meaning that what the Boyd Theatre gets restored to cannot be too delicate. For such is what caused the Boyd Theatre when it was the Sameric to fall into a quick state of demise, and downgrading that particular block of Chestnut Street even further in the process. And one thing that's really hurting the enthusiasm to save the Boyd Theatre now is the continuance of keeping that stacked Sameric marquee sign over the building's original upper facade -- as in what is taking so darn long in finally getting rid of it??? For it has no historic value, and God, I hope no sentimental value for anyone! Right now it's masking over the best external feature the Boyd Theatre has going for itself right now, making many of us wonder, is the Save the Boyd crew serious or isn't it?!

Meantime, to yvgtspike, potentially any theater or theater building is up for sale if you've got the bucks to spend. But make sure you've got a very good business plan in place if your plan is to have it be a theater and you hope to recoup your initial investment. And learn as much as you can from others' mistakes, such as those made by the Sameric people.

There's been much development at the 1900 block of Chestnut Street recently, and much of that makes it better. Friends of the Boyd volunteers have been very devoted to saving Center City's last movie palace, and have spent many hours to make this happen. WE've not seen financial support or an hour of your time on this effort (and we don't see your actiona making better the theaters you champion in the Northeast- the Holmes & Mayfair especially), so I don't know why you choose to be so unpleasant again to a group that has sacrificied so much. The new owner of the theater has also worked very hard. This preservation is a great model of SUCCESS. We anticiate major renovation to start soon.

I can't attend tomorow night either. Shame though, that and I haven't seen Michael Tearson since my wrestling days.

Anyway, even though I can't attend I still purchased a ticket as a show of my support for the Boyd.

TheaterBuff1: Enough already> Take a break and relax. The PAST is the PAST. Thank god the theatre is still standing. Let the group enjoy the pleasure of saving a great old lady. rg

Again there's a lot of misunderstandings here as opposed to my remarks being interpreted accurately. For with more careful reading of the things I've said in the past, you'll see that my whole focus is on the future. For I'm the one who's saying Philadelphia cannot return to how it was in 1928 when the Boyd Theatre was built if nobody else is. Nor can Center City Philadelphia where the Boyd Theatre is located go back to how it was in 1959 either, when Ben Hur premiered there at the Boyd.

But Philadelphia DOES need to evolve over all so that it does become much more intellectually friendly, both at its commercial heart (Center City) and its residential areas -- where the Holme and Pennypack Theatre buildings are located. And Philadelphia's classic theaters when restored the right way will go a long way in achieving this goal. For speaking of the past, wake up people, for we're not still back in the Frank Rizzo era anymore, which is when the Sameric people came pretty close to totally destroying Philadelphia's grand old lady as you say. Fortunately, the Boyd Theatre has survived. And all I was asking was, at this late stage -- nearly 4 years into the acquisition and restoration -- is any trace of the Sameric era still left?

For you may not appreciate this, but in terms of my own efforts towards raising money for the Boyd Theatre's restoration, I'm doing everything I possibly can to get some very influential people interested in this theater. But right now it's a very hard if not impossible sell with last vesiges of the Sameric era still obscuring the Boyd Theatre's underlying beauty. As I say, that stacked Sameric marquee sign on the theater's upper portion front facade should've been removed long ago. It should've been one of the first things to go. And I believe it's a very fair --and 100% unhostile -- question to ask why it's still there? For I'm sure we can all agree on this: Paul J. Henon, Jr., who designed the Boyd Theatre originally, was a great great architect, as evidenced by his Mastbaum Theatre and so on. And the same could be said of William Harold Lee who later reworked the Boyd Theatre in the 1950s, as evidenced by his State Theatre up in Easton, Pennsylvania, his Majestic Theatre out in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania and so on, both being magnificent theaters we can all go and see today.

However, when the Sameric people got ahold of the Boyd Theatre and reworked it the way they did, were there any great architects involved in how they chose to transform it? Obviously not. And NOTHING drives that point home more clearly than that stacked Sameric multiplex sign I've been very critical of. As I say, that sign should've been taken down before anything else was done. And why oh why is anyone getting angry at my saying this?!

Now as for me and why I have not contributed money towards the Save the Boyd effort so far, any of you who have familiarity with me know that I'm an investor. And among we investors we have a saying: Don't throw good money after bad. Meaning that if we feel that money that's already been invested is not being directed properly, plain and simple, we don't invest. And we WON'T until that changes. And that, in brief, is how ALL intelligent investment works. Then there's the other style of investment, case in point, HDTV267's blindly throwing money at things he (or she) doesn't fully understand.

Now as for failings regarding the restorations of the Holme and Mayfair Theatres up here in Northeast Philadelphia -- right now the Holme Theatre building, designed by William Harold Lee, is being made into a mini-mall, the Mayfair Theatre building, designed by David Supowitz, is being made into a bank -- with all due respect, Howard, these historic theater buildings being misconverted are your failures as much as they are mine, if not moreso. For just to remind you, YOU'RE the one who has much better connections than me in this city, as you rubbed in my face in an e-mail you sent me several months back. So if you're going to blame me for those two failures, please be sure to blame yourself as well just to keep it fair.

Last time I checked, its my money.

If I want to open a window and throw it out or put a check for 9,000 dollars through my paper shredder its my option.

go away you troll.

Back seat driver who won't ever "invest" in the Boyd would indeed do us all a favor and stop misrepresenting facts.

The Boyd won't find itself in 1928 but with a new stagehouse, and updated for ADA, modern comfort, etc. We certainly do aim to restore its original Art Deco features. As stated, prelimary work continues. Major renovation will include removal of the four movie signboard.

Friends of the Boyd mission doesn't include a theater which has been closed half a century (the Holme) or the Mayfair. Without specifying either, it should also be obvious that every closed theater won't reopen. And, despite pipe dreams, they certainly won't all reopen as single screen movie houses. That would be living in the past.

great news I got in my mailbox this week. Thanks. Hopefully the small financial support I put forth helped along with this. It makes me proud to have actually been able to do something, put my money where my mouth is and show support.

Here is a picture of a 1974/1975 "Sameric Theatres" ad. This includes a ad for the Sameric Theatre when it was showing "Earthquake":
www.flickr.com/photos/mrambojr/160408206/

What happened to the Save the Sameric website page? As a contributor to the Save the Sameric, I would check the webpage on a regular basis to get the latest news. Still anxious for this theatre to reopen. However, it certainly seems to be taking an extremely long time to get anything accomplished. And to think it was originally suggested that the touring version of "The Lion King" would be the grand reopening attraction! Still cannot imagine seeing a "Broadway show" at the Academy of Music!

The "SaveTheSameric" domain name expired. I've asked the Webmaster to see if we can renew it, so old references can be viewed. For a long time, we've been at www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

We are sending out free Weekly Update emails to anyone who enters their email address for such, at our homepage. The latest news, soon to be posted by volunteer Webmaster, is last week's removal of the Water Tower framework from atop the Boyd's stagehouse. That step was needed prior to demolition of stagehouse for replacement with larger stagehouse.

Dennis, I'm sure you are familiar with how long it takes everything to get done in Philadelphia. Closed historic buildings like Lit Bros, the Victory Building, the Naval Home, etc. took many years...new projects like the Kimmel Center, the Gallery, the Vine Street expressway, etc. took forever. The Boyd closed in 2002. Clear Channel bought it earlier last year, but they spun off their theaters to a new company Live Nation, and yes, there have been delays. However, the restoration plans are great, and there will be great shows at the Boyd.

There won't be poles obstructing views, either! The Academy of Music is an opera house. Touring Broadway & concerts will be fun at the up to date Boyd Theatre. And, Friends of the Boyd are working to set up exhibits of the movie palace's history, and towards our program of films (classics, festivals, etc), organ, and public tours.

Hey guys. Well I saw on Playbill .com that The Light In The Piazza is booked for the Boyd for March6-11. Does anybody know the official opening date of the theater.

That show will be at the Merriam instead. No date yet for Boyd reopening.

To Howard and all others in charge of various operations in Center City Philadelphia, the fact that several sizeable slots parlor complexes are going to be coming to Center City shortly absolutely cannot be overlooked in however you plan things out. For you're right that things go slow in Center City ordinarily, but I assure you that's not the case with new casinos. Not only do they rise up very very quickly, but the impact they have on everything around them is every bit as sudden.

And in Atlantic City's case what I just described above was nothing short of a total disaster, except for the casinos themselves. On the other hand, the Crown Casino Entertainment Complex in Melbourne, Australia does not appear to have hurt other businesses in Melbourne that also offer food and entertainment the way Atlantic City's casinos did. According to this Cinema Treasures website Melbourne has some really great movie palaces to speak of. And the huge Crown complex does not seem to be having any dent on them watsoever. But whether that success can be repeated in Philadelphia's case is hard to say. But all you down there better be planning for it is all I can say, and don't let yourselves get sucker punched the way Atlantic City's non-casino business owners did.

I agree with what you wrote Theater Buff. Atlantic City was a disaster not only to business owners, but people like myself wholoved the fun city it was before the casino's. Not one of the great old movie houses in AC survived not to mention old great restaurants.
Sorry to hear this theater isn't opening as sonn as next year as playbill had in there article.

Though it hasn't been publicly stated as of yet, I suspect that the gambling casinos to be coming to Philadelphia soon had far more than just a little to do with Live Nation's decision to abandon restoring the Boyd. Meantime, though there are no movie palaces left in Atlantic City, for live performances there is Dante Hall - Theatre of the Arts. Just a block and a half from the casino strip, it appears to be surviving well. Then again it's seating capacity is small -- only 243 seats -- and is Atlantic City's only fine performing arts theater to speak of. Add to this that it's heavily subsidized by the Atlantic City Casino Re-Development Authority (CDRA) a fund that all the casinos there are required to pay into, while to the best of my knowledge Pennsylvania has no plans of creating anything equivelent. And right now, although the mayor of Philadelphia and others are trying to get it changed, Philadelphia at this moment has no authority in being able to set any clearcut guidelines on the casinos to come, based on the premise that Philadelphia's government is too corrupt to be able to do this. So yeah, if I was Live Nation I guess I would have second thoughts on following through with restoring the Boyd, too, given all that.

GOOD BYE Theater. If you read yesterdays Phila. Ing. paper things are NOT good for this theater. rg

No, it isn't time to go all pessimistic. We need to ensure Philadelphia's sole surviving downtown movie palace survives, is restored, and is restored. Visit www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org for more updates.

I saw Rocky III at the Boyd, before they added the additional theaters. Here is a photo from 1935:
http://tinyurl.com/ms4sl

The September 15, 2006 Philadelphia Inquirer article stated that Philadelphia's Regional Performing Arts Center, which operates the Kimmel Center and the Academy of Music not far from the Boyd, vigorously fought a $6.4 million city subsidy of tax breaks to offset the expense of restoring the theater to its original grandeur and adding a larger backstage area, arguing that a large new theater competitor threatened their survival. But I argue that that could only be the case if the Boyd tried to replicate what the Kimmel and Academy of Music now offer, which I've said all along the Boyd shouldn't try to do. And both the Kimmel and Acad. of Music have far more to worry about with the casinos still to come than any possible threat the restored Boyd would pose. For casinos, as we all should've learned from Atlantic City, have a funny knack for offering a lot of wonderful things for free, or at prices so ridiculously low they no independent entity could possibly begin to compete with them, whether it be nearby restaurants, nightclubs, hotels....or large scale entertainment venues. There is a way out of that, of course: Stop the casinos from coming to anywhere near Center City Philadelphia period. And if that isn't possible, then push to have it so the casinos subsidize rather than compete with the Boyd, etc., though I don't particularly like the word "subsidize" in this case. For it makes it look like without the casinos Center City couldn't have these wonderful things. So "compensation for damage caused" would be far more fitting.

If saving the Boyd had anything to do with the Eagles or Phillies, the city and its citizens would do everything in their power to save it. However, the Boyd Theatre, I would guess the majority of Philadelphians are not even aware of its possible fate. Spend millions upon millions for sports arenas, but cannot come up with any funds to help with the rescue of the Boyd! The coming of slot machines, may effect the area. But attending events at a restored Boyd is far different than the glitter of casinos and their slot machines. I would guess the theatres in Atlantic City were on life support long before the casinos arrived. If any were even around by that time.

You're right about what you say about the Eagles and Phillies, while in Philadelphia's case it's very much the whole "bread & circuses" thing. That is, this city used to be a thriving blue collar mecca with its major seaport and manufacturing, which concurrently was when the Boyd was at its peak.

The previous blue collar population is still very much in place today. But instead of blue collar opportunities, these days the only blue collar outlet to speak of is cheesesteaks and major sports events, and, of course, the enormous slots parlors to come next. And right now the plan is to place the slots parlors where the blue collar moneymaking opportunities used to be -- four sites along the Delaware River waterfront being looked at plus the fifth site being strongly considered where the enormous Budd plant used to be. And community protests against all sites being considered is starting to grow, and it's primarily blue collar groups doing the protesting.

As for what you say of Atlantic City and its movie theaters prior to casinos, absolutely true. And I'll go even further and say that the whole city with one or two exceptions was on life support by that point. But rather than that which was on life support getting a huge lift when the casinos came, it was the exact opposite. That's like the patient is lying sick in bed, and when the "doctor" is called in to help, the so-called doctor just takes out a gun and shoots the patient instead, and then bills those who called him for "services rendered" while the dead patient gets carted off to the morgue. I.e., I think there was a much better way Atlantic City could've solved its problems. And if Philadelphia were on the right track right now it would be doing everything to bring blue collar industry back -- since Philadelphia's previous blue collar population is still very much here -- that is, all new blue collar industry befitting of the 21st century. But instead of that our city is overshadowed and being run by Nero, so to speak, not to mention how the state of Pennsylvania at large is on the same wrong track.

For movie theaters can't stand on their own. They need to be in combination with people making good money doing what they're best at -- and that, needless to say, won't be their pulling the handles of slot machines. But try telling that to Nero.

Since the Philadelphia Inquirer's architectural critic Inga Saffron apparently saw fit to omit my commentary from the following link where people are invited to express their comments on the latest regarding the Boyd -- http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=15452685&postID=115867275997197074 -- here is my commentary that due to whatever misguided pressures she wrongfully decided to omit:

As I recall how the Boyd Theatre was back in the 1950s, which I regard as when it was at its absolute height of glory, it was a movie theater only, and specialized exclusively in premieres and epics. And though it was far from being an upscale entertainment venue only for the elite, it was always well understood that whoever went there had to be on their best behavior or be assured of quickly being ushered out. And not with any sort of pleasure, mind you, for the ultimate ideal at that time was to grant those from every walk of life the opportunity to experience life at its absolute best. In brief, that had been the way of the United States of America as it was in that very optimistic period following World War II.

Of course, the Boyd's great success at that time hinged on the fact that Philadelphia was a thriving industrial mecca and major global seaport, too, and all efforts made to ensure that people from all walks of life had an abundance of opportunities to make very good money while living here.

But alas, such a stark contrast is that to the way Philadelphia is now. And nowhere else in this city do I believe this is revealed more than the current state of the Boyd Theatre. When I listen to Bruce Springsteen's "My City In Ruins," the Boyd Theatre as it is now is what comes to my mind first and foremost. And the greatest tragedy of all is that those who love it the most are the least financially able to contribute towards its restoration, with the only possible exception being if it somehow could be made into an investment that would allow them to see a sizeable cash return on the money they invested.

The other alternative to that, of course, would be to bring Philadelphia itself back to being the city where people from all walks of life can look to to make good money.

But to both of these solutions all that's given back is one big scoff. Either that, or opportunities to make money that only bring the city down even further.

And upon the latter premises the Boyd Theatre is supposed to rise up again? In a very fake way it could I suppose, to become a sunny entertainment venue of sorts for shady people. And what's saddest of all about that is that we have a whole generation of people who've grown up never knowing that the much better alternative to that is possible. That is, they never got to see the Boyd Theatre as it was in the '50s and all that it represented/proved, just an iron booted leadership quick to stomp upon anyone who dares to think that way in this "far more advanced" day and age, and oh so anxious to wipe out all last traces of what once was. Whether it be the Boyd Theatre, Gettysburg Battlefield, Burholme Park, what wee little good is left of old Ocean City, NJ or what have you.

____________________

As you all can see, I said nothing offensive or out of line in this commentary, but it's just to show how corrupt Philadelphia has gotten.

What is going on? Today, I walked past the Boyd and heard the sounds of men working in there. And what is the deal with the new for sale sign? I am sorry to see that the last post was almost three months ago.

Under the marquee is the original, historic Boyd Theatre. To the west, closer to 20th than 19th Street, is the long blank wall of the three former small auditoriums. The small auditoriums aren't historic, and that space was gutted and available for rent. Is that where you heard workers and where you saw a new for sale sign?

If you enter your contact information at www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org you will receive our free email Weekly Updates. The last formal notice from Live Nation, the Boyd's owner, was that they were considering whether to proceed with the project or place the theater up for sale. The Friends of the Boyd will continue to volunteer to ensure the Boyd is restored and reopened.

No , I heard work coming from inside the theater. I looked inside, and found the inside lobby, cleared out. The exit doors in the smaller theaters were open, already gutted, no workers in there. Keep up the good work, Mr. Haas.

At our website, How to Help, you can find my direct email address towards the bottom of the page. I'd appreciate hearing from you directly including whether you saw any differences today inside the Boyd from recently. I'm not sure what was "cleared out" unless you mean concession stand that was removed last year from the Grand Lobby. And, I am eager to know whether For Sale on the small auditorium property or the Boyd itself, if you are sure on that point.

I am going to also seek direct clarification from the ownership. Thanks.

This being an election year, not to take the focus off crime and other big city problems, I would like to see the canidates stand on restoring the Boyd. With Rittenhouse Square, the new Condos, and all the resturants, and not to mention that the Adcademy of Music was never ment to have plays there. I would not like to see this theater become the biggest "dollar store" in the Delaware Valley.

When faced with the challenge of lifting America out from the depths of the Great Depression, FDR made theaters and their well-being a top priority -- the Federal Theater Project (FTP) as it was called -- which was an integral part of the W.P.A.

But I suppose that if a leader wanted to do just the exact opposite, to steer the country into a deep economically depressed state, save for a small select privileged few, they would make a special point of neglecting the theaters. Which clearly does appear to be the aim here in Philadelphia. Although this city -- ironically -- is predominantly Democrat (the same party as FDR), any vestiges of anything New Deal like are long missing from here these days.

Meantime, Philadelphia is home to several magnificent performance venues at the present time -- the Kimmel Center, the Pennsylvania Academy of Music and so on. But the Boyd is the only one of all that holds -- or that ever did hold -- the distinction of being "The Peoples' Palace." And when it was operated at its best it was a magnificent palace indeed.

But the most predominant political trend now appears to be to not have anything uplifting for the people at large in that way. Right now that seems to be viewed as the "wisest economic strategy." For example, Illinois' U.S. Senator Barack Obama (who's currently running for president of the United States) recently allowed a magnificent movie palace in his home state -- and one designed by Rapp & Rapp no less -- to be torn down. After I learned about this I wrote to his campaign team inquiring how this could have happened while under his watch -- the theater in question being the DuPage in Lombard, Illinois -- while also requesting greater clarification on where exactly he stood regarding America's many endangered movie palaces on the road ahead. And the response I got was no response, which I guess says it all really. Contrast that to last November (2006) when I inquired of a candidate running for U.S. representative here in Philadelphia what his views were regarding the revival of Philadelphia's classic theaters, and how I immediately got a warm reply back full of tremendous enthusiasm for the idea. Sadly, that candidate -- who clearly shouldn't have -- lost.

So maybe that partially answers your question regarding finding out where various candidates stand on this issue, or for this election year at least.

I am having a great time reading the above comments regarding Philadelphia's old Boyd Theater. The only movie I saw at The Boyd was DOCTOR ZHIVAGO in March of 1966. I was 17 at the time and lived in nearby Moorestown, NJ. If I remember correctly, the theater's interior was an all red motif: walls, floor and the huge curtain that covered an enormous wide, curved screen. Watching DOCTOR ZHIVAGO at The Boyd was an unforgettable visual and aural experience. Those who tend to dismiss ZHIVAGO as a bland, expensive soap opera have no idea how visually overpowering that movie was in its 70mm presentation at The Boyd. Director David Lean was by that time (from the late 50's on starting with THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI) making spectacular, lengthy film epics and ZHIVAGO was a directorial masterpiece. I'll never forget watching the early sequence when the young Yuri witnesses his mother's burial. The stunning, brooding cinematography enveloped the movie audience, as did the sound: the men hammering the casket closed, the casket slowly lowered into the earth, clumps of dirt hitting the coffin and one chilling shot of the young boy's mother's corpse lying interred in her final resting place: it sent chills down the spine. The epic train ride to The Urals was another mesmerizing sequence among many others.

I went back to The Boyd several times to see ZHIVAGO. Subsequent viewings of the film during its non-roadshow, nation wide release were fine but couldn't compare to the 70mm presentation at The Boyd.

Moviegoing just isn't the same anymore. Mall cinemas have no personality whatsoever and audience behavior now is beyond rude in many cases. Event movies such as GONE WITH THE WIND, BEN-HUR, ZHIVAGO seem to be things of the past, although great movies are still being made. (BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, the two recent Clint Eastwood war films, VOLVER, LITTLE CHILDREN and PAN'S LABRYINTH are cases in point). I'm lucky enough and old enough to remember when moviegoing was fun and often a great experience. And The Boyd Theater and that first viewing of DOCTOR ZHIVAGO will always be a fond memory for me.

I am having a great time reading the above comments regarding Philadelphia's old Boyd Theater. The only movie I saw at The Boyd was DOCTOR ZHIVAGO in March of 1966. I was 17 at the time and lived in nearby Moorestown, NJ. If I remember correctly, the theater's interior was an all red motif: walls, floor and the huge curtain that covered an enormous wide, curved screen. Watching DOCTOR ZHIVAGO at The Boyd was an unforgettable visual and aural experience. Those who tend to dismiss ZHIVAGO as a bland, expensive soap opera have no idea how visually overpowering that movie was in its 70mm presentation at The Boyd. Director David Lean was by that time (from the late 50's on starting with THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI) making spectacular, lengthy film epics and ZHIVAGO was a directorial masterpiece. I'll never forget watching the early sequence when the young Yuri witnesses his mother's burial. The stunning, brooding cinematography enveloped the movie audience, as did the sound: the men hammering the casket closed, the casket slowly lowered into the earth, clumps of dirt hitting the coffin and one chilling shot of the young boy's mother's corpse lying interred in her final resting place: it sent chills down the spine. The epic train ride to The Urals was another mesmerizing sequence among many others.

I went back to The Boyd several times to see ZHIVAGO. Subsequent viewings of the film during its non-roadshow, nation wide release were fine but couldn't compare to the 70mm presentation at The Boyd.

Moviegoing just isn't the same anymore. Mall cinemas have no personality whatsoever and audience behavior now is beyond rude in many cases. Event movies such as GONE WITH THE WIND, BEN-HUR, ZHIVAGO seem to be things of the past, although great movies are still being made. (BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, the two recent Clint Eastwood war films, VOLVER, LITTLE CHILDREN and PAN'S LABRYINTH are cases in point). I'm lucky enough and old enough to remember when moviegoing was fun and often a great experience. And The Boyd Theater and that first viewing of DOCTOR ZHIVAGO will always be a fond memory for me.

The thought crossed my mind today as I was reflecting on how the Boyd Theatre once had been that it was a "power theater," emphasis on the word "power." When it had been at its height of glory, along with the city of Philadelphia itself, a movie had to be mighty special if it was shown at the Boyd, a true sign that the movie in question had made the grade. But I don't think there's a living soul in Philadelphia today that could even begin to grasp that which I'm saying now. So you do wonder what you're supposed to do with such memories. It's like remembering how great Kennedy once was or something as you look at who America's stuck with today and the choices it's being given for come tomorrow. Great memories. But what are you supposed to do with them? For that was then. The once powerful theater in the great roaring city...now never to roar again (or so it seems.)

But for whatever it's worth I'm glad I got to see experience the Boyd when it was the great powerful theater in the great powerful city, and would feel a much poorer man without such memories. So in that sense I guess those memories are worth something. Such memories help you retain a sense of which way is up despite all that's being bullhorned now.

It has been nearly 40 years ago since the first time I went to the Boyd to see The Bible in the Begining. On a class trip, we sat in the balcony, I believe there was avery large cinerama screen. You were not allowed to bring drinks into the theater in those days. Three years later on another class trip, we saw Goodbye Mr. Chips, with Peter O'Toole. Sad that Boyd closed as a porn theater, with a screen of that size, the rain coated viewer was in the position of the proverbal "fly on the wall". From 1972 until 2001, I attended the SamEric or the "Sammy", as my friend and I used to call it. My last worst memory was in 1983, Scarface with Pacino, the screening I went to was greeted with gunshots and a riot. The theater went downhill from there. When United Artists bought it, armed robberies at the box office and over zelious security greeted patrons. Apartment buildings nearby, such as the William Penn House wanted it closed. This is why we may never see another movie theater in Center City. My plea to the powers that be, is to FINISH the work on this theater!!!!!!

The Boyd went from being a destination theater, which is what it was when at its height, to a convenience theater, which is what it was reduced to in its last phases. When it was at its height people traveled long distances to come to it. It was in the heart of the great city and in many ways it was the heart of the great city. It pumped the life's blood into everything all around it, into the whole entire city really. Sure, there was the Art Museum, Wannamakers, and other major Center City Philadelphia attractions as well. Not to mention other Center City movie palaces at the time. But something about the Boyd, just the name itself if nothing else, pulsated power.

And then, as with so much else, the wrong people got ahold of it. And great thrones just in themselves do not make for great kings. In any event, the wrong people got ahold of it and people stopped flocking to it far and wide accordingly.

I don't know if Philadelphia at this point can ever be the great city again. For great cities require great people. And you won't find much of that in Philadelphia now. So how could the Boyd itself ever be great again therefore? There's some people in Philadelphia now who think of themselves as "great" due to the great thrones they sit in. Or once great thrones I should say, the Boyd being one. The Art Museum being another. Wannamakers being a third.

Philadelphia could be a great city again -- IF great people were to come back to it. But short of that? No, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for anything special to happen with the Boyd. For I don't see any great people coming back to this city. Not a one. And thrones just in themselves are empty thrones is all. Vacant and collecting dust.

I believe Philadelphia is a great city. I cannot trash it because of the Boyd situation. How many cinema treasures exist in New York? This is unfortunate sign of the times. Philadelphia is a first class resturant town. Look at the Parkway, Rittenhouse Sq.,the great museums, the Tut exhibit, the Free Library, I could go on and on. I lived most of my life in Phila., I live in New Jersey now. But, I could remember a time when the sidewalks would roll up at 7:00, now life and enjoyment florish til the wee hours. The problem is politics, and big city law firms. The Boyd is a key to 19th and Chestnut street revival, and it can't stay in the position that it is in, do something or get off the pot! I refuse to see a play at the academy of music, when people get tired of paying good money to see a play with an obtructed view, the Boyd can fill that void. But, I know it will never be a full time movie theater again, that is not possible, inspite of all the arguments on this site about it. I would love to see a 70mm Lawrence of Arabia on the big screen.

Just to clear up the misunderstanding if you're referring to any of my posts here and elsewhere, I never said that the Boyd Theatre should become a movie palace again exclusively, ONLY that I see that as its highest calling. My only objections to alternative uses of it are alternative uses that would block that goal from being reached. And some -- somehow -- interpreted that as meaning I'm against any sort of live performances there.

But for the record, as long as its highest calling aspect is kept perfectly intact, I am not opposed to live performances being presented there in the least. Quite the contrary I think that goal is great. I do, however, warn of the tremendous competition it would face in that regard. For Philadelphia is no stranger to live performance outlets at this point in time. Meaning, I would hate to see it rule out its highest calling aspect completely and then not be able to compete as much as it would need to to stand strong.

It might also help if you understand that my perspective is that of one who lives up in Northeast Philadelphia which at this moment has a very bad relationship with the rest of the city -- while it's completely under the command of Center City at the same time. That is, a Center City that knows nothing about it at this point yet retains full control over it as a matter of rote nevertheless, compliments of something called the 1854 Consolidation, which probably made a lot of sense in 1854. But makes no sense at all today.

And when the relationship between Northeast Philadelphia and Center City was much better than it is today, the Boyd Theatre when it was a major east coast movie palace was a most memorable highpoint of that relationship.

And there was a period back then when the sidewalks of Center City did not role up at 7:00 P.M. as you say. Northeast Philadelphia's sidewalks at that time did, yes. But Center City at that time was a major world port o' call. You went downtown in the evenings and everything was happening there, whether it was a premiere at the Boyd with searchlights swirling in the air or what have you. It was the flourishing downtown at night, that's what I remember, and what I think of when I think of the Boyd at its height.

And then another era arrived which was as you say. The era of the very dark and nothing happening downtown Philadelphia at night. And right now everything is being measured against that particular era with the other being long forgotten. Or that is to say we're not supposed to remember the other era prior to that one you describe. But I do. And it was great. And Northeast Philadelphia was a very instrumental part of it.

If the Boyd isn't saved it will be the largest city in the United States not to have saved a Downtown Movie Palace since the Boyd is the last one. The size of the theatre is perfect for touring Broadway shows which prefers theatres seatting at least 2000. The Boyd could be used for many types of live performances as well as classic films. The City should make every effort to save this last movie palace as they have let all the others to be torn down. Pittsburg has restored three downtown movie palaces the Stanley,Penn and Fulton. Baltimore recently restored the Hippodrome and is bringing the Town theatre back to life. Even NYC with its real estate values has saved Radio City,New Amsterdam,Broadway,Globe,Hollywood as well the Loew's Wonder Theatres out of the theatre district. Live Nation is no longer involved due to its desire to only focus on live presentation and not own theatres.Live Nation saw the value in the Boyd as they did with the Opera House (B F Keith) in Boston or they wouldn't have bothered. Chicago and Boston have both realized the value of their historic theatres and have made huge efforts in restoring there theatre districts. These historic movie palaces are part of the fabric that made our downtown and theatre districts great in this country. The decline of downtown preceeded the decline of the movie palace after WW11. The restoration of these historic movie palaces helped bring many downtown's back to life after decades of decline. The Greatest Generation has many fond memories of these historic movie palaces, it helped them get through the depression and WW11.Most of the newer theatres that have been built have no personality and thus have no effection as the great movie palaces from the 1920's when most of them were built. I hope Philidelphia realizes what it has as does not destroy its last historic movie palace in its Center City.brucec

One thing that Philly lacks right now that those other city's you mention have is checks and balances. For instance, with a mayoral race going on here, the city's most likely next mayor, Michael Nutter, wants to give Philadelphia police the power of stop and frisk. The introduction of martial law, in other words. The mayor of Baltimore wanted to bring the same to Baltimore, but there the Baltimore Sun was quick to state the truth that it would be the same as when Fascism was on the rise in Europe. Checks and balances, i.e.

And the reason for the big difference between Philadelphia and those other cities you mention, brucec, is because those other cities have not been written off the way Philly has. Unlike Philadelphia they are still vital to the U.S. over all. And they are vital because they still have some sort of checks and balances in place.

And to restore a movie palace and make that restoration stick, you have to have checks and balances firmly in place. But sadly, the way Philadelphia is right now, I would compare trying to restore a movie palace here at this point in time to the prospect of trying to do so in Germany at the height of the Nazi Third Reich. For there's a breakdown of law going on here, a breakdown in a truthful press and so on -- as in "Sound familiar?" when referring back to the WWII era?

Many thanks to Brucec for his above comment and 8-6-04 list of movie palaces saved in downtowns of cities all over the US, posted at the Mayfair (Embassy 2-3-4) page: http://cinematreasures.org/theater/501/ With very slight adjustments to theater names, I employed his list in this past Monday's Weekly Update email to our supporters (www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org).

Here's the Weekly Update:

Below is a list of restored LARGE movie palaces in US CITIES' DOWNTOWN "entertainment zones" that a movie palace enthusiast drew up in August 2004 at www.cinematreasures.org The list may not have been complete then (and more movie palaces have since been restored), but it does show that many cities across the USA have saved, restored, and reopened their glorious historic movie palaces for entertainment!

The list was drafted to advocate reuse of a closed Times Square movie palace. The list drafter opined that Radio City Music Hall was outside New York City's entertainment zone of Times Square. In addition to Radio City, reopened Midtown Manhattan movie palaces include the Hollywood (church) and New Amsterdam. Please realize there are MANY MORE restored movie palaces in the US: in neigbhorhoods, towns, suburbs, etc. in addition to those movie palaces listed below in cities' downtowns.

Defined as the traditional locale of movie palaces and other theaters, Philadelphia's "entertainment zone" would include Chestnut West. The BOYD THEATRE should join the list!

Howard B. Haas
www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

Seattle: Paramount and Fifth Ave
Portland: Arlene Schnitzer (Paramount)
San Francisco: Orpheum, Warfield and Golden Gate
Oakland: Paramount and Fox Oakland (restoration in progress)
San Jose: California (opens in Sept)
Hollywood: Chinese, El Capitan, Pantages, Egyptian (not fully restored)
Los Angeles: Orpheum, United Artists (church) and many unrestored
San Diego: Fox (Copley), Balboa and Spreckels
Phoenix: Orpheum
Dallas: Majestic
San Antonio: Majestic and Aztec (under restoration}
Denver: Paramount
St. Louis: Fox and Powell (St.Louis)
Kansas City: Midland
Minneapolis: Orpheum, State and Pantages
Chicago: Chicago, Oriental and Palace
Detroit: Fox, State and Opera House (Capitol)
Cleveland: Palace, State, Allen and Ohio
Columbus: Ohio, Palace and Southern
Indianapolis: Indiana and Circle
Buffalo: Shea's Buffalo
Pittsburgh: Heinz Hall (Loew's Penn), Benedum (Stanley) and Byham (Gayety)
Baltimore: Hippodrome
Providence: Ocean State (Providence)
Boston: Wang (Metropolitan), Majestic (Saxon), and Opera House (BF Keith)
Washington DC: Warner
Richmond: Carpenter (Loew's)
New Orleans: Saenger and (unrestored) Loew's State
Jacksonville: Florida
Tampa: Tampa
Miami: Gusman (Olympia)
Birmingham: Alabama
Omaha: Orpheum and Rose (Paramount)
Albany: Palace
Syracuse: Landmark (Loew's State)
Salt Lake: Capitol
Louisville: Palace
Memphis: Orpheum
Jersey City: Loew's Jersey and Stanley (church)
Albuquerque: Kimo
Tucson: Fox and Rialto
-----------------------------------------

My dream is to reopen this theater with no concern about turning a profit. I'd install a 70mm projector for special screenings of Lawrence of Arabia and 2001, while also showing funky midnight shows of whatever I pleased (Beyond the Valley of the Dolls would be awesome!). I would make the three extra smaller theatres into two, with top-of-the-line sound systems.

Ushers would keep a constant eye on patron's behavior. Cell phone reception would be blocked. There'd be no commercials before screenings. Projection and sound would be flawless for every showing. And, I'd allow smoking in the balcony if it wasn't banned in Philly.

All I do is dream...dream dream dream...

So long as a good person doesn't actually try to do anything meaningful and worthwhile here, I find Philadelphia to be a great incubator of dreams, to at least give some credit where it's due. I have learned so many good things that can be done -- elsewhere -- as an observer of Philadelphia's mistakes, my compiling a long list of the in-between "what ifs?" if not for Philadelphia's highly corrupt political machine. One noteworthy thing, how Philadelphia could've swiftly become an outfront leader in the digital cinema revolution now starting to take hold in other parts of the world and which rapidly could've taken hold here if not for that political machine. But doing exciting things, and keeping those who don't deserve to be on top, don't mix. Simply put, you can't have it both ways. Either one or the other has to be relegated to the world of dreams. And right now in Philadelphia's case all the good that can be said of this city is relegated to the world of dreams -- as is to realistically be expected.

Here's today Weekly Update sent out to our supporters. We urge all interested parties to directly visit our website and enter yourselves to receive updates, and look at the other ways to help.

The most frequent recent question asked of us, of people who are quite upset "Is the Boyd being turned into a store?" NO, the former three small auditoriums next door are being turned into a retail store, a Gap Outlet. People then followup with "Wasn't that space part of the theater?" Yes, but that space was a modern addition. The historic Boyd Theatre is not being turned into a retail store.

Recently, the national head of an organization concerned with theaters commented that given the current situation- of the Boyd being for sale-it is too bad that there's still a demolition permit issued. Fortunately, that's wrong, too. Years ago, the City refused to renew the demolition permit, explaining that demolition permits are not tools for developers or mechanisms to increase property values. Just as we would with an application to turn the historic theater into a store, Friends of the Boyd would vigorously fight the issuance of a demolition permit. Even if it was issued, we would litigate and publicly protest and make a huge fuss, as we did previously.

Downtown Philadelphia's last surviving movie palace is important, as you appreciate, and needs to be restored, and reopened. We continue to ask Live Nation to ensure that when the company sells the Boyd, they sell it to a new owner who wants to reopen it, and we will help. Thank you for your support.

Howard B. Haas
www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

Not intentionally seeking to drop yet another bombshell here, but if I understand the Boyd story correctly -- and please correct me if I'm wrong Howard or anyone else -- but when Live Nation first took charge of the Boyd Theatre building with plans to restore and reopen it as a theater, it was still an operational theater at that point. That is, it still was equipped with functional projectors and so forth that could've been reactivated once more. But with new plans that Live Nation had in mind regarding its restoration, so much of what made it operational when it first took it over was removed, with implied promises that all new equipment and whatever else necessary would be introduced. But then Live Nation (or Clear Channel or whoever) decided not to follow through with what they originally planned, and its original intentions were fully scrapped. Meaning that it is now seeking to sell off this theater building in its incapacited state in relation to what it was when it first acquired it.

Now my take on this is, had Live Nation followed through with its original plan, no one could fairly complain that the original operational facilities had been removed, given how such facilities would be replaced anew. But Live Nation DIDN'T do that, meaning that in many ways the theater building -- so far as its theatrical potential -- is now greatly devalued from what it had been when they first acquired it. If what I've said is true, it seems only fair that Live Nation should in some way compensate the city of Philadelphia for having greatly devalued one of this city's very historic properties. At the very least, before selling it, they should bring it back up to the operational level it was when they first acquired it. Otherwise, something is terribly, terribly amiss here.

Here's today's Weekly Update:(1) After last week's update, we were asked why the Boyd owner ceased renovation. The Boyd and other theaters nationwide are for sale because the new company Live Nation chose to focus on Rock n'Roll rather than the mix of entertainment uses that Clear Channel intended for the Boyd when they purchased it. Friends of the Boyd have asked Live Nation to sell the Boyd to another company that wishes to program it broadly. We will help obtain sufficient funding for the renovation.

(2) Today's Philadelphia Inquirer discusses the $1.3 billion dollar impact, and 40,000 jobs that arts and culture has on the Philadelphia area. http://www.philly.com/inquirer/local/20070924_The_arts_impact_on_area___1_3_billion__40_000_jobs.html
Arts and culture will have an even bigger impact on Philadelphia when the BOYD reopens as a major showplace theater! We have told you that the Econsult report summarized here http://www.econsult.com/files/boyd.pdf shows that a reopened Boyd Theatre would generate $120 million a year including related expenditures, and when including those related expenses, a total of 520 jobs.

As the Inquirer states, the arts do not receive enough public funding in Philadelphia. The Boyd will not need annual support as the shows will run in the black, but may need onetime public support to assist with the physical rehabilitation so it can reopen. Most movie palaces nationwide received funding from cities and states, for restoration and updating, so they could again serve their communities.

(3) This Weekly Update has frequently mentioned the Philadelphia region's historic cinemas, most of which now show arthouse films. Since the Boyd then named the Sameric closed in 2002, Philadelphia residents see mainstream movies in multiplexes. http://cinematreasures.org/ encourages moviegoers to comment on those theaters, and record the history of those theaters. Philadelphia multiplexes showing mainstream movies include the BRIDGE http://cinematreasures.org/theater/10911/ the PEARL http://cinematreasures.org/theater/17993/ and the RIVERVIEW http://cinematreasures.org/theater/20973/

http://cinematreasures.org/ also profiles historic movie palaces. All the movie palaces featured in downtown Philadelphia are history, except one -the Boyd. We must not allow the Boyd to be enjoyed only on cyberspace! The Boyd must be restored and reopened. Thanks to Patrick Crawley and Ross Melnick for inventing cinematreasures in 2000, as volunteers, and thanks to them and to YOU for your continued support of the Boyd.

Howard B. Haas
www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

re: the list above in Howard B. Haas' post--I would add the Masonic auditorium to the Detroit list, it seats nearly 5,000 (although not well, it was designed for Masonic assembly, not theater) and has recently been restored. Masonic has been in constant use since it opened in 1926.
I would not count the Indiana theatre in Indianapolis as a large venue, as the amateur theater group that owns it decimated the interior to make two small black-box venues, not so much a big place now.

Here is an undated photo of the Boyd:
http://tinyurl.com/2qdbgt

That beautiful photo is from Opening Day 1928 and belongs to the Irvin R. Glazer Collection of The Athenaeum of Philadelphia. It shows the original Art Deco vertical sign, marquee, and ticket booth.

To add to "My Dream" by Fever Dog on Sept. 9th - I would reopen the Boyd Theatre with the Cinerama screen used in the 60's,70's. The ushers and usherettes would wear the style of uniforms back then - red blazers, white shirts, and gray slacks/skirts. I would show only the Cinerama and 70mm epics of days past - "HTWWW", "2001", "Lawrence", "Indy Series", "Ben Hur", "MFL", "SOM", etc, etc. There was something lacking when the Boyd became the Sameric and that large curved screen was replaced with a still large flat screen. And movie presentations of today are totally lacking the magic and charm of the movie palaces of yesterday. You were transported even before the movie started. As I have mentioned on this thread many times, growing up we drove regulary the 60 miles to see the big screen epics at the Boyd. And I think people would do it again. Give the true movie lover/goer a reason to skip the shoe box megaplexes of today, and they will in a heartbeat.

Amen!

Dreams are great. Reality is that nowhere in the USA is there a movie palace that was built to seat more than two thousand people and still open for daily movies ! There are many movie palaces hosting live performances and some have a film series. Clear Channel believed, and Friends of the Boyd agree, that the Boyd is a viable theater. New owner Live Nation is changing its focus on Rock N'Roll rather than Touring Broadway Musicals, so the Boyd project is stalled.

Advocacy as a daily movie palace, with one screen, would be useless. Bloggers kept suggesting such for New York City's DeMille, http://cinematreasures.org/theater/501/ and that space is being gutted! There just aren't enough fans who would keep any theater built this big in the black, not in New York City, and not in Philadelphia.

Friends of the Boyd follow the path that has saved countless former movie palaces nationwide, which is mixed use. Live events will pay the bills and bring many people to the Boyd to enjoy first class entertainment there. A film series of classics, festivals, and premieres, will enable people to also experience the Boyd for film. Restored to its original Art Deco glamour, the Boyd will once again be a showplace and entertain future generations.

The Boyd Theatre in its ongoing closed-down state, along with many other once-great things that Philadelphia, Pennsylvania once showcased, is reflective of Philadelphia's current extremely screwed up reward structure. It's a reward system that elevates the city's most worthless, unimaginative, uncreative, and untalented elements to the highest level of social stratification, while treating anyone who's the total opposite -- what few if any are still left -- as if they are "worthless pieces of trash." It's why we no longer see great people coming out of Philadelphia anymore the way we used to, and why we haven't for many many many years now. As for the reward structure itself, why it functions the way it does is very understandable. For not a single penny used in it is legitimate. A great deal of it is simply laundered money -- the proceeds of illegal arms dealing (Philadelphia still ranks number one in this), illegal drug trafficking, fraudulently bilking the taxpayers in the rest of the state and the U.S. for constant bailouts of Septa (our public transit system), etc., medical malpractice and fraud, human trafficking, routine auto theft and, indeed, just about every other vice you can think of. And it is doesn't help that Pennsylvania's current governor, formerly the mayor of Philadelphia, can far more be likened to a dictator than a legitimate political leader. There's absolutely no such thing as democracy when it comes to Pennsylvania's current Governor Ed Rendell.

And right now with his leading the charge, Philadelphia is about to explode into a gambling mecca with its citizens -- whether they be good or bad -- having absolutely no say over it.

So against all that backdrop it would indeed require a miracle to bring the Boyd Theatre up to what it's supposed to be. Short of an all-out revolution, war or purely an act of God there's no way that I could see it. But with those things taking place I could see the Boyd Theatre being very instrumental in helping turn this city around for the better. Right now, however, it's "Welcome to Myanmar"...

Today's Weekly Update of Friends of the Boyd:

the IMPORTANCE OF THE BOYD THEATRE:

Built in 1928, the Boyd Theatre is the last surviving motion picture palace of downtown Philadelphia. Acclaimed as an Art Deco masterpiece, the Boyd was an early example in the US of a movie palace in the Art Deco style. The Boyd was designed by Hoffman-Henon, architects who designed many of the other movie palaces. The theater's exterior included a towering vertical sign that advertised the theater a mile away, a public retail arcade and a huge etched glass window with Art Deco motifs. http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org/photos/glazer/43-P-029-003A.jpg/view

The Boyd has one of Philadelphia’s grandest Art Deco lobbies http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org/photos/glazer/43-P-029-007A.jpg/view

plus foyers and lounges with dazzling colorful mirrors, marble fountains, and elaborate plasterwork http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org/photos/wakely/09.jpg/view

and a 2450 seat auditorium with perfect sightlines http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org/photos/wakely/02.jpg/view

The theme of the Boyd is the triumph of the modern woman, seen in the Proscenium Mural by acclaimed artist Alfred Tulk and by artistic figures of women from around the world including the modern American.



Movie palaces including the Boyd were places where the ordinary man could enjoy entertainment in a regal environment. On opening in 1928, for a mere 35 cents, an ordinary Joe could enjoy Walt Disney’s debut of Mickey Mouse in Steamboat Willie and Interference, Paramount’s 1st talking picture.



Equipped for the change in movies from silents to talkies, the Boyd drew patrons from throughout the Philadelphia area for films such as “Gone with The Wind,”epic 70mm films such as “Ben Hur” and “Doctor Zhivago,”and blockbuster movies like “Star Wars.” Customers traveled from a hundred miles away as the Boyd was the only local theater equipped mid-century to show Cinerama films. Hollywood style premieres were public spectacles, including the 1993 World Premiere of “Philadelphia” with Tom Hanks and Denzel Washington appearing.





Too many movie palaces nationwide have been demolished, but almost every US city has restored and reopened at least one movie palace to serve as a showplace of entertainment and so future generations will know how movies were experienced in the 20th Century.

Help us find more people who can join our cause at www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org



Howard B. Haas

www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org

Virtually every American City has managed to keep and restore at least one of their movie palaces. It would be an utter disaster if Philadelphia, one of our greatest cities and whose downtown is enjoying a renaissance, was unable to restore and reopen the Boyd. Theaters like these will NEVER be built again. It is important to future generations that they have a place to connect to how people went to the movies in the past and how the experience was so very different to the movie going experience today.

I live in New York where we are always lamenting the loss of theaters, the latest being the "Playpen" (not the original name, but its latest incarnation). The reality though is that New York still has Radio City, The Hollywood, The Paradise, The 175th Street, The Valenica, The St. George, The Beacon, The Ziegfeld and still others that have the potential to be restored to their former glories, chief among them the Kings and The Brooklyn Paramount. Compared to Philadelphia, this is an embarassment of riches. Nonetheless, it is still painful to lose even one theater because they will never be built like these again.

If this is Philadelphia's last palace remaining it is important that everyone who loves Philadelphia and believes in its future work hard to save The Boyd! I wish you luck!

And the number one way to do that is to bring it to the attention of the best possible buyer with its continuing to be up for sale. In the right hands, the potential of this movie palace is tremendous and easily worth whatever the asking price happens to be. It is at a choice location to serve as a prominent east coast destination theater with its convenient closeness to Philadelphia's Amtrak Station, not to mention its being near to the University of Pennsylvania. And there's no question it is totally ripe for partaking in Center City Philadelphia's invigorating renaissance which is now fast oversweeping that part of downtown Philadelphia where the Boyd Theatre stands. A beautifully restored Boyd Theatre is the one thing glaringly missing from that renaissance right now.

The City of Pittsburg has restored three of there Downtown movie palaces the Stanley,Penn and Fulton all under other names now. Live Nation meant well but they decided to get out of owning theatres and concentrate on them music business which was bad timing for the Boyd. The city of Philidelphia should realize the potential of the Boyd since Live Nation wanted to present Broadway shows like they did with the Opera House in Boston. The Boyd is the perfect size theatre for Broadway road productions, not to small and not to big. The City should take it from Live Nation if they can't find a suitable buyer at this time and hold it in trust until a suitable buyer can be found. The Nederlanders and the Shuberts both own theatres that are a little to small for touring shows that are presented for a few weeks. Theatres on the road need to seat at least 2000 to mazimize the gross on the large touring musicals such as "The Lion King","Wicked", "Phantom Of the Opera" snd many others. The Nederlanders just bought out Live Nation's intersts in Broadway in Chicago and maybe could be interested in the Boyd as there primary house for touring Brodway shows. In San Francisco the Curran for decades was the primary house for Broadway shows until economics forced them to make the larger Orpheum and the ugly Golden Gate the primary Broadway Theatres. The smaller Curran is now used for plays and long run of musicals such as "Jersey Boys". Philadelphia is not a market for long runs like Chicago,Los Angeles,Boston and San Francisco. Maybe the Shuberts and the Nederlaners should get together and form a Broadway in Philadelphia and use both there theatres along with the larger Boyd.brucec

Just for future reference, Brucec, it's spelled "Pittsburgh", with the "h" at the end carefully kept intact.

Now as for live performance venues in Philadelphia, while I as a Philadelphian certainly wouldn't object to the Boyd serving this purpose, the city certainly has no shortage of such now. But it doesn't have a MOVIE palace, and it needs one badly. And the only opportunity left for that right now is the Boyd. But, it's Philadelphia, and Philadelphia's not thinking right right now and may not make it to the other side of this. Several years back I might've said, "No, no, this city still has a good chance!" And I DID. But now I have many many doubts. So where the Boyd goes from here is a total toss-up. If it survives in any way as a theater I'll be happy. But we've gotten so steeped in this denial thing that its greatest calling is as a movie palace, and it's now to the stage (no pun meant) of being surreal.

The Boyd is the percect size theatre to house Broadway musicals on the road that is why Live Nation was interested in the Boyd.Most restored movie palaces now serve as Broadway road houses or Performing Art Centers. The Boyd could be a home for Broadway ,Concerts,Dance and Classic Film. The Shubert and Nedelander theatres as stated before are to small for the large scale musicals on the road. The Academy of Music and the Performing Art Center aren't perfect venues for Broadway shows. The Hippodrome in Baltimore was restored for Broadway shows and the Boyd would serve the same need in Philidelphia.brucec

Brucec is correct, but let me clarify regarding particular theaters. Nederlander isn't in Philadelphia. Shubert owns the Forrest Theatre on Walnut Street. The former Shubert is the Merriam Theatre, now owned by University of the Arts. Each of those is too small for large scale musicals as he says. The Kimmel Center isn't a venue at all for Touring Broadway shows. The Academy of Music is, as he says.

I would find it very interesting why Live Nation finally gave up on its plan, for it to come right out and state exactly why. For I, for one, was never against the Boyd being made use of in this way. But as I look at what's currently going on up there on NYC's Great White Way, and with it being very unclear what the end resolve is going to be with that, I look at Philadelphia, where in terms of unions being reasonable it's the absolute worst city in the world. And when looking at that side of Philadelphia it's not really hard to figure out, ah, that's why Live Nation finally gave a shrug of resignation. I'm certainly not anti-union by any means. But in Philadelphia's case we have what we can call mindless unions, ones who have long lost all sight of what they should be collectively bargaining for and what they should be against. So if Live Nation is having great difficulty explaining why it finally gave up on the Boyd, how exactly do you explain what ultimately amounts to a resistance of shear insanity? For that's the b---- of it. You can't. Only that it was able to make the simplest things a total impossibility.

Live Nation is selling their theaters that presents legit shows, because they want to be a Rock N Roll CONCERT company. That's why they chose a name like "Live Nation" in the first place. Recently, they sold their ownership interests in the former movie palaces in Chicago's Loop, because those are legit theaters.

Live Nation is selling all there theatres across the U.S with the exception of the Hilton in New York City and the Opera House in Boston due to complicated tax credits with both cities. They want to concntrate on there core business which is presenting musical acts across the nation. The Boyd got caught in the companys plan to sell all theatres. The demand for suitable musical theatres in New York is huge. A Broadway bound show such as "Cry Baby" was delayed a season becuase there were no available theatres on Broadway. The number of Broadway theatres has grown in the last decade fron 30 to 40 when the new Henry Miller opens next year. Broadway is even producing more plays with the new profit formula of star driven limited runs from 10 to 20 weeks.brucec

Not during the current strike it isn't.

Howard, the Nederlanders ran the Merriam the former Shubert for a number of years after the Shuberts moved to the Forrest. The Shuberts were forced to divest many theatres becuase of a court Decree of being a monopoly. The only new theatres that the Shuberts built after the decree was the Shubert in LA which was demolished a few years ago. The Shuberts run 17 Broadway theatres in New York and now only have two theatres left outside of New York, the Forrest in Philidelphia and the National in Washington DC. The Nederlanders run 9 Broadway theatres and run many Broadway theatres accross the U.S. The Forrest and the Merriam as stated before are to small to present large scale Broadway musicals such as "Wicked", they both seat less than 2000 seats. The Boyd with 2400 seats is the perfect size capacity for the road. I think people who are interested in saving the Boyd should stress this point to City leaders. Live Nation saw that the market in Philidelphia needed a theatre the size of the Boyd for Broadway road productions. Live Nation looked at the Boston market and realized that the Wang with 3600 seats was to large for Broadway shows and the Colonial was to small for many of the large scale Broadway musicals and decided to restore the long closed Opera House (BF Keith), which is now the primary theatre in Boston for large scale Broadway Musicals such as "Wicked".brucec

I just saw in the Friday paper that Live Nation has sold their theatres. I was wondering whether the Boyd was included in that sale. The article was in the New York Times and they did not mention the Boyd.

The Boyd was included in the sale.

Oh, goodness, I meant to write that "the Boyd was NOT included in that sale."

Yes, today's (1/28/08) Philadelphia Daily News confirmed this via Dan Gross' column.
LiveNation holds onto Boyd

LiveNation announced the sale of almost its entire theatrical division Thursday, but the largest live-music company in the world held onto two theaters - the Warner Theatre in Washington, D.C., which it leases; and the Boyd Theatre (1908 Chestnut), aka the Sameric.

Clear Channel, of which

LiveNation is a subsidiary, bought the Philly theater in January 2005 from the Goldenberg Group. Built in 1928, the Boyd was Center City's last great movie palace and was closed in May 2002.

LiveNation has said it would turn the venue into a multi-use entertainment house. A LiveNation spokesman did not return an e-mail about plans for the theater.

Live Nation held on to the following theatres not included in the sale, Opera House (BF Keith) Boston,Hilton NYC which is currently hosting the long run musical "Young Frankenstein,Warner Washington DC and the Boyd in Philidelphia. The Broadway community is very happy that Live Nation sold these theatres to a private investor who will take more interest in the theatres and also produce there own shows beside hosting Broadway tours. Clear Channel did a much better job with the theatres until they spun it off as LIve Nation.The Nederlanders purchased Live Nations 50% interest in Broadway in Chicago for 60 Million prior to this sale.brucec

Here are some pictures I took of the Boyd/Sam Eric 4:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/yellowstar/2310626767/in/photostream/

Very good photos, ericalynn g.! In an eerie sort of way they remind me a bit of that scene in the 1946 David Lean movie, GREAT EXPECTATIONS, when Pip returns to Miss Havisham's house long after she's gone but discovers Estella to still be there. Yet how things do change from what they once were. To think of the huge crowds that flocked to there with the premiere of BEN HUR in the late 1950s. How very different the place called Philadelphia was then. I look to those memories and then I look to these photos and I think, no, they can't be the same place, the same building, can they? For the one image I hold is so full of life, the other so void of such. Gone now are the searchlights of opening night and the long limousines, the souvinir booklets, the stars in their tuxedos signing their autographs in them, the grand exhibiting of the film itself. THAT Boyd will never be again. It came and went and now it's behind us all forever.

Yet as I look at this old girl I think, there's still some life in it yet. And to reveal it, all it would take is a young brash Pip to pull the old long-musty curtains down to let that new light in.

Thanks! I have more that I'll post shortly.

I see the TV ads, newspaper ads, and publicity for the new "Indiana Jones" movie opening in a few days. It makes me think back to the first three "Indy" films. I would make plans to travel to Center City to see the film in "70MM Six Track Stereo Sound" at the Boyd/Sameric Theatre. Now we no longer have that choice. Worse yet, even if there were still some "70mm" theatres around, films are not being released with 70mm prints anylonger. It is sort of a catch 22. If there were still theatres, would they make 70mm prints? If there were 70mm prints, would there still be theatres to show them. Anyone who has not seen a film presented in 70mm six track stereo sound has not seen a great presentation. And those of us who have, will miss those days and times. Even now, just hearing the music from "HTWWW", "Lawrence","My Fair Lady", "Camelot" and all the others brings back so many pleasant movie going memories. I can still picture those red curtains opening on the curved Cinerama screen at the BOYD and would love to see that again. Oh well, at least some of us had that experience to remember.

DennisZ, this upcoming Thursday -- May 22, 2008, starting at 11:30 A.M. -- they're planning to have a huge save the Boyd rally in front of the Boyd Theatre. Speakers will include John Gallery of the Preservation Alliance for Greater Philadelphia, Pennsylvania State Representative Babette Josephs, Adrian Fine of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and, of course, Howard B. Haas, Esq., president of Friends of the Boyd.

Also this coming Thursday, from 5:30 PM to 7 PM, at the AIA Center for Architecture at 1218 Arch Street, Adrian Fine of the National Trust for Historic Preservation and Shawn Evans, AIA of Atkin Olshin Schade Architects, will present an illustrated lecture on the significance and the plight of the Boyd Theatre and place it in the context of a national preservation struggle. The lecture is free. No reservations are needed.

So if you could find a way to attend this rally and/or lecture afterwards and assert your views -- which I fully agree with -- I think that would be really cool!

Theatre Buff1 - I would love to attend both functions. However, when I write that I would be making plans to travel into Center City, that travel originates in Lancaster, PA. And when you are still working full time, taking time off means a vacation day. And as much as I would like to attend, vacation days to me need to be saved for a vacation. I cannot believe that in a city the size of Philadelphia, there is not enough support to get this theatre restored and reopened. If only they could come up with a way for the flyers, Sixers, Eagles, or Phillies to play there, the support I would think would be overwhelming. They, the city and its citizens, could comee up with a humongous amount of money to build two new stadiums, but the money to restore its last movie palace - a much smaller amount of money - cannot be found. I guess it is all where your priorities lie. There is just as many people who would spend their money in Center City dining and attending an event at the Boyd, just like some people shell out their hard earned money to see a sport team in Philly. When there were many movie palaces in Center City, my wife and I - and on occasion friends - would make a weekend of it. Arriving Saturday and spend the day shopping. Then dinner out and a movie at the Boyd - Stanley - Fox - Midtown, etc. Then stay over night and have breakfast out in the morning before heading back to Lancaster. It was a nice break "mini vacation."

DennisZ, the glory days of the Boyd that you're fondly remembering, and that I got a fleeting taste of in my earliest childhood years before everything was quickly changed, can only be superficially replicated in today's economy at best because of the following reason. When the Boyd was at its height, and by that I mean very much on solid ground when it was, Philadelphia was where everything of a non-rural nature was concentrated. Though by the late 1950s there were the first phases of suburbia surrounding the city, there were not things as of yet such as super malls, megaplexes and suburban sprawl in general. There were small town movie theaters, and where I lived, Northeast Philadelphia, small neighborhood movie theaters, which served their purpose well if you just wanted to see a regular movie. But if you really wanted to see an epic in the right way, there was really only one place to go at that time, Center City Philadelphia. And when I say that I'm talking about the whole Delaware Valley region stretching from the Jersey Shore to small Pennsylvania towns as faraway as Lancaster. Downtown Philadelphia (in those days we called it "Downtown," never "Center City") was where ALL the big, most dynamic stuff was, whether it was Downtown Philadelphia's movie palaces, or its department store palaces such as Wanamaker's, Gimbel's and Lit Brothers. But after the introduction of the interstate highway system by Dwight Eisenhower (and what a huuuuge blunder that was), and the demise of the railroads (another huuuuge mistake), and the wholesale displacement of the Delaware Valley's abundance of farmland -- said to have been some of the best in the world -- with runaway development, everything just leveled off as a result of that, and this leveling off process is continuing to this day. If this economic pattern could be reversed there's no question the Boyd could come roaring back to what it once was and then some. And maybe with the continuing to skyrocket gas prices who knows? But until that happens, other than superficially, there's no way you could revive the Boyd to what it once was.

Now to me, over the past several years (since my joining CT in fact), I viewed the revival of Philadelphia's movie theaters and palaces as a way of luring people back to the city once more, reversing the trend of everything going the other way. But it is very much a which should come first, which can come first, the chicken or the egg, equation. But if we're living in a world where all homage and political reverence is shown to those in suburbia -- which, by the way, is the case with Philadelphia's current mayor, Michael Nutter -- with the accompanying outlook that we here in the city "don't know anything," good luck trying to do anything good in the city of Philadelphia right now. As I'm sure you know, we have a very high rate of crime in Philadelphia right now. Our prisons are filling up way beyond anything they were ever designed to handle. But of course we do, given the current type of economy we have. And this high rate of crime we have spurs those who fled this city to suburbia to look back to Philadelphia in terms of moving back and say, "Thanks, but no thanks."

And come on, who wants to live in a city, or come to a city, where the Philadelphia politicians don't hear you, they only hear those out in suburbia?

To me, I miss both when Philadelphia was the greatest thing around when it came to cinema, shopping, employment and so on, and when you traveled outside the city there was glorious countryside that went on forever, and the Jersey Shore really was the shore at its wide open and free finest. Of course the Boyd did very well when it was like that. Of course it did.

But now if money's going to come from somewhere to bring it back, it will have to come from the people who profitted immensely from transforming the Delaware Valley from the glorious way it once was laid out economically to the bland way it is now. But if that happens, be advised it will be a very superficial way of bringing the Boyd back. Interesting to note, if we locked those people up in prison -- starting with Mayor Nutter -- instead of the people we're locking up now, we could greatly reduce Philadelphia's current prison population dramatically. Hey, one can dream, can't he?

Theatre Buff1 - Don't think Philadelphia is the only area subject to all these changes. The farmlands of Lancaster County are disappearing faster with each "blooming" shopping center or housing development built. I drive 7 miles to work and it takes me usually 30 to 35 minutes each way!!! Downtown Lancaster was destroyed years ago in the name of urban redevelopment. Four movie palaces, innumberable businesses, a hotel, and other things were demolished. Now they want to demolish what was built in its place and bring back a part of what was there. Developers from Montgomery, Delaware and Chester Counties seem to have set their sights on Lancaster County as the next area to bastardize. It will soon be to the point one area will look the same as another. Wal-Marts, K-Marts, Lowe's, Target etal will abound and you will not think you left home. I still say, if you could find out how the box office of a movie in Imax compares to a "regular" shoebox theatre box office. To me I look at Imax as the new version of 70mm6 Track Stereo sound from the 60's-80's. However, it will still never replace the movie palaces and those traveler curtains opening on that large 70mm screen. At least it offers you more than the "postage stamp" size screens in most of the megaplexes. They advertise wall to wall screens, but a theatre with 150-250 seats, the walls are not exactly that far apart!
If I had a vast amount of money, I would restore the Boyd or any theatre I could purchase. Even if I was the only one patronizing it. However, I keep thinking about the movie "Field of Dreams." "Build It and They will come." Restore it and they will come as well.

DennisZ, if the laws on the books were upheld as they're meant to be upheld, not only could the Boyd be brought back to life in no time, but it would've never shut down in the first place. And that's the big problem in much of Philadelphia right now. A long list of laws are not being enforced as they're meant to be.

While admittedly some laws are very tricky to understand (you should see how the city worded two Charter change questions on the recent Primary ballot, for example), others are in plain English, they could not possibly be clearer. They do not require any special Supreme Court interpretation or what have you. But if you're living in a city where all local elections now appear to be fully rigged, where the total basis for Philadelphia's entire economy is totally questionable, where facts gets reduced to "mere opinions" when any fact contradicts what the powers-that-be want to believe and impose, laws that are perfectly clear do not seem to mean very much, if anything at all.

To run the Boyd the right way, it should not have to call for any special political connections and illegal payoffs to this or that shady entity so long as there's an assured market for it and it plans to operate in accordance with actual laws. But if anybody tries to go in that direction in Philadelphia at the present time they can expect to be told -- or ordered, I should say -- "That's not the way we do things around here." We have something here in Philadelphia at the present time called "councilmanic prerogative," which states that no city councilperson can go against another when matters are voted on collectively by Philadelphia's City Council. This "rule" is not in the city's Charter anywhere, it has no U.S. Constitutional or State Constitutional support, it's not even a law at all. But as such, it's being allowed to override all existing laws, from the U.S. Constitution on down to Philadelphia's Home Rule Charter. And it's not a "rule" that the people of Philadelphia have a right to vote to abolish. Besides, even if they did, with the way that the Philadelphia elections are clearly rigged, it wouldn't do any good anyhow. In case you don't know, we're using the Diebold electronic voting machines here. Banned in many states because they've not been developed to the point of being tamper free, in Philadelphia they are just par for the course. Add to this that if anyone sidesteps them by voting by absentee or provisional ballot, paper ballots such as that get "handled" by the incumbent politicians who are running in the elections. And if these paper ballots are "filled out incorrectly" they tend to "mysteriously disappear" right before it's time for them to be handed over.

Is this to say that under present conditions there's no way the Boyd can be brought back up to what it's meant to be? No. It can be. But the present conditions are such that it cannot be done just in the framework of existing laws. It shouldn't have to be that way. There's absolutely no good reason why it's that way. But it does speak to the way Philadelphia is right now.

The Boyd was at its best back when this was a legitimate city, that is, one with a legitimate economy, rather than a money laundering front, or whatever it is now. We have huge highrises in Center City at the present time and more going up with condo units starting at $1.5 million. And of those who can afford this, it's one of those situations where nobody knows -- and nobody's telling -- where the kind of money that can afford those types of prices is coming from. Rather, the outlook is one of, "There's no need for us to know." That said, I still hope the best for this coming Thursday's Save the Boyd rally. But beyond that, and even if it does result in the Boyd getting saved, this city has a lot of work that needs to be done beyond just that. And I see absolutely no signs right now that that work is getting done.

What is the hard cost.First purchase price.second,full restoration back to 1928 third,running costs,upkeep,hvac,heat,etc.Anyone have a present day picture of the theater,exterior and interior.Did the rally make any headway?4hope

The rally hasn't happened yet but will be on Thursday, May 22, 2008, starting at 11:30 A.M. Meantime, here is the article by Pulitzer prize winning architectural critic Inga Saffron that appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer for Tuesday, May 20, 2008:

Boyd Theater makes endangered list

By Inga Saffron

Inquirer Architecture Critic
With the celebrated Boyd Theater once again for sale, the National Trust for Historic Preservation has placed the art deco movie palace on its annual list of the 11 most endangered historic sites in America.

The sad, yet coveted, designation comes at a low moment for the shuttered 2,350-seat Chestnut Street theater, also known as the Sameric before closing in 2002. Only three years ago, Live Nation, a subsidiary of Clear Channel Communications, bought the run-down Boyd with the intention of turning it into a sumptuous venue for music shows. But the company, which has been consolidating operations, decided to get out of that business and put the property back on the market.

Live Nation has invited interested parties to submit bids by Friday. But there is no guarantee that a buyer would be committed to restoring the ornate interior for live theater performances or film. The building at 1908 Chestnut St., which was constructed in 1928 and is the last intact movie palace left in Center City, does not have historic protection in Philadelphia because of its entanglement in a legal battle dating from the 1980s.

That's why the National Trust decided to single out the Boyd this year, trust president Richard Moe said, along with such other threatened locales as New Orleans' Charity Hospital and Manhattan's Lower East Side neighborhood.

"The nomination helps bring real attention to these sites, both locally and nationally," Moe explained. "We hope it will bring the theater to the attention of a potential developer."

When Live Nation acquired the Boyd from Goldenberg Group in 2003 for roughly $13 million, the company was seen as the theater's savior.

It promised to invest about $17 million to expand the small stage for live shows and to buff up its elaborate art deco detailing, which includes a series of etched mirrors and murals depicting the history of women, and an intact marquee and ticket kiosk, all designed by the noted theater architects Hoffman & Henon.

But costs escalated, and public support from the city and state never materialized.

Live Nation did manage to stabilize the building, sealing it from water infiltration, and obtained rights to an adjacent parking lot before giving up on the project, said Adrian Scott Fine, the trust's Philadelphia-based program officer and a member of Friends of the Boyd, a nonprofit devoted to finding a sympathetic reuse for the theater.

Fine said the group wasn't "sure what to expect" from potential buyers. Although Friends of the Boyd have been contacted for information by several preservation-minded investors, it's not clear that they will be able to put together a winning bid.

"It's a highly challenging building," Fine acknowledged. "It's why we lobbied to have it listed. More than ever, the Boyd is at a crossroads."

One factor that might help the Boyd is a no-competition clause in Live Nation's sale invitation. It precludes the future owner from converting the theater into a venue for rock concerts, a business Live Nation still pursues.

At the same time, the clause could encourage some buyers to eye the site for a high-rise and retail development. Last year, the Irish firm Castleway Developments paid $36.7 million to acquire the parcel immediately to the south, on the 1900 block of Walnut Street, for a proposed luxury condo and hotel development on Rittenhouse Square.

In the hope of drumming up support for preservation, Friends of the Boyd plan a rally in front of the theater from 11:30 a.m. to 1 p.m. Thursday, said Howard Haas, the group's president.

The Boyd's expansive auditorium, with its curving balcony, is considered too large for today's movie industry, which prefers to market films to niche audiences. Three small screening rooms that were once part of the Boyd have already been turned into shops.

As a live theater, the Boyd would have to compete with the state-supported powerhouses along Broad Street's Avenue of the Arts, including the Academy of Music and the Kimmel Center.

Still, cities around the country have found creative strategies to preserve their historic movie palaces. In New York, AMC Entertainment Inc. moved the historic Empire Theater 168 feet down 42d Street, then built a 25-screen multiplex onto the top of the façade.

The National Trust's Moe said he remained optimistic about the Boyd, noting that of the roughly 200 places listed by the trust in the last 20 years, only seven have been lost.

The Boyd was chosen for this year's list from among 100 nominees. Among the other endangered properties listed are: California's state parks; the Great Falls Portage on the Lewis and Clark trail in Montana; Hangar One at Moffett Field in Santa Clara County, Calif.; Chicago's Michigan Avenue streetwall; Buffalo's Peace Bridge neighborhood; Dallas' Statler Hilton Hotel; Sumner Elementary School in Topeka, Kan.; and the Vizcaya and the Bonnet House in Florida.

Contact architecture critic Inga Saffron at 215-854-2213 or isaffron@phillynews.com

And here's a link to the small photo that went hand-in-hand with her article, showing the Boyd's grand Art Deco interior from balcony level:

http://media.philly.com/images/20080520_inq_isnboyd20z-e.JPG

This sounds like unless there are funds available from the city,that even though the building may get some form of protection,there needs to be a high million dollar investment(Reinforcing the entire building,including mold or asbestos removal,remake the theater back to its original standing,and then money designated to start up the new business venture and put to operating costs with heavy hvac and heating costs).The buildings new assesment would make property taxes go nuts.This can only be saved thru financial contributions from the city,tax incentives for a group of new investors and a very well organized business model.By being an endangered property,does that carry any financial commitments from the city?

4Hope, the city's usual policy when it comes to endangered historic properties is to rush in and tear them down as quickly as possible before any possible alternative solutions can be found. You wouldn't think would be the case in the most historic city in the nation, but, welcome to Philadelphia. I will say, though, that on that front the city is very innovative, and will not allow itself to be a no-can-do type of place when it comes to doing the wrong thing. Last year, for instance, up in the northeast part of the city where I live, we had an historic chapel that had been designed by 19th century world renowned British architect Frank Wils and had been built in 1859. Called Eden Hall, it had been the centerpiece of Northeast Philadelphia's Fluehr Park. You can see excellent photos of it at this link:

http://www.infraredhouse.com/edenhall/index.html

Its one saving grace as residents and historians scrambled to try to find ways to save it following a suspicious arson was that Philadelphia's Fairmount Park officials, who have jurisdiction over that park, said they didn't have the funds needed to demolish it. Interesting to note, and as the photos at that link should attest to, even following the arson it still remained a building of tremendous beauty, and its brownstone walls held very solid. But when word got back to Philadelphia's politicians that there wasn't the money needed to tear it down, and that such delay could -- horrors! -- result in residents and historians coming up with a way to save and restore it, they would not stand for it, and made sure to come forth with the money needed to tear it down as quickly as possible. For Philadelphia government is a master at delivering when it comes to doing the wrong thing, and let it not be said otherwise. When it comes to that, those stooges are the absolute best. And it's very proud of this outstanding record it holds. Soooo, maybe that answers your question?

TheaterBuff1without the support of the city,this building is in desperate danger.Any private company will most likely re- use this movie palace for condos or retail.How much does the building cost,does anyone know?

4Hope, when we're talking about a movie palace like the Boyd, cost is not really relevant. For instance, if we were talking about Philadelphia's Independence Hall being in danger of facing the wrecking ball due to bad politics, bad economic decision-making, etc., and you thought in terms of how much does Independence Hall cost in efforts to save it, people would look at you funny -- or at least I hope they would -- as that's really not a moot point in a case such as this. What is now coming under attack in Philadelphia are things that are way over the line in terms of humanity's continued existence. In this regard, though I consider it highly important, the Boyd Theatre is not the biggest story; the biggest story is Philadelphia's Burholme Park, currently in the process of getting slaughtered, but not getting reported on ay all due to Philadelphia's really bad politics. Burholme Park is an international story, but is not getting reported on at all right now, not even at the most local level. That doesn't mean what's happening with the Boyd isn't important, for it is. It's all part of the same war, so to speak.

Meantime, this is very unusual; I've never seen her do this before. Pulitzer Prize winning architecture critic Inga Saffron wrote a second article for the Philadelphia Inquirer that appeared in it today (May 22, 2008) regarding the Boyd, that is, her writing two articles on the same topic in a period of less than three days. Because of its much longer length I won't print it here, but here's the link for it:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories/20080522_Changing_Skyline__Boyd_s_loss_would_be_a_new_shame_of_the_city.html

Few private music or theater company's will ever have the funds to bring back this theater.With everyone on this website crying out to somehow change whats happening within our mindless american cultural bleakness,i was simply saddened that such a beautiful history is soon to be lost.The city should buy it, sell it cheap then split the cost of the rehab.I know theaterbuff1,this is not about money,but if you can save one...

Friends of the Boyd www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org, which I lead, are working to ensure the survival of the historic Boyd Theatre. The homepage has news articles linked.

That link isn't working. Here:
http://www.friendsoftheboyd.org/

4Hope, right now from what I can determine, though not a single word is currently being said about it, the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts located at Broad and Cherry Streets -- which at one time I suggested would make for a great entity for taking over and restoring the Boyd -- is directly in the firing line of what great Philadelphia thing is to go next. The Academy of Fine Arts is directly across the street from the in-the-process-of-expanding Pennsylvania Convention Center, or directly in its sights, I should say, and I kind of sensed this was coming on when I visited the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts' beautiful gallery -- designed by Frank Furness -- back in February of this year, which was right at the same time those historic buildings almost directly across the street from the Academy were getting torn down, even though an "agreement" was made that that wouldn't happen. Historic Philadelphia at the present time is dealing with an enemy that cannot be trusted, that cannot be taken at its word, and that will stop at nothing to destroy all that shows it up for what it really is. I don't know if you've been to see the Pennsylvania Convention Center yet or not, but it is really one of the worst, most awfullest new buildings I have ever seen. But of course I would see it that way when I'm seeing it in contrast to some of Philadelphia's finest architecture. As in, do you understand where this enemy coming at historic Philadelphia is coming from now? If it can, it will bring down everything that Philadelphia can rightfully claim as a thing of beauty and that shows up the opposition for what it really is. And right now in that regard it is on a super roll. With it already having claimed Burholme Park, Eden Hall and so on, the Pennsylvania Academy of Fine Arts next on the list to go from what I can determine. That's what that whole thing about that section of north Broad Street currently being blocked off is all about from what I can surmise. Take a look for yourself. Here's the map that appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer for Friday, May 23, 2008:
http://media.philly.com/images/CC_Conv-Ctr_Broad_Closed.gif

If its to be saved,next week it goes up for bid,if the city wants to kill it,is there a real coalition out there to buy it?Are there any updated photos of the interior and exterior?Has anyone reached out to big names in the music business?TheaterBuff1 the city cant stop the sale.Is the city going to go so far as to kill it by buying it and then knocking it down.

There are bidders who wish to preserve the Boyd. So far as we know, the City is not bidding on the property. The Inquirer article copied above makes it clear that the owner Live Nation seeks to not have other "music" companies at the Boyd. Legit theater, film, and other uses would not be prohibited. On the homepage is the National Trust designation including photos.

Also, 4hope, who are you? where are you? Not Philadelphia? What is your interest? Why are you requesting breakdowns of costs such as heat & HVAC? All other former movie palaces restored & reopened have such, and deal with such.

I am not from Phili,i was told that the theater was up for sale,and i have been looking for a theater to open up as an operating theater,that has a recording studio connected to it.I almost took over a theater last year,but the costs were simply to daunting(thats why i was trying to get a handle on how extensive the damage/rehab is).I was looking over one specific new york theater which has stalled, when i was informed that the boyd was up for sale.I see know that the owners will not sell to a music company.

4Hope, regarding your search for a theater that has a recording studio connected to it, please get in touch with me via private e-mail -- Freedom_2001@Juno.com -- as I have a pending project that might be of great interest to you.

Meantime, regarding the Boyd, if a convincing case can be made that the city of Philadelphia is on solid ground, there are no doubt many many parties who will show a strong interest in it. It is in a great location, after all, in terms of becoming a destination operation. And to be sure, they don't build theaters like the Boyd anymore. I myself cannot think the term "movie palace" without the Boyd instantly coming to mind. But how much will is there on the part of Philadelphia's Mayor Nutter and Pennsylvania's Governor Rendell to do what it takes to convince potentially interested parties that Philadelphia is on solid ground? Right now it does not appear they have any will in that direction at all, while let it be said there's an awful lot of things they would have to reverse to make that case. And right now I don't see any willingness on their part to do that. And that to me is the number one thing making the Boyd Theatre such a tough sell.

TheaterBuff1,your email does not go through.

worked.Speak to you soon.

I have repeated this before, almost every large City in the United States has restored not one but two movie palaces in there historic Downtown Districts. Pittsburgh has restored three of there downtown movie palaces. Cleveland has restored four of there downtown movie palaces. Boston has restored three of there movie palaces besides having many legit theatres in there central core.Chicago has restored three of there movie palaces besides having other legit theatres downtown.Detroit has restored or renovated six downtown theatres.Minneapolis has restored four downtown theatres.Seattle has restored three downtown theatres. San Francisco has three downtown theatres besides besides the Geary and Curran legit theatres. San Antonio has three restored downtown theatres.Columbus has restored three downtown theatres.Most other large or medium size cities have restored at least one former movie palace downtown. If Philadelphia loses the Boyd it would be on a very short list of cities not to save a former downtown movie palace. I think Live Nation should be taken to task with the clause stating that no other music company be allowed to restore and use the theatre. The Boyd as stated before would be the perfect size theatre for touring Broadway productions not to small and not to big. brucec

I agree with all you've said as I'm sure many others do as well. But that said, I don't think you understand how at the present time this city where the Boyd movie palace is located is at war, or that is to say, the suburban communities outside it, which have formed a formidable megalopolis, are at war with it. Study such things as the current way in which the Pennsylvania Convention Center is expanding, violating agreements left and right in the process, the way the two casinos proposed for Philadelphia have been planned out (look at how the tax relief from it has been rigged to solely favor the suburbs at Philadelphia's expense), the sabotage of the East Coast Greenway that originally was going to come through Philadelphia to run alongside the city's Delaware River waterfront but then mysteriously got scrapped, the 100% illegal expansion of the Fox Chase Cancer Center onto historic Burholme Park up in Philadelphia's northeast section, destroying the historic, well-loved park in the process, and no matter the huge public outcry that was against it, and so forth and so on and so forth, and you'll see how ALL these assaults on Philadelphia are originating from outside the city in its suburbs.

Though we began to see early signs of such assaults while Ed Rendell was still the mayor of Philadelphia, they greatly stepped up after he went from being the city's mayor to being the state's governor. And as for Philadelphia's current mayor, Michael Nutter, if you study him closely you'll see how he fully ignores anything Philadelphia has to tell him and only listens to the suburbs. The only exception so far has been with regard to his handling of the two proposed casinos. But even there it's obvious he's muscling for the right sell-out-Philadelphia deal, nothing more.

As for nefarious forces out in Philadelphia's suburbs making such assaults, look very closely at who they are. They are extremely crooked people who became very wealthy and likewise politically influential through the full sacrifice and misdevelopment of all the rich farmland that once existed all throughout there. And now they're to the point of calling all shots, even to the degree that the U.S. Constitution, which was created in this city (1787), doesn't even mean anything anymore, other than one big "yeah, yeah, yeah, now get the hell out of the way and let us reshape the city to our liking completely."

And the challenge is to bring the Boyd back to life against that backdrop. That is, are you starting to get the picture now? Anything more you need to be brought up to date on?

After reading about the Boyd decided to check out the other Phil theater like the Fox, Stanley and Mastbaum.
Big mistake.
It was wrenching reading about these great Phil monuments.
Couldn't really see interiors of the Fox or Stanley but the exteriors sure were wonderful and reading about the Stanley as a roadshow house made me think that it was one of the best in the States.
Would be wonderful to see both interiors before and after 70mm came in. Can somebody who has them put them on their repective pages?Anybody know where Sound of Music had its' original run?

You won't probably EVER see any pictures of the Fox or Stanley interiors during their "presentation" days of the 1950s and 1960s. At least, none taken by those people who supposedly loved movies and the buildings in which they were exhibited. Many of these so-called theatre historians HATED any changes made to the interiors of these structures in their misunderstanding of the simple fact that these buildings were erected for the sole purpose of presenting motion pictures...and as motion pictures changed, either in width or in depth, theatres had to evolve with them, and if that necessitated structural changes to these halls, then so be it. If they didn't change with the times, they either fell dark and unused or had a meeting with the wrecking ball. I actually met one Theatre Hysterical Society "guru" who threw up his Don't-Change-Anything hands and nearly went apoplectic when discussing the Stanley after its 1959 remodeling. Aww, they covered up the proscenium. Aww, they covered up the walls. Aww, they drilled holes in the Boyd's proscenium. Tough! If it weren't for renovations like these to accomodate evolving technologies in the 1950's and 1960's, most of these houses wouldn't have lasted as long as they did.

A photograph of the Stanley auditorium as originally erected is in "The Best Remaining Seats" (Ben Hall) which should be at your larger libraries. I've seen the Fox' pictures somewhere online. When I dig up the url, I'll post it on the Fox pages.

And, btw, "The Sound of Music" opened March 17, 1965 at the Midtown and ran for over a year to an audience that clearly didn't give a hoot that the theatre didn't look a thing like its original incarnation as the Karlton.

Just noticed an error in the introduction here. The world premiere of RKO's "Kitty Foyle" was not in 1945, but December 27, 1940. Warner Brothers (operator of the theatre) was seriously annoyed that RKO didn't send out a press "junket" of the film's stars to Philadelphia for the premiere inasmuch as a great deal of "KF" took place in Philadelphia. Just three weeks later, "The Philadelphia Story" opened at the Boyd. Interesting fact about this is that at the same time the film opened, the stage play starring Katherine Hepburn, who of course was in this classic film, was playing to delighted audiences just a few blocks away at the Forrest.

The Following article appeared in the Philadelphia Inquirer for May 30, 2008:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/entertainment/20080530_Boyd_Theater_renominated_for_landmark_status.html

It appears that Philadelphia's Mayor Nutter will take a stand on a matter of historic preservation so long as he's not in confrontation with some adverse entity wanting to take things in the opposite direction. If this were a case where Jefferson University nearby to the Boyd wanted to take the Boyd down to slam up a highrise parking garage, Nutter would give his full consent in a heartbeat -- the same way he totally incompetantly handled the Fox Chase Cancer Center v. historic Burholme Park controversy.

But in the Boyd's case, since he's not being asked to take a stand against a nefarious entity such as that, it's, "Oh sure, I'll side with the effort to save the historic Boyd, why not?" But if some formidable nefarious force decides to go after and take down the Boyd, watch him change his tune in a New York minute. Hopefully no such entity will emerge, but just to let you know how he'll quickly change his stance if it does.

Friends of the Boyd, Inc. are quite pleased with the support of Mayor Nutter and placed it in our homepage http://www.FriendsoftheBoyd.org

That is certainly the Friends of the Boyd's prerogative. But the man -- Michael Nutter -- has shown early on in his mayoral administration that he has no respect for Philadelphia laws, facts or history. Because of its remoteness, many people don't know just how major an historic thing Northeast Philadelphia's Burholme Park is, or WAS, we can now start to say. Originally it was the country estate of leading Philadelphia Quaker businessman Joseph Waln Ryerss, a direct descendant of Quakers who arrived to Philadelphia from England along with with William Penn on the ship Welcome. Ryerss was a founder of the Pennsylvania SPCA as well as an active abolitionist. And he made his fortune in all ways honest and upstanding, among them, the creation of the Tioga Railroad Line. As mentioned earlier, he allowed his estate -- the highest point in Philadelphia -- to be used by the Union Army as a critical lookout point when the Confederates under Gen. Lee were planning an attack on Pennsylvania but it was unknown where. Thanks to the role that Burholme Park had played, Philadelphia was kept safe all through the Civil War. When Joseph Waln Ryerss passed away, he left his country estate to his son Robert Waln Ryerss, who in turned willed it to the people of Philadelphia to be preserved as green open space for their enjoyment forever. And the city accepted it on those terms unconditionally. There were no provisions or clauses then -- or NOW -- for that will ever to be broken. And at the time the Fox Chase Cancer Center announced it would like to acquire and expand onto Burholme Park it was not like it was a dead and meaningless thing at that point. Quite the contrary, I visited this park just a few short months before this announcement was made, and I cannot recall ever visiting a park more alive, more cared for, more loved by the everyday people as was the case with that park. It was like a patch of heaven in area of the city that in other ways had become very run down. As Pulitzer Prize winning architectural critic Inga Saffron said of it in her 2005 visit to it, "Picking your way through the clutter that is Cottman Avenue, past all the diners and dollar stores, nothing prepares you for the vision of an Italian palazzo perched nobly on a hill in Burholme Park." What Burholme Park serves as a magnificent example of is noblesse oblige at its finest. And in terms of what the infrastructure around Burholme Park can support in all directions, the Fox Chase Cancer Center could not possibly have picked a worse place to seek to expand. It had so many far better options in the city it could look to. But it wanted to take down that historic well-loved that park. And do we really have to guess why? Add to this that in its taking over Burholme Park -- in all ways illegally -- it will be getting a major lookout point over the rest of the city. Add to this, and I'm not making this up, you can check this out for yourselves, on the brink of its "victory," the Fox Chase Cancer Center official who spearheaded the expansion is calling himself "chancellor," on the 75th anniversary of when another man in history took on that title -- in a place called Germany.

To anybody in Philadelphia who genuinely cares about protecting its historic landmarks, Mayor Nutter, who the moment he took office quickly approved the cancer center's expansion without even so much as blinking an eye, is no friend, whether of the Boyd, or anything else of Philadelphia historic significance.

If in the course of the Boyd's current sale it gets sold to someone whose only interest is tearing it down to put up a paarking garage or whatever else in its place, based on his mishandling of Burholme Park, we can all rest assured that Mayor Nutter will change his colors in a heartbeat and show all loyalties to that nefarious interest, whatever it is, and the Boyd Theatre, too, like Burholme Park, will become history. For keep in mind that just within walking steps from the Boyd is another historic Philadelphia park that many would like to see eliminated, historic Rittenhouse Square. In brief, anybody who trusts Mayor Nutter when it comes to historic preservation, whether it be of parks or theaters, is as naive as it gets. As I say, the only reason why Nutter is taking the position he is now when it comes to the Boyd is because no adverse interests have expressed an interest in demolishing it. But the moment such emerges, he will switch to their side just like that. Mark my words and watch and see.

Published today in Philadelphia Inquirer, Sunday June 1, 2008
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20080601_Letters_.html
Letters:

Save the Boyd

I applaud The Inquirer for drawing much-needed attention to the restoration and preservation of the Boyd Theater, Philadelphia's last remaining movie palace from the 1920s ("Boyd Theater renominated for city landmark protection," May 30).
Restarting the historic designation effort is critical to preserving the Boyd and defending it from demolition. However, the state Supreme Court has held that the Philadelphia Historical Commission does not have the legal authority to protect the theater's remarkable interior.

I recently introduced legislation in City Council to give the commission this power, and I hope my colleagues quickly advance the bill to Mayor Nutter's desk.

The Boyd is one of the city's cultural treasures, and reopening it to the public would be a tremendous economic boost to Chestnut Street. We must take the necessary steps to ensure the Boyd's interior is protected and open for the enjoyment of future generations.

Bill Green

Councilman-at-large
Philadelphia

Though I'm normally opposed to councilmanic prerogative given the illegal role it played regarding the fate of historic Burholme Park, this is one instance where I hope Councilman Green can get the full support of Council he needs. And it's a case where the bill he's pushing for would not run counter to the U.S. Constitution or Philadelphia's Home Rule Charter. So yes, given that, I certainly hope this bill gets passed!

I read the article in the Inquirer Sunday entertainment section about the "troubles" at the Kimmel Center. Both with design flaws and debt financing. I wondered at the time when the Center opened for one heck of a lot less money they could have taken over the Boyd and made a marvelous performing arts center and used it for films during "off times." Because if the Kimmel Center is six years old that, if my memory serves, opened the end of 2002 which was after the Boyd closed. Granted the Boyd was still an operating movie theatre when the design, construction, etc was arranged for the Kimmel Center. Granted the size of the Kimmel Center is much different that the Boyd, however is the seating any higher than the Boyd could have offered?? Even in two "theatres" at the Kimmel. Oh well, it's too late now. I guess with the close proximity of the Great White Way, Broadway touring versions do not need to have such extended engagements, but it would be nice. I see the "road grosses" of touring shows and see all the cities that have saved at least one of their theatres. They can spend 300 million on the Kimmel Center, but 50 million to restore a movie palace is out of reach!!!!!!!???????

In studying out this matter very carefully, the foregone conclusion at this late stage is that the only thing that can save this theater with any sort of certainty is that every effort be made for its immediate reactivation as a theater. Just to get historic designation protection status for it alone in terms of saving it really means nothing at all -- as recently was demonstrated with Burholme Park in Philadelphia's northeast section. That very historic park had every legal protection on it imaginable, whether historic or otherwise, yet it made not one iota of a difference. In that case, the many legal protections it held were not only local, but were statewide, national and international legal protections as well. Yet when push came to shove, all the failsafes that were supposed to protect it didn't kick in. And in the case of the Boyd, the pressures to drive it under and replace it with something else are much greater.

Meantime, the trouble with the Boyd -- and this what's really hurting it now -- is that for the past six years every effort had been made to block it from reactivation, with money being made by keeping it in a shuttered up, run down state instead, that is, money being made by the issuing of hollow promises that it will eventually be restored and reopened. But, with absolutely no truth behind any of those promises -- as evidenced by the fact that while the Boyd has stood all boarded up these past six years, many other theaters in the Philadelphia area (plus neighboring New Jersey) have been fully restored and reopened, no problem. Add to this that several new theaters have opened up as well.

During the past six years there were many many ways the Boyd could've been reactivated every bit as easily as other theaters in the Philadelphia area were, if not more so, there's no question about that. However, running active theaters takes work. And the outlook has been, why make money that way, when money can much more easily be made by making false promises about it alone? Of course for the stage hands' union anxious for new job opportunities, making money in that fraudulent manner that doesn't do them much good, nor the countless others who otherwise would be able to profit from the Boyd's reactivation.

But just to clarify this matter, simply getting historic designation status for the Boyd is absolutely no guarantee of its continued existence, as was just demonstrated with Burholme Park.

Hi Brucec....you pointed out in a prior post that most American cities have saved at least one movie palace and most have saved at least two. You left out the two cities that have the most remaining palaces and (arguably) the best quality remaining theaters overall: Los Angeles and New York.

Los Angeles has at least 6 palaces in their downtown in various states of restoration, but nonetheless an architectural treasure trove of palaces. When you add in the theaters in Hollywood like the El Capitan, The Pantages, The Chinese, The Warner, etc.. it makes for an enviable collection of America's Movie Palace history.

New York is always decrying the loss of its theaters in the current real estate boom that is still very much underway. We have lost a great many. The reality though is that New York still has Radio City, The Hollywood, Loews Paradise, Loews 175th Street, Loews Valenica, The St. George, The Beacon, The Ziegfeld, The New Amsterdam, RKO Keiths Richmond Hill, Loews Elmwood and still others that have the potential to be restored to their former glories, chief among them the Loews Kings, The Brooklyn Paramount and The RKO Keiths Flushing. There are still many others that I haven't mentioned that have been beautifully converted to churches in Brooklyn. I also should include Jersey City's Loews Jersey and The Stanley.

This is an embarassment of riches. Nonetheless, it is still painful to lose even one theater because they will NEVER BE BUILT LIKE THIS AGAIN!

The Boyd is apparently Philadelphia's last remaining palace. It is important that everyone who loves Philadelphia and believes in its future to save The Boyd! It is important to future generations that they have a place to connect to how people went to the movies in the past and how the experience was so very different to the movie going experience today.

I end with this: Jersey City has managed to keep 2 of its palaces! Jersey City! Surely Philadelphia should be able to garner the resources needed through government and corporate funding to save and fully restore this precious monument to Philadelphia's past. Philadelphia's biggest industry is its past! If there is any city that should be respectful and protective of its past it should by Philadelphia!

You're absolutely right, LuisV, for as I continue to say, Philadelphia is the most historic city in the most historic state in the U.S., the very city where it was born, after all, as well as where the U.S. Constitution following the American Revolution was drawn up. You would hardly know this now though with each passing day.

Regarding the Boyd Theatre itself, what it needs for its restoration and grand reopening is a good solid business plan, but for the past six years straight, in its shuttered up, run down state, we have not seen anything such as that. Instead, there have been six straight years of empty promises that it will eventually be brought back to its former glory but with no explanations as to how. And when any suggestions were put forth, just like that they got shot down -- particularly by means of those making such suggestions being threatened with being sued for "libel" if they persisted. At least the Boyd was still an operable theater back when it was shut down in 2002. It still had all its original projectors intact. But they were removed first thing. Don't ask me why. Because if I try to find out the answer for you I could get sued for libel, as that barrier is still going on -- as if setting the stage for the next six years of its being all shuttered up in a run down state.

...If the Boyd is lucky.

Because it's located in a part of the city where real estate values are through the roof, so much so that a theater in that very well-to-do vicinity being perpetuated in a shuttered, run down state is not particularly practical. I'm sure that if it were restored to its former glory and reopened it would very much become a welcome presence there, adding to the real estate values of that part of the city all the more -- the same as nearby Rittenhouse Square (an historic nearby village green) does. I myself, if I was paying $12,000.00 a month for a luxury condo near to there, would love if the package included a nearby movie palace to go to as well. That is, one that's OPEN, and not all boarded up and looking hideous likewise.

And that's pretty much the full rundown with the Boyd right now. [The remainder of this comment has been deleted for violation of Cinema Treasures' terms of use.]

Councilman Bill Green put up a vote on a bill to also protect the interior of the Boyd as well as the exterior.

Green's bill came up for a public hearing before City Council's rules committee yesterday.

They ultimately persuaded Council to delay a final vote until Sept. 18.









http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/19804759.html

Friends of the Boyd appreciate the hard work of Councilman Bill Green and that the Rules Committee did vote for and forward to the entire City Council his proposed legislation to protect historic interiors. I testified yesterday on behalf of the proposed law.

here's some links to online accounts:
Philadelphia Inquirer
http://www.philly.com/inquirer/breaking/news_breaking/20080611_Preservationists_once_bit__twice_shy__over_Boyd_bill.html

Philadelphia Daily News
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/cityhall/19799424.html

PlanPhilly
http://www.planphilly.com/node/3279

Exterior designation hearing is next month, and Friends of the Boyd continue to work for overall solutions so the Boyd's restoration and reopening can get back on track.

Another story today online & on the radio:
http://www.kyw1060.com/Final-Vote-On-Boyd-Theater-s-Interior-Will-Come-in/2354853

Ironically, if the Boyd were to receive historic landmark status based on its interior, it could mark the beginning of the end for the Boyd Theatre building's continued existence. For in order for the Boyd to come back as a theater worthy of the 21st century -- the ultimate way it can hope to continue to stand -- its historic interior in many ways conflicts with this goal and would have to be reworked considerably. But if historic landmark status based on its interior prohibits this, well, you begin to see the problem. If practically speaking the Boyd's interior cannot be altered so as to make it widespreadedly alluring by 21st century standards (it has 2,450 seats after all), as businesses go -- all history aside -- it will be a losing proposition. On the other hand, if it's to be kept afloat as an historic artifact where very little if any money is made by its continued existence in that capacity, will that in itself be strong enough to insure its continued survival? I, for one, based on what I've seen in other Philadelphia cases, do not believe it will be.

It would be much better, I feel, and I don't see why this isn't possible, that the Boyd Theatre receive historic landmark status based on its exterior, and just that alone. For that status it should be able to receive now without waiting for Green's bill to pass. And also with that, every move could be made here and now to get the Boyd back open for business again interior-wise, and suited to the 21st century.

I could be wrong, but I believe that the majority of the Broadway houses in New York have external landmark designations which allows the theater owners to keep up with individual produvtion needs and modern technologies. The theaters, nonetheless, retain virtually all of their historic facets.

Could the law be written to designate the interior as a landmark allowing that changes can ONLY be made as they relate to the operation of the theater as a theater? Just a thought.

Landmarking helps ensure the Boyd WILL be a theater rather than gutted.

As to New York, thanks to Joe Rosenberg of V.I.P. Tours of New York for the following:

The New York Theatres designated landmarks, exterior and interior:

Radio City Music Hall
Loew's Valencia (now a church)
Loew's 175th St. (now a church and performing arts center)
Beacon (now a performing arts center)
Embassy Times Square (interior only - it is now the tourist information center with all its theatre elements)

The following 42nd St. Theatres, most of their lives being movie houses, have been designated interior and exterior landmarks
New Amsterdam (now a Broadway theatre)
American Airlines (Selwyn) (now a non-profit theatre)
New Victory (now a non-profit Children's Theatre)
Empire (Eltinger) now the lobby for AMC 42nd St.
Liberty (sitting vacant)
Times Square (long time conversion to a store which will look like a theatre)


35 Broadway Theatres (two designated exterior only - August Wilson and Henry Miller and one designated interior only - Broadway)

City Center
Town Hall

Metro (exterior only - it is now a store)

LuisV, that is an excellent suggestion you made as it takes into account all the many variables that have to be weighed in in the Boyd's case. Mayor Nutter fondly remembers seeing ROLLERBALL there, hence why his strong support toward seeing the Boyd Theatre gets saved. At the same time, the Boyd he so fondly remembers was after its screen had been reworked by master 20th century theater architect William Harold Lee to bring its functionality up to modern standards. Lee did so by going all out to protect the Boyd's original proscenium, albeit by concealing it. He placed the new wide screen to be in front of it. Which was how it was when I saw BEN-HUR there in the late 1950s. Although the Boyd's original Art Deco proscenium is no doubt beautiful, I question how practical it would be for 21st century presentations -- whether live or on screen. Regarding film exhibitions it's been suggested a fly down screen could be introduced, but that would compromise the integrity of the Boyd's magnificent ceiling. It would be better if the screen could rise up from below, while, aside from the high cost of it, I don't see why that wouldn't be possible. But would historic status for the Boyd's interior prohibit this? Could one exception such as that possibly be made to allow for that?

Howard, I don't know if you know the answer, but in New York, if the theater has an internal landmark designation, I beleive they are still allowed to make changes that are needed to present a show. Maybe it is required to be restored back to origninal condition after the run. I would think this is how it's done because I never really hear the Schuberts, Nederlanders and Jujamcym people complaining about it. Whatever is done in New York should probably serve as the model for the Boyd.

Luis,
Legally protecting the interior ornate architecture does not preclude shows. Your comparision is perfect. Those major theater operators don't have a problem with legal preservation of their beautiful theaters. I didn't myself draft the proposed law to protect landmarked Phila. interiors, but heard that the NYC law was indeed reviewed.

Right now it's unclear how much weight historic landmark status carries when it comes to insuring that things of historic significance -- such as the Boyd -- can survive when push comes to shove. At this moment Philadelphia's Burholme Park -- which is extremely historic and likewise holds every historic protection imaginable accordingly -- is very much on the line with regard to its future, while at the present time the historic Barnes Foundation, located in the suburbs just outside the city, is in the process of getting fully trashed, and with no contest to speak of whatsoever. So given all that, it would probably make the most sense to withhold all further funding towards the save the Boyd Theatre effort until, with Burholme Park, it gets established that historic landmark status carries weight after all. If Burholme Park goes down, historic landmark status will mean absolutely nothing thereafter with regard to anything. Since the Boyd's next hearing won't be till September, while Burholme Park's hearings will be taking place all throughout this summer, all financing should be directed towards the Burholme Park's legal defense fund for now so as to establish that historic landmark status does carry weight. The address for this is "Save Burholme Park, P.O. Box 245, Cheltenham, PA, 19012." You can also see the recent video about it at YouTube, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXqPOF9tAPY

It was sad, this summer blockbuster season that, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the the Crystal Skull, did not play at the SamEric. I had seen the other adventures there and the screen cried out for the big Paramount logo to appear on it. I hope something is done soon, because jackasses are tagging it with more and more graffiti, it is begining to look like an eyesore.

It is sad that anything that stands still in downtown Philadelphia, and indeed all of Philadelphia, gets tagged with graffiti. As we've posted as news on this site, there has been lots going on this year. That said, the future of the Boyd is not settled yet, and we appreciate the support of cinema treasures fans.
Friends of the Boyd

Let's say that the Boyd is saved from the wrecking ball, and a company is hired to begin and/or finish the rehabilitation. How closely do you feel they can restore the building to its former glory? Also, how much work actually remains to be completed (percentage-wise)? Let's just hope that there are enough blueprints and quality photos from yesteryear to aid the artists in breathing new life back into this wondrous facility.

Unanimously, the Designation Committee of the Philadelphia Historical
Commission today recommended that the Boyd Theatre be legally protected! KYW Radio's report:
http://www.kyw1060.com/Agency-Could-Give-Boyd-Theatre-a--Historic--Design/2609800

Friends of the Boyd have met with various parties interested in a great restoration of the movie palace. Partly on the various historic photos we supplied, and the main floor blueprint we supplied, but also due to their excellent work, Clear Channel's architects drew up a detailed set of restoration plans and exploratory work including a paint study that revealed original designs. Preliminary work was done, but most of the actual renovation was not done.

Has anyone mentioned SenSurround yet? Forgive me if it has, but I heard it was discontinued because the vibrations were causing cracks in walls and other damage to the theatres in which it was utilized. Any truth to that? The only two movies I can recall that used that SenSurround system were "Earthquake" and "Rollercoaster," and I believe it may have been used for parts of "Towering Inferno" but not sure. Help?

Sensurround = Earthquake, Midway, Rollercoaster, Battlestar Galactica, and (mostly in L.A. area) Zootsuit.
Story has it that a net was installed underneath the ceiling at the Hollywood Chinese to catch falling bits of plaster.

My wife thinks I'm nuts because she doesn't quite share the same enthusiasm we do for places such as the Boyd. For her, a theatre was just a theatre. She went to see the film and not much else. But even as a child, I was fascinated by 3 things other than the actual film: the ray of light extending from the projectionist's booth onto the screen, the lighting fixtures within the auditorium, and the credits rolling with the curtains closed (I still think that's terribly cool!)
Speaking of lighting, the present-day hanging circular fixtures beneath the Boyd balcony -- they're "upgrades," aren't they? They look too modern for the Art-Deco period. Always wanted one for my dining room, with orange & white lights and a dimmer of course.

Sorry, the above falling-of-the-plaster took place during the "Earthquake" engagement. And, btw, Sensurround was not used for "Towering Inferno."

We've heard Sensurround caused problems at the Boyd with "Earthquake"

The light fixtures are currently off site with a light fixture restoration company. Those you refer to are a famous 1939 model, installed in the Boyd during the 1953 remodel for Cinerama, as replacement for original 1928 lights. I saw the same exact ceiling light fixture on display in Washington D.C. at the Smithsonian Museum of American History, as an example of then cutting age 20th Century lighting.

We all would hate to see the demise of the Boyd (like the Spectrum!) but what I would give to own one of those fixtures if they began selling off the interiors. Before the Milgram was demolished, people were buying its wall fixtures. They weren't ornate, but very '70s chic. I'm surprised nobody bought the old Goldman vertical bow-tie-looking wall fixtures (too big, I guess) but they were my faves.

And what is the proper name of the circular motif centered above your head on the balcony underside? 30th st. Post Office has one of them at each entrance, as did the Boyd, Nixon, Fox, and a few other theatres. In some places it was encased in class, others not.

Sadly, when the IRS takesover the Post Office building at 30th Street, that ornate Art Deco space will be totally off limits to the public, for security reasons! Another nearby post office will service the public. Looking at my own photos, I see ceiling domes at the entries of the post office, which I recall.

The Boyd's balcony underside has plaster medallions. Well, the plaster & paint experts might have a more technical name, but that's what they appear to be. They are quite elaborate at the Boyd.

Since you like the Boyd lights so much, I will tell you they had a model name: "Aura", given to them by their maker, the famed Rambusch Company. Rambusch, then of NYC (now NJ)also were among the Boyd decorators in 1928 and refurbished post WW2.

Heck, there wasn't anything I didn't like about the Boyd, lights and all! Even the smaller chandeliers that hung from the main ceiling on either sides of the screen added a touch of class. Another question: what were those 14 circular plaster designs called that hung directly above the stage? Always intruigued me.

We have materials that name them and at some point, I can look for the names. Interesting is the purpose of them. That decor exists because the auditorium and proscenium arch are wonderfully wide- one reason the Boyd was selected in 1953 to host Cinerama. That decoration helps to visually make the auditorium seem not too wide.

The side chandeliers are indeed very nice. All the original light fixtures are currently off site in storage, waiting for restoration to get back on track.

But with all the hoopla surrounding the Boyd's future, if the building has been dormant for so long -- and given its age -- is it still structurally sound? From the photos I've seen, it still looks great for the most part, but then I'm no engineer.

The Boyd is structurally sound! Architects, engineers, etc have verified that repeatedly including this year. Now, I have to take a break from answering questions as it has been tremendous (volunteer) work to obtain today's giant step towards legal protection,and all the rest we are doing.

Does anyone know of any movement underfoot anywhere in the country to possibly create a new theater that mimics the look and feel of those like the Boyd and its predecessors? Ornate plaster designs, elaborate drawings, curtains, a stage, etc. Financially it would be quite an undertaking, and finding people talented and skilled enough to carry it out would be another task, but I'd love to see that happen versus another cineplex/multiplex.

Nobody is going to replicate original 1920s Art Deco, which is one reason why it is so important to save, restore and reopen the Boyd!

No argument from me there! It's just sad that it closed at all. And we have to be the only major city without a movie theater in its downtown district, aren't we? Forget those places down by Penns Landing -- a tourist wishing to take in a film while staying in Center City would go where? Yes, please save, restore and reopen the Boyd.

Movie theaters today are multiplexes. Friends of the Boyd do include in our mission to have a film series at the Boyd, but it will need to primarily rely upon live events.

While we're focusing on what happens next with the Boyd we should also be keeping an eye on what's going on with the Uptown in Chicago as well. Recently put up for auction, it was just bought by Jam Productions. But, that's no guarantee that the Uptown will be restored and reopened as a theater, even though it already has historic protection designation status. As usual, this is a very difficult time for movie palaces, whether here in Philadelphia or there in Chicago, and just about everywhere else in the U.S. as well. I would hope that we'll eventually get to the other side of this trend, but who knows what's still going to be standing when we do? Which is why I feel your idea is a very good one, ntrmission. I remember years ago when I was visiting Hamburg, Germany being taken by what I mistook for very historic old buildings, in that case Medieval structures, only to be told that they were simply newly built from the ground level up replicas of what had stood before the bombing of Hamburg during WWII. But they looked so old and genuine they sure fooled me! But based on that, I say yeah, if they could do that, when the right time comes we could build accurate replicas of whatever gets lost in this current period we're in -- IF we ever get to the other side of it. And replicating 1920s Art Deco? No sweat.

And I say bring it on, TheaterBuff1. Speaking of theaters named "Uptown," one can only hope that our own Uptown can someday rise up from near-oblivion. I imagine that Chicago's Uptown holds as many precious memories for its patrons as much as our venues and I'm glad they're making some progress there. But at the risk of sounding judgmental here, "Jam Productions" sounds kinda fly-by-night to me, every bit as "Live Nation" did, and we see what happened there! Think I'd feel slightly cozier if a Trump came along and sank a few million into preserving/rehabbing/reopening these places.

BTW, I'm new to this: Who the heck is/was Live Nation anyway?

The tension in the Chicago Uptown's case is very much linked to what befell the DuPage Theater which was in a suburb of Chicago. You can read what happened to the DuPage at the following link, but please be forewarned of the very disturbing photo they show:

http://www.mysuburbanlife.com/lombard/archive/x18353309

To me what happened regarding the DuPage was a bona fide crime and I don't know how that could've happened in America. But it did. And not only was it an attack on a building, but a whole culture of people for whom the realm of the theater is valued as much as anything that others place a high value on. Think how far theater goes back in our whole entire human history, how whole generations have grown up in reverence to it spanning back thousands of years, of the very vital role that theater has played throughout humanity's advance. Like the Chicago Uptown Theatre, ranked as one of the largest in the U.S., the DuPage was also designed by the architectural firm of Rapp & Rapp which today stand as legendary. Though the DuPage wasn't anywhere near as large as the Uptown, it was one of the rare few atmospheric theaters that the Rapp & Rapp firm had turned out, and most certainly right up there with John Eberson, who specialized in this. Yet there was no one there to stop when they came for it. No one. And it wasn't like we were at war or anything. This was just an innocent theater that some well-meaning people were trying to restore, that's all. No crime whatsoever was being committed there. But the way those who wanted it down went after it, well, read Cinema Treasure's DuPage page if you can stomach it. It got so bad CT finally had to shut it down, of course. And while certainly people have their rights to their own opinions and tastes, this story went way over that line. Here were a people who wanted to do away with somebody else's opinions and tastes, and they did so in the most physical manner. And with nothing to stop them, as though it was all very "right and proper." So naturally there's some concern with Chicago's Uptown being next to get hit in that same fashion. But I certainly hope not. And could the same thing happen here in Philadelphia regarding the Boyd? Fortunately, the Boyd is in a good part of the city where I don't think it could. But, given the times we're living in, as signified by what happened to the DuPage and what could happen next to Chicago's Uptown, well, you see the current times as well as I do.

The City of Chicago put conditions on the purchase of the Uptown. Jam Productions is to give the City 5 Million within 30 days of receiving title to the Uptown. Jam also is required within 90 days have a detailed plan of repair of the Uptown to be open within three years and after the theatre is open will get back there 5 Million. The Uptown is far more difficut project than the Boyd. Chicago has many restored movie palaces where Philidelphia has none. Most large cities in the United States has restored one or two movie palaces in there downtown districts. The Boyd is the perfect size theatre for touring Broadway shows with its 2400 seats where the Forrest and Merrium theatres are to small for shows like "Wicked" and "The Lion King". The Academy of Music and the Kimmel Center are not proper venues for Broadway shows. The Boyd could be used for concerts,dance,classic film as well as for Broadway shows. Live Nation clause that the theatre couldn't be used for music concerts can be challenged due to the fact they never opened the theatre after they bought it. There is a need for the Boyd and its restoration would be a great asset to the City in the long term.brucec

Those were some disturbing photos, and my condolences go out to those who fought so diligently to save the DuPage. I have very vivid memories of when our Fox, Milgram, Randolph, Duke, Duchess, Regency, Nixon and Goldman theaters went down, and believe it or not I was on the verge of tears each time. It's like someone ripping down your house w/o your permission and stripping away some childhood memories along with it.

Pardon my being off-topic, but the demolition of these palaces is akin to the so-called condo boom at the Jersey Shore. The delightful and distinctive doo-wop-themed motels from yesteryear have given way to pricey, unattractive condominiums. Is that what they're going to put in the DuPage's vacancy? Is that what's in store for the Boyd should -- God forbid -- the unthinkable happen? If we cheered a condo demolition, we'd be chastised for being insensitive (if not a little nutty), but I'd happily risk the chance!

Brucec, my mindset on the Boyd is that at this point I'd be happy to see it reopen as a theater in any capacity! But I do think it has to be flexible to adjust for whatever the greatest demand is. Meantime, there was the rumor, I don't know if it was ever true, that the Kimmel Center was holding the Boyd's restoration back when it was heard that the Boyd would try to compete with it. And if that rumor was true, what can you do? That's just the way of cutthroat competition. And I don't know about anybody else, but I think it would be suicidal to try to go against the Kimmel Center.

Which is why I stressed that the Boyd should concentrate on becoming a movie theater once more, particularly for Cinerama, if possible, and also to become Philadelphia's first Digital Cinema theater, neither of for which there's any competition now.

What we really need in this city right now, and which really hit home recently with all the excitement in other theaters throughout the country over THE DARK KNIGHT, is that special movie palace we need to be able to flock to in droves when such attention drawing movies come along. It's like build it and they will come. But if anyone thinks they can make a go of the Boyd being a live performance venue, taking into account the competition and so on, I'm not going to argue with that. I just don't want to see anybody lose their shirt is all, hence my emphasis on flexibility. And if it could somehow be adopted from the Uptown's restoration plan, I love the fact that they have time lines set and would love to see that applied to the Boyd as well, as it didn't seem to be on the last run.

And to Ntrmission, I know exactly what you mean. That said, however, there is such a thing where in some cases there's free enterprise, and how do you fight it? Such as when they took down the Fox being a good example. It's being razed was not meant as an act of hostility or a cultural attack, but was just simply the way of progress. As beautiful as an old theater it was, it no longer worked for that location.

As for what's happening at the Jersey Shore, I threw in the towel on that a long time ago. And that was not a case of progress by any means. At the point I threw in the towel there should've been a moratorium on all new construction there plain and simple. The Shore when you're at the Shore should feel like it's at the Shore, and anything that goes against the grain of that should be said no to. But in that case money was the only thing allowed to rule and all else be damned. And to me that was crossing the line from free enterprise to outright senseless greed at the expense of all else. There are a lot of ways money can be made, but it doesn't mean that all of them are right. As for what rose up in the DuPage's place I don't know if anything has yet or not. For in that case it's kind of like what do you build in the place of where the World Trade Center stood? For I'm not absolutely against condos per se. I had no complaints whatsover when Symphony House rose up. It's just a matter of where they rise up, and on what emotional level they do. I absolutely can't stand any of the condos at the Jersey Shore, because I know of the outright hostility that was behind them, the hate of fellow man and nature, the love of money.

So let's recap: we've lost an absurd number of theaters. Wanamaker's is Macy's. The Macy's Light Show ain't the same without John Facenda narrating it. Strawbridge & Clothier are history. Horn & Hardart gave way to fast food (fine, if you're a kid). F.W. Woolworth became what? John's Bargain Stores are gone. Anyone remember Linton's? PTC begat SEPTA . Where's Sun Ray Drug Store and its outlandishly delicious milkshakes? Where's my Gimbels at 9th & Market with the sales marquee and digital clock inside the big, neon "G"? Anyone seen my H.L. Green? Can't find Kresge, either. Corvette's? Two Guys?

No problem though - I'll just tune in to WKBS-48 and watch "Roller Game Of The Week" with Elmer Anderson doing play-by-play.

We've lost so much in this city over the years that I really couldn't stomach losing our last treasure. What else is left? I've shown my kids photos of the Boyd/Sameric interior from the Irwin Glazer book. Sad to think they may never step foot inside what we all have come to know and love. I really wish we all could have a week just to look around and snap pictures inside the Boyd, no matter what else happens afterward.

You hit it dead-on, Theaterbuff1. I realize it isn't my dislike of condos as much as their location, so I apologize to anyone residing in such places who may have been offended by my remarks.

Hey, Santa? Here's my early wish list: Save the Boyd and all the other precious theaters that mean so much to us all. Not just for our pleasure, but also for future generations.

Last I recall, F.W. Woolworth became Woolco, but maybe that's now gone the way of nostalgia, too. But I'll tell you, while so many of us today pine for the past, those in the past just went ahead and brought about the things they wanted for themselves, the things you listed, and with nothing to stop them. It was called -- and this might sound like a very alien, foreign word to many people reading this today -- "freedom." Put your time machine hat on and imagine right now is 1927 or so. Your name is Alexander Boyd, and you have this idea that you want to build a theater...no, make that a movie palace. You want to build a movie palace. Now with that said, what's standing in your way? You have the location picked out and purchased, and the architectural firm of Hoffman & Henon has just come through with a really great design for this theater you seek to build and exactly as you picture it. So with that, you hire the contractors, work gets underway full swing, and by Christmas day 1928, wa la! You offer to the world the newly opened Boyd! And what was missing from what I just laid out the steps of? Only one thing: Obstacles. There were no obstacles. Try doing that same exact thing today and you realize how different now is from then. It's like back then obstacles -- or perhaps shackles I should say -- hadn't been invented yet or something. That is, between 1927 and now, who is this idiot who invented obstacles? And who is the nutcase lawyer who granted this idiot the patent for it so he could begin mass-marketing it?!

It's one way of looking at this matter anyway.

It seems to me that the criticism of Condos above is misdirected. One need only look at cities like Detroit, Gary, East St. Louis, Camden, Newark, (the list goes on) to show that many movie palaces were lost in cities that had no development at all. That was the problem! No one wanted to build Condos because many people had left and no one else wanted to move in. So the palaces rotted.

In New York, new condo development has primarily ocurred because the city has been turned into a very desirable place to live. By lowering crime, cleaning the streets and restoring and creating new infrastructure, people have been flocking back to the city. As a result, developers built new housing. That doesn't mean that you lose all of your landmarks. That's what Landmark laws are for. That is what Zoning laws are for. All of these new Condos and Office buildings increase property values over all.

In New York, one need look only at what happened on 42nd Street. New Office buildings were built and the entire street was redeveloped. Some theaters were gloriously restored (The New Amsterdam, The New Victory, The American Airlines and the Hilton Theaters). One theater shell was preserved as an entrance to a new multiplex (The Harris). Another theater, The Times Square, is being turned into a retail store for Marc Ecko. Another theater, The Liberty is still awaiting its new use (rumour has it that it will soon be restored into an actual operating theater).

My point is that, overall, development SAVED these theaters. It is not enough to say that all old movie palaces need to be restored. Someone has to pay for them and they generally have to have a way to support themselves afterward. A vibrant successful residential/office district is much more likely to allow that to happen.

Philadelphia finally landmarked the Boyd! It's about time! Now, they have to find a way to assist in restoring it; whether through tax breaks, grants or other incentives. The city needs to understand that a restored Boyd will lift the entire district up and enhace Philadelphia's reptation. The sooner they truly figure that out, the sooner you will see progress.

LuisV, I appreciate your comments.
Philadelphia has not completed the process of landmarking the Boyd's exterior (all it can legally protect unless a new bill is passed next month). A recommendation was made in favor by the Designation Committee. A vote is scheduled August 8 at the Phila. Historical Commission.

In NYC, on 42nd Street the Harris facade is the entry to Madame Tussard's. The Empire was moved a short distance, and its former interior (auditorium) is the grand lobby of the AMC Empire multiplex.

The New Amsterdam is the crown jewel, an Art Nouveau masterpiece whose restoration & reopening kicked off the renewal of Times Square. I certainly hope that when the time comes- and we are working towards it, when the Boyd reopens, that it will greatly help Philadelphia, too, and especially Chestnut Street West.

LuisV, I am not strictly against condos and do feel they have the power to greatly improve certain areas. And you gave a very good example of how this is possible and where it has happened. What ntrmission was being critical of and that I was quick to agree with him on was condos at the Jersey Shore. For believe me, condos have not helped to turn things around there for the better in the least, not even in Atlantic City. And if offshore drilling with its inevitable occasional oil spills now comes to crown off all that totally inappropriate development that keeps going up there, and that in the past should never have been permitted to go up there, New Jersey will pretty much be done for completely.

Here in Philadelphia, meantime, we have a case of a classic movie theater building that was saved from the wrecking ball by being turned into a condo-like apartment complex highrise -- the Oxford up in Northeast Philadelphia. And though the man who saved that building by converting it to this was well-intentioned, the end result was disastrous, and today it can only be described as Section 8 housing. It might not be that technically, but it has that look and feel to it, and does not help the surrounding neighborhood in any way.

In the case of the Boyd, it's currently located in an area of the city that in many ways is seeing tremendous forward strides but that also has a severe homeless problem in the shadows that needs to be resolved in the right way, while it's not clear yet what that right way is. And no, giving them one-way tickets and busing them all up to live in the Oxford isn't! In the past, when the Boyd was in its glory last, all these homeless would've been employed and contributing to Philadelphia's over all economy greatly -- hence how the Boyd got to be so glorious in its earlier run. And I'd be curious to know how NYC took on and solved this problem if by chance it had it for a time. For in Philadelphia's case it's not a problem that simply can be solved by closing eyes and it will simply go away.

Thanks Howard and Theterbuff1 for your comments. Regarding Condos on the Jersey Shore, once again, it is all about zoning and landmarks laws, of which New York is strong on both. That is why we have a relative wealth of our old palaces remaining. Yes, we cry about all of the ones that we lost (as we should): The Roxy, The Center, The Capitol, The Rivoli, The State, The Paramount, The original Ziegfeld, etc...

But we still have many with us: Radio City, The Hollywood, The Paradise, Loew's 175th Street, The Valencia, The Brooklyn Paramount, The New Amsterdam, The Elmwood, The St. George, The Metropolitan, The Paris, The Beacon, The RKO Keiths Richmond Hill, and sitting in the middle of Brooklyn waiting for its restoration.....The Kings! In addition many of the old Broasdway theater houses remain.

New York's theater district salvation, arguably, was started by the construction of the Marriott Marquis on the site of 3 demolished old Broadway houses. They were sacrificed to bring business back to Times Square which at the time was a cesspool of crime and filth. While it was painful to lose those theaters, I choose to look at it from the standpont that it started the ball in motion of saving Times Square and by ectension, saving the remaining Broadway houses. Eventually, it led to the 42nd Street Redvelopment Corporation and the plan to build 4 huge office towers in Times Sqaure while at the same time restoring many of the old theaters on 42nd street, but not before getting rid of all of the x rated businesses, prostituion and crime that the street was long known for.

Today, 42nd Street is home to 39 screens in two huge multiplexes, a wax museum, many restaurants, a jazz club, several "Broadway" houses, dance studios, a Childrens Theater and lots of other retail.

Many years ago, Pennsylvania Station was torn down in New York which for many people was the worst architectual crime in the history of the city - worse than the Roxy's destruction which I believe occured a little earlier. The loss of Penn Station roused the people albeit too late to save it. But because of the outcry, it led to the Landmarks Laws that prevail in New York today. It is why New York still has Grand Central Station, The TWA Terminal at Kennedy Airport, and many of the theaters that we still have today. Without landmark protection AND zoning laws, New York today would be more like Houston. (No offense meant toward Houston, but they don't seem to have an appreciation for historic architecture and its preservtion).

Philadelphia had some of the most beutiful movie palaces in the country and lost almost all of them. They have one chance to retain a single theater - The Boyd! I mentioned this before but I'll say it again. If there is any city that should protect, relish and promote its history, it should be Philadelphia! I am dumbfounded by the apparent indifference of not just the city govenment but the local business community and civic groups to fight for projects like the saving of The Boyd. Maybe this will be a turning point.

Hey, how about T-shirts? How about taking a few photos from the friendsoftheboyd site, putting them on t-shirts, and selling them with proceeds going to actually saving the Boyd? Count me in - I'd buy several for sure! Some of my coworkers are equally interested in what the future holds and when I pointed them to the old website (savethesameric), it was like a trip back in time for them. And for those who may not have a computer, wouldn't it be a nice keepsake to have a shirt honoring this 'grand lady' of Chestnut Street?

And what about other paraphernalia trumpeting this cause: posters, coffee mugs, baseball caps, etc.? Why not set up a table and sell these items right in front of the theater?

Don't know if this idea will actually float, but it's just something that popped into my head. Your thoughts?

Friends of the Boyd, Inc did print up some T shirts this year. We offered some for sale to our supporters. Considering the printing costs, we'd need sell 10 million T shirts in order to restore the Boyd! So, City & state funding and major donors, really is needed.

I've long wanted to place one or more image of the Boyd on a poster. I'm not aware of any movie palace that's on a poster.

I also meant to add that the sale of such items wouldn't exactly cover the entire cost of restoration, but I felt it would raise more awareness of the importance of preserving it to those who may not know about it at all.

My family and I were discussing the entire moviegoing experience today, and sadly many of our youth just don't care (or even know) what Art Deco is. "But who really cares? It's just a movie theater," my eldest daughter said. "It looks real nice on the inside but is all that (decor) really necessary these days when we just want to see the picture?" I told her that in the case of multiplexes, the answer is an emphatic NO, especially given how bad the economy is these days. And, truthfully, most patrons wouldn't care one iota about how the place looked. But since the beautiful Boyd is in a precarious situation, it should be held in a higher esteem and viewed as a true work of art, rather than just another movie house. We also owe it to all the architects who designed and built it to ensure that their work wasn't in vain. How happy would Mr. Boyd be to know his 'baby' was still standing and in operation? Ditto for all of us.

As LuisV knows so well, most movie palaces nationwide don't show daily movies anymore. Gorgeous movie palaces, like the Boyd, are restored & reopened primarily for live shows.

And a live show at the Boyd trumps a-hole-in-the-ground-where-the-Boyd-once-stood scenario. Still, my heart yearns for a taste of yesteryear.

When movie theater going was at its height, it would not have been unusual for movie palaces such as the Boyd to run at full capacity daily. But that shouldn't be the expected norm at any time. For if it's looked upon that way it's the worst possible way to try to run a theater, and accounts for why so many Philadelphia theaters folded. For that's a terrible -- and might I add extremely arrogant -- pressure to put on the public; to expect them to pack the movie palace every day, and if they don't, shame on them, blame the public for the theater's failure and all that. It's great if a theater can run at full capacity daily, but a theater should not be budgeted at if it automatically will. Rather, a much more down to earth expectation, and how the theater operational budget should be geared, is for a fairly good turnout on weekends and holidays, but just a small smattering of dedicated theater-goers all other times. And any theater attendance beyond that should be treated as unexpected windfall only. There are many things theaters can and should do to increase theater attendance. But putting a guilt trip on the public for not coming as often as the theater operator thinks it should should not be one of them.

To be a great theater operator you have to love people, and by that I mean love them for what they really are, not what you want them to be. If you can't do that you don't belong in the theater business, period. And to love people for what they really are in this instance means that any turnout, whether it's a huge one or small, should be seen as a great turnout. Furthermore, a theater's operational budget should be based on the annual take, not the daily one. We should not be thinking how much this theater can make per day but how much per year, and base every budget projection on that alone. A theater should be set up so that it operates daily, but not with the expectations that it will get a good turn out daily. For that's the best way to kill a theater I know of.

Friends of the Boyd have long advocated that movie premieres, a film classic series, and film festivals be hosted at the Boyd. To operate in the black, the Boyd will need to host live shows. 1st run movies will play at 1st run movie theaters- which is no longer the Boyd's role. Huge, ornate movie palaces in most US cities primarily host live shows, and sometimes a film series.

The Boyd's role should be Broadway shows and live concerts that is why Live Nation bought the theatre in the first place. Live Nation sold its theatres across the nation to focus on the music business. Its not a reflection on the Boyd that Live Nation has the theatre for sale. The Academy of Music and the Kimmel Center don't want to loose there Broadway shows but that is what should be done just as they took away shows from the Forrest and Merrium theatres which are to small to host the larger Broadway productions such as "Wicked". Philidelphia is one of the largest markets for touring Broadway shows that doesn't have a suitable theatre such as the Boyd with its 2400 seats. The Boyd should be allowed to present concert acts despite Live Nation's clause which would not allow another owner to stage concert acts. A films series should be part of the programming of the Boyd when the theatre is dark. The Boyd is very lucky that is has Howard rooting for its survival.brucec

What's very funny to me is that when I was young, I didn't truly appreciate the palaces either, probably because there were so many of them. Marcus Loew famously said, "I don't sell tickets to movies, I sell tickets to theaters!" While I was always happy to see a film at my favorite palace, The Valencia, I picked a theater based on what was playing and how close it was to my house (which was usually the crappier theaters). I only grew to truly appreciate them once I wasn't able to see a movie in a movie palace anymore and now I realize what was truly lost. I'm not old enough to remember the heyday of moviegoing, but I can only imagine what it was like.

Many of us may also remember the Grand Banking Halls of our youth, with the huge Corinthian Columns and Chandeliers and Marble Floors and Brass finishes. They were spectacular! But today, they don't make any sense financially and so very few of them remain and fewer still remain as actual banks. Most were torn down since they usually sat on prime land and had a lot of unuse air rights, but in New York a few incredible examples survive as party/event spaces. Some of the best examples are 2 Bowery Savings Bank buildings (one on The Bowery and the other on 42nd Street), The Old Citibank at 55 Wall Street and The Greenwich Savings Bank on 6th Avenue. The Williamsburg Savings Bank in Brooklyn is being turned into retail but will be beautifully restored as well. They survive because of a combination of strong Landmark and Zoning Laws and the ability to find an adaptive resuse of the property now that the old one no longer worked financially.

The point is that these buildings were quite beautiful but were built for a different age and a different economy. They survive today becaue they have found alternate uses.

The Boyd will not survive based on movies alone. It must be geared toward live theater and concerts and corporate events. it would be wonderful if it could still show movies as well, but that can't be its primary purpose if it is to survive.

Many many comments ago I mentioned it would be nice if someone put together a book of the Boyd Theatre. Detailing the history of the theatre and including as many pictures as possible. I know it would not raise enough money to restore the theatre, but I would certainly think there is enough interest in this theatre that the book would sell and at least help raise funds. I have bought enough "books" from the Theatre Historical organization which, in size comparison, would be similar to the souvenier programs that were sold during the roadshow film days. I am so glad I took the pictures I took back in the 1960's of the Philadelphia theatres. However, I only have exterior pictures. It would be nice to have some history of the interiors as well. Since the Boyd is the only one left standing, this an opportunity worth pursuing. I am also still amazed at the number of people who attend rallies, meetings, etc. With the population of Philadelphia, you would certainly think more than a handful to a hundred would participate. I know the wheels of progress turn slow, but I keep thinking if the citizens of Philadelphia really cared, there would be an outpouring of support to save this masterpiece. There have been other theatres in a lot worse condition that have been brought back to life across this country. Do you suppose by the time the "touring revival of 'The Lion King' travels the country the Boyd could be one of its stops??

Friends of the Boyd have had several hundred people show up to support our cause many times, including various film fundraisers at International House, and at one particular tour. We've received tons of letters, emails, and other communications in support, and have a mailing list in the thousands. There's no question that the public overwhelmingly supports our cause.

I took this place for granted when I lived in Philly. I had my pick of theaters, though, with the Goldman, the houses at 16th and Chestnut, the Midtown over by Broad Street, and even the Fox, which disappeared soon after I moved to town. Them was the days.

(1) Cover story on Philadelphia theaters in today's City Paper, including the Boyd. This you can read online:
http://www.citypaper.net/articles/2008/08/07/alas-poor-theater

(2) new Arcadia book, Philadelphia's Rittenhouse Square, also features the Boyd on one page.
http://www.amazon.com/PHILADELPHIAS-RITTENHOUSE-America-Arcadia-Publishing/dp/0738557439/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217538473&sr=1-1

This morning, the Philadelphia Historical Commission unanimously voted to add the Boyd Theatre to the PHILADELPHIA REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES!

Designation of the Boyd means that the building's exterior is legally protected from demolition or alteration. Today's decision was a landmark reversal of the 2002 denial. Today's action means that the City of Philadelphia has done the right thing in taking this step! It does not mean the plywood on the facade comes down and the Boyd magically reopens, with its ornate Art Deco exterior and interior restored for public entertainment.
There's more work to do!

congrats to you, friends of the boyd!

I can't believe no one has submitted a photo of this theatre.

A link to the Friends of the Boyd was posted more than once in the comments above. That website has photos of the Boyd. Click here. If your asking why there is no photo at the top of this page, it's because the add a photo feature isn't working.

Yes -- our add-a-photo feature is currently offline, but we look forward to adding this capability in the near future. Users routinely post images on flickr or other sites and link them to theater pages and/or find other images and post links to them here.

Good news today in the newspaper about the Boyd Theater. I hope the deal works out, I would at least liken it to the Tower Theater, only with places to eat and nearby clubs, will make it "the" Chestnut St. happening. I pray the new owners will not back out on the film part, like the Prince did. Until then, thank you, Howard, you have put up with nonscence by some on this site and you've handled it with class. Why should Ambler have all the fun?

Al...What news? Please share. Thanks!

Nevermind Al........Here is a summary of the news item.

PHILADELPHIA, PA — A local developer says he has a deal in place to buy the [url/theater/1209/] Boyd Theatre[/url] and plans to make it the centerpiece of a $95 million hotel and entertainment complex. Hal Wheeler of ARCWheeler expects to close the deal with current owner Live Nation by November 25, and intends to build a 30-story, 250-room hotel to the west of the theater.

Live Nation would book live entertainment into the theater about 60 nights a year, leaving it available for other events the rest of the time. Broadway-type plays would not be part of the plan, as the hotel would be built on land that was to be the site of a stage house for the Boyd under a previous proposal.

Wheeler’s development proposal, like Live Nation’s earlier plan to turn the Boyd into a Broadway roadhouse, would restore the theater to its original art deco glamour. But the project’s scope is far more ambitious, and aims to transform the 1900 block of Chestnut Street from a retail backwater into a Center City nightlife destination.

I hope this plan happens its a win win for everyone.Live Nation will be able to sell the property but still book the theatre with 60 acts a year. The Hotel will make the theatre more vaible and at the same time revive the area the Boyd is in. The Boyd will get the restoration it deserves and the Academy of Music and the Kimmell Center are still able to book Broadway shows.brucec

Let me be first to say, HAPPY 80TH BIRTHDAY BOYD THEATRE!!!!!
Hope to see you soon.

When I saw a movie here in the mid/late 90s I couldn't believe I was sitting in a theatre in such a terrible state of disrepair. Obviously the balcony was closed off but I would say that at least 40% of the orchestra seating was blocked off too. Many rows were missing altogether and it took me 3 seats to find one not broken. It was a fabulous experience seeing such a stunning theatre still open and showing movies. I had a good look around and it was certainly still showing signs of its once wonderful past. I cant remember what movie I saw but it was just me and six others there that evening.
Good luck to any project that saves this gem of a theatre.

I saw movies regularly here. The balcony was indeed closed off. The orchestra had long ago been reseated, so rows were permanently gone, rather than "missing." 40% sounds too high for seats roped off.

One of the first things I would love to see restored is that rather unusual, but incredibly beautiful Blade with the "BOYD" name. This giant punctuation mark, as it were, would tell Philadelphia and the world that the Boyd Theatre is back and here to stay!

I am looking forward to attending The Boyd with the awe I had the first time I walked in there in June of 1967. No longer the sad dying cinema. with over zelious security guards checking your bags, patrons you could not reason with, and bathrooms you mother told you not to use.

Refurbished restrooms will be wonderful indeed.

I would also like to see, when The Boyd does reopen,some photos of its days as the RKO Stanley Warner's Boyd and as Sam Shapiro's/United Artists Sameric 4 Theatre.

Here is a 1986 photo:
http://tinyurl.com/d2v9qw

American Classic Images also has an older picture of the Sameric before the other three theatres were added. The film showing was a 70mm presentation (Either a "Star Wars" and "Indy" film if I remember.) And they had the fabric banner around the bottom of the marquee stating it was a 70mm 6 track Dolby stereo sound presentation. Even though I have a picture of the "Boyd" from earlier, I am still thinking of ordering a copy of this one. And the sign board above the marquee only advertises the one film - naturally.

Here is the photo to which Dennis was referring. Date is 1980. I actually saw that film at the Sam Eric when it was playing there.
http://tinyurl.com/o8tenu

Here is a 1935 photo:
http://tinyurl.com/rdrq3x

You already posted that photo on Sep 16, 2006 at 2:57pm.

Here is a photo circa 1952:
http://tinyurl.com/nk57fc

What is the theater down the street in that picture? The Aldine? I tried searching for it and nothing came up. Is it listed here by another name?

It's listed as Sam's Place One & Two. In the search area check off previous names.

http://cinematreasures.org/theater/3358/

THANKS!

For those who would like to see a gorgeous color slide of the Boyd in Philadelphia in her Cinerama days there one for sale (mislabled) currently on Fleecebay: ClickHere.

Jonathan, that's great! Are there other Philadelphia theaters on slides there, too? If so, please link them to the appropriate pages, and feel free to email me directly (found after clicking my name).

Here is hoping in 2010 something will be done with this theater. In Montgomery County, they are having great success.

Picture of the original Cinerama screen at the Boyd from the Temple University's Urban Archive: (ridiculously described as a "white backdrop": http://digital.library.temple.edu/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/p15037coll3&CISOPTR=8&CISOBOX=1&REC=3

Hal Wheeler, who planned to acquire and reopen the Boyd, passed away this past Monday (25).
http://www.philly.com/philly/obituaries/82873297.html

Here is a November 1968 photo from Temple U:
http://tinyurl.com/yg2p3ao

I really got to know the Boyd when I was college at West Chester, but when I was younger my parents had taken me into Philly to see "Seven Wonders of the World" in Cinerama. I remember looking over the edge of the balcony because the sound was so realistic I thought there was an orchestra down there. I also remember seeing MGM's "Ben-Hur" and "Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm" (in 3-panel Cinerama).
When I was in college I saw Fellini's "La Dolce Vita" there. It was in some odd European wide-screen process but still very impressive on the Boyd's still wide screen.
veyoung mentions a planned reopening. Is the Boyd building still even there?
I also remember the Viking, a little ways down Chestnet St. from the Boyd. I remember sneaking in from West Chester one evening to see a re-issue of "Raintree County" there.
There was also a small theater about a block over from Chestnut (as I recall). It used to show double features of second-run foreign (and probably other) films, sort of like some of the theaters on old 42nd St. in NYC. I don't remember the name of it it but I went there a lot after college.