Alameda Theatre

Built in 1932, this was the last of the eight theatres designed "from scratch" by Timothy Pflueger. His firm would design deco remodels for older theatres throughout the ensuing ten years, ending with the remodel of San Francisco's Metro in 1941.

Some of the Alameda's lobby furniture may still be enjoyed at the Oakland Paramount, where it fits right in.

The Alameda Theatre seated 2168 people.

Can someone hunt down Michael and kill him? or at the least delete his remarks?

Saw many movies in my youth at the Alameda. It rememded me of a smaller version of the Oakland Paramount. The Alameda has a great marquee. The Alameda was well maintained till the day it closed as a movie theatre.brucec

The Alameda in its latter years as a movie house was a triplex; its status (unfortunately like just about every other Alameda movie house) should be "Closed."

During the late '80's my daughter spent many hours at the gymnastics school in this building. Even with the seats removed, the building is beautiful. I was fortunate enough to get a tour of most of the building love it still, even though I haven't seen it in years.

An independent operator named Kyle Conner out of Santa Rosa has plans to remodel this venue into a 6 plex theatre. It has the potential to make thousands and thousands of dollars in this 90,000+
populated area. Currently, moviegoers much venture into Oakland or
Berkeley to view films where parking and safety can be problematic
depending on the hour of the day.

alameda theater 1954 thats where so many kids went on friday nights, cost 50 cents to get in and that was for a double feature not too many kids stayed for both movies, i always remember the theater manager with his too short red trousers kicking out row after row of kids for talking during the movie the kids never really seemed to mind . thanks leon theriault

Curiously, one consideration that's apparently not been looked at (at least as far as I know) is conversion of the Alameda into a concert hall or performance art center; seems to me that that would better preserve the architecture than a multiplex. It'd be a shame if the Alameda were to become another UA Berkeley.

Oh the memories !
I worked at the Alameda Theatre from 1975-78. I knew all the hidden passages, trap doors and hollow walls. Did you know the attic still had boxes of sand to throw on Japanese bombs during WWII ? Any question, just ask.
Ciao.

The City of Alameda is attempting to restore the old theatre, build a new building next door (for more screens) and build a 325 space parking garage next to that. Every effort will be made to restore the old theatre to it's original glory (within budget limitations). The Park Street Business Association (PSBA) is highly involved in this project. For further information please call PSBA 510-523-1392 or email us at parkstreet@alamedanet.net Our web site (shopparkstreet.com) will soon have a page devoted to the theatre project.

Geez! Every surviving movie theater has at least 10 screens. Not real movie theaters, though. Showcase Cinemas

In 1994, my band used the projection room as a rehearsal space. Although we hated hauling our equipment up those steep metal outside stairs, it was worth it just to be there. The interior was somewhat shabby, but still beautiful. When it is restored for use as a movie house again, I hope there won't be lots of new screens added. I understand the financial reasons, but I still wish all lovely old theatres could be kept at the minimum amount of screens.

By the looks of it, business on Park Street seems to be gaining momentum. New shops and restaurants seem to be popping up all over the place-- there's even a [gasp] Starbucks and a Peet's coffee situated across the street from each other-- big surprise. This factor in addition to the new huge housing development by the Webster tunnel will hopefully mean that restoration of the old theater will become a reality.

I read some great news in the Alameda Journal just the other day. The city just approved plans for rennovating the theater!! From what I gather, they are planning to restore the theater and then construct a 2 story multiplex adjacent to it. There are also plans for building a parking structure. Can't wait!

I'm glad to know they are restoring the theatre; but judging from the illustration on the front page of the Alameda Journal, I think the two-story building will overpower the area around it. A big multiplex seems so unnececssary, and ruins the small-town atmosphere of Alameda (like the many chain establishments that are now on Park Street).

No kidding! I saw the illustration and nearly had a heart attack. It looked as though they demolished the theater. Then I looked more closely and realized that the new theater was smothered next to the huge multiplex. The old movie palace should definitely remain the focal point of that area. To our town's dismay, it's been shown that the powers that be are lacking in the visual aeshtetics department. We need designer on board!

Unfortunately, I think the city feels that revenue from a multiplex with leaseable store fronts is the only way that they can pay for such a project. I'm also a bit concerned with all the traffic and safety issues that come along with a multiplex. Anyway you look at it, it is a double edged sword.

>>Then I looked more closely and realized that the new theater was smothered next to the huge multiplex.>>

Oops make that, the *old* theater was smothered by the multiplex.

A pity no one among the civic leaders apparently considered a community theater similar to the Berkeley Community Theatre. There are certainly groups and companies who could have utilized such a venue, adjacent multiplex or no.

To the comment about using the Alameda as a community theater-- Alameda has a 2000+ seat community theater a block away from this one. It is called Kofman Auditorium and is where the Alameda Civic Light Opera resides in the summer. I don't think another one is viable in this location.
I have been working to get this theater open since 1994 or thereabouts, when the 15 year non-competition clause expired. A few years ago, the city held an extensive workshop, public participation series of events on the whole Park Street business district, called the Park Street Visioning project. Through those workshops, it was found that among the participants, the renovation and reuse of the Alameda Theater AS A MOVIE HOUSE was the highest priority for revitalization of the entire district. Since that time, the city has put a lot of energy into finding someone to develop the theater. Their initial request for proposals generated exactly zero response, even though city help and some historic preservation tax credits are available. So they had to actively search high and low for a willing developer, and have been working and negotiating with the current one for about two years toward getting a viable project that would restore the theater. The project is in the "design review" process now. However, a certain group of johnny-come-lately "stop the multiplex" people are threatening to stop the whole project at this point. I don't know if they realize that the alternative to the adjoining multiplex and parking garage is not a restoration of the Alameda Theater, but the status quo-- no project, and the theater continuing to deteriorate under the current owner, who does not care about theaters and is satisfied to collect the rents from the current businesses while doing as little maintenance as possible.

As long as they don't plex it anymore than they already have, getting the true Alameda Theatre (and I only hesitate to say original because this is historicaly the "third" one) going again as a premier entertainment venue (movie house, performiing arts or whatever) should be the top priority.

I would highly recommend to have the Alameda Theater restored and open for business as it would help to bring business to Alameda and to boost up the economy.

Lily L.

I would highly recommend to have the Alameda Theater restored and open for business as it would help to bring business to Alameda and to boost up the economy.

Lily L.

I would highly recommend to have the Alameda Theater restored and open for business as it would help to bring business to Alameda and to boost up the economy.

Lily L.

Thank you, thank you, thank you Lily

Restoring the Alameda Theatre is obviously a plus all the way around. What worries me is the huge multiplex that they want to attach to it. Not only does it overwhelm the old structure and the surrounding area, it may cause a traffic nightmare in Alameda's lovely & charming "downtown". However, from kbb's comments above, it seems there is no happy medium.....so, I guess restoration + huge, unnecessary multi-plex is better than the current state of the theatre.

I don't know if it will help devildoll feel any better, but in the draft development agreement it is specified that the multiplex is supposed to be designed so that its eventual removal would not damage the historic theater at all.
Planning Board put some conditions and changes on their approval of the project, such as breaking up the large cast concrete panels on the sides, eliminating the sort of tower on the corner, changing the window treatments, etc., that may help with the overall look of the cineplex.
Also, look around Park Street. There are many really tall buildings-- the Masonic Temple (JavaRama on the street level), the historic high school, City Hall itself. The project replaces an ugly former drive-in and asphalt parking lot, and the wall of the historic theater is no great view either. When it was built there was a brick commercial building next to it hiding that wall.

There is now a petition for people who support the current plans to restore the Alameda and put up a cineplex next to it for more screens, along with the parking garage. You can get to it at http://www.ipetitions.com/campaigns/Alameda_Cineplex

The City may have put a lot of energy into finding the current developer but doesn't look like they put much effort into finding anyone else. The list they sent the Request for Proposals is pitiful—it almost looks like it was designed not to get a response. Two major developers accross the estuary in Oakland, one of them restoring the Fox, haven't even heard of it! I simply don't buy the notion that there aren't other options. There have been proposals in the past, and the City blew them off. If you read www.alamedadailynews.com you will know that things can happen even now with the Theater if the monster project stops. Besides, if Kyle Conner is such a great guy why are we paying for everything, and giving him a grant to boot? Oh yeah, and why does he get to equip the theaters, basically selling his own service to himself? Who is he, Haliburton?! Heck, if the City gave me such a sweet deal I'd quit my day job and restore the Theater myself! As far as the visioning goes, I remember that too. People voted to restore the old theater, not for this bloated plan. I'd hate to see the disappointment of these folks if the project goes through. Half of a historic theater and a monster attachment looks more like a nightmare than a vision to me. I hope that the chance of tearing down the multiplex if it doesn't work out is not the only thing helping people make up their minds.

It is true that when the city sent our the RFP they carefully selected who they would send it to, including Landmark Theaters, because it was important to find someone who would be interested in the historic theater restoration as a theater. This was because of a huge mistake they made earlier when they did go out to the big list of shopping center developers-- that resulted in the proposal of Trammel Crow, from Texas, to take over four blocks including the theater block and develop them to be like every other shopping district around-- complete with a Borders in the historic theater! Not one of those shopping center developers was interested in putting a theater in the theater! The outrage over this plan is what led to the Downtown Visioning process, where most of us who participated wanted a movie theater in the theater. So why should they have sent their RFP to the same people who wanted to ruin our downtown?
Kyle Conner has stuck with the process while the other developer, Atlas, pulled out over a year ago. And I don't know who the developer is that is to restore the Oakland Fox, but the funding situation for that project is not great-- please go to the Friends of the Oakland Fox site http://www.foxoakland.org for details. And contrary to what is being said, the developer has to put in at least $7.2 million according to the DDA. Yes, go to the www.alamedadailynews.com and look at the pictures of the proposal-- on the Central Avenue elevation the Alameda Theater is only shown as a corner of itself on the right, but you can clearly see the cineplex part is not as tall as even the lowest corner of the Alameda Theater. The other proposals in the past were not "blown off"; the Michaan proposal in the mid '90's got quite far but broke down over the parking problem, is my recollection. There were several hearings on it. I don't know of any other proposals that were "blown off" other than Trammel Crow, which was run out of town by citizen objections.

Alameda has a rare jewel of a theatre. Designed by a famous local architect whose stylistic brilliance is responsible for the unprecedented flair of the nearby Oakland Paramount. The Alameda shares many architectural features with its famous sister-theatre and the building has suffered over the years but is basically sound. Still sitting proud above all the street level shops surrounding it. Whilst the City Council is trying to regenerate the downtown area they have no real faith in the building itself. If they did they would not be attempting this dreadfully ill-conceived and half-baked restoration. The building is not huge. Originally only seating just over 2000 people in art deco splendor.

The proposal is to restore elements of the original theatre (alarm bells ringing yet?) by reopening the original front orchestra section (a proposed 400+ seats!). They claim to be restoring the area that can be seen from those seats facing the proscenium and above. The balcony will remain unrestored with its two 1970’s box cinemas not planned for re-use…. but possibly in the future. The orchestra section will have the roller skating rink floor taken out and replaced with a stadium seating floor (?!) The lobby will be restored faithfully with the addition of new ticket office, merchandise area and candy counters. Some of this will be placed underneath the balcony section. The beautiful upper lobby and mezzanine lounge left closed. There will then be holes punched through the outer walls to allow access to the hideous multiplex and associated car park they plan to build next door. The graceful façade, marquee and blade sign, restored, but now joined to a multiplex and car park building that are so far from discreet and harmonious, you wonder if the new architects have ever seen the original building!

In what world is this any sort of restoration? What is the point of even calling this a restoration if there isn’t a single aspect of it that is not compromised in some way. Its high time the City of Alameda woke up to the real horror that is about to wreck this rare gem. The City Council should hang their heads in shame for even suggesting such an ill-conceived scheme to denigrate the centrepiece of their revitalised downtown. If the project is as vital as they keep proclaiming it to be, have enough faith to restore the whole theatre for starters. Alameda is not such a small city is cannot support another large community venue. The original theatre can be used for multiple uses as well as showing occasional films. Build the multiplex and car park if you must but let it sit gracefully alongside the original building, contributing to it architecturally as well as economically, it IS possible.

Citizens of Alameda please stop letting the City Council and others fool you into believing this is a restoration, it is the desecration of a very worthwhile part of your community.

I really don't understand the previous comment about this being a desecration. There is now a site put up by the city that tells about the project at http://www.ci.alameda.ca.us/theater/ . All of the work is being done according to National Trust for Historic Preservation guidelines. There is no way that the city can get the historic preservation grants that are needed if anything is done that ruins the theater. I love the Paramount and would love to see the theater completely restored-- that day may come, but this project gets us partway there. If Mr. Faulkner would like to donate the additional $15 million or so that is needed for complete restoration, I am sure that we here in Alameda would appreciate it. I am not thrilled about the design of the new buildings next door, but they will replace an ugly weedy surface parking lot and a schlocky former hamburger stand. I have followed the fate of the theater for more than 20 years-- this is our chance to save it. There is a better 2000 seat venue for stage performances one block away from this theater and we in Alameda sit in the shadow of San Francisco, Oakland, and Berkeley when it comes to regional stage performances. Our Alameda Civic Light Opera cannot even support itself on ticket prices and low rent, let alone support a multi-million dollar theater restoration! I resent the comments about the City Council pulling the wool over our eyes-- the whole project has been conceived and negotiated in response to citizen request. Without the city's redevelopment bonds, nothing would be happening with the theater except its continued deterioration. The past has been a desecration-- you should see the inside of the theater currently, it's a disgrace-- and this project will save the building and its historic features. The stadium seating is removable if fashions in seating change. The original seating is not available.

Gee whiz, just because I agree with a lot of other Alamedans that is an ill-conceived and foolish approach to a restoration I’m supposed to stump up $15 million and pay for it myself?!!! Get a life.

There is a lot of objection to this project and it’s getting louder. There are a lot of local politics interfering with the issue of restoring this priceless gem. It is blatantly obvious that the city council has raced into this current incarnation and is being led down the path by the developers. The developers are being given big cash incentives and the city council believe they have made a good decision but its been made in haste and was their only option. There were no other developers approached since the previous attempt failed in the 1990s. This project is rotten at the core and the site is being leased to developers for a ridiculously low rate of 9c per square foot. The council feel that they will make big bucks from movie admissions to cover their investment. The figures they are using are artificially high have don’t take into account the BIG downturn in attendances. I though part of the point in doing it this way was for the funds made at the box office by the City Council were supposed to finance further so-called restoration. I can see this won’t be happening for some time.

The whole point of my raising these issues is that it affects the quality of the restoration as this IS Cinema Treasures. You only get one good crack at it. Lets start with how do you justify building a hideous eyesore around a listed building? Just because over the years small low-level businesses have become run down they have to be replaced with something so inappropriate as this ineptly designed multiplex? Then the City Council claim loudly this is improving downtown. Having a city official defend the project last week by saying “I truly believe that this is the best plan we’re capable of doing.” is pretty desperate.

Then you take the original graceful and unique building and you really desecrate it. If you compromise it first off you spend more time and lots more money down the line getting it right. How is putting a 480 seat cinema inside an area that once seated 2000 a good place to start? How is seating in in a style that is modern appropriate to the deco style you are supposed to be restoring? Then you neglect the rest of the building or hide it.There are massive holes in the ceiling that aren’t even going to be repaired! Then the developers have so little faith in the building that you punch holes in it so that people are forced to enter the main building to get into the multiplex. Guess which part gets most restored? The Lobby, because that leads to the multiplex. To top it all off you call it a ‘restoration’ and a lot of fools believe you. What is sorely needed here is some respect for this once grand theatre and a total rethink.

Thankfully there are several organisations in Alameda who are not fooled. stopalamedamegaplex.com and alamedadailynews.com are both at the forefront of asking why this has gone so far and how to raise objections. I suggest the poster of the above, kbb try those for a dose of reality.

OK, Mr. Faulkner, do you really live in the UK or are you here in Alameda? If you were here five years ago, or had read my previous posts you would know that the city went through an extensive, and totally democratic process to come up with this idea. The outcome of the public hearings and workshops called "Downtown Visioning" which took place in 2000 was that the reopening of the Alameda Theater AS A PLACE FOR FIRST RUN MOVIES (my emphasis) was the top priority for revitalization of downtown. Since then, the city searched high and low for someone who would be able to do that. First they tried to find someone to open a one to three screen in the original-- no takers. Existing one to three screens are not doing well right now-- and this one needs a lot of work. So fortunately there is land next door where a modern cineplex can be built, and that is the proposal that has been negotiated for three years to come up with something workable for the whole package, theater restoration/rehabilitation, modern cineplex, and parking garage. There are no big surprises here. If the city spent $25-$30 million to restore the theater exactly the way it was, and was able to lease it to a movie operator at the going rate of $1.30/square foot, that would give only about $26,000 per year, and that is provided the city could find an operator for it, not a guarantee. It is currently rented at only about $2000/year. If the city voted to do this and then spent another $8 million for the necessary parking garage, I guarantee that Alamedans would go wild and oust their reps from office for fiscal reasons. This proposal allows Alameda to spend only $9 million for the theater restoration, the developer spends another $8-9 million on the cineplex, the city spends $8 million on the parking garage, and owns the theater, the parking garage, and the land under the cineplex. Nothing will be ruined, according to the preservation consultants, there are holes (not giant holes) in the ceiling, but not the roof, that may not be repaired right away because it is not in the budget, and because of budget we will not be able to apply the original gold leaf finishes on interiors. Oh, and another thing, having the cineplex next door will allow compliance with ADA without having to have ramps inside the historic building compromising the original architecture. It is in no way a desecration, it is a start. City Council requested modifications to the cineplex building exterior to make it less modern-looking on Tuesday.

The Alameda theatre should look pretty good if the city is going to spend 8-9 million on the restoration. Disney spent 6 million on ripping out the 1940's modern design and restored the 1920's architecture on the El Capitan in Hollywood ten years ago.I can't believe fixing the holes in the ceiling is not in the budget. Has the City applied for federal grants to help with the restoration. Im not happy about the stadium seating being put in the main auditorium I think slope seating along the lines of the original would be more appropriate. Stadium seating was put in the Egyptian in Hollywood and it looks horrible. The front part of the balcony was never divided, the box theatres were built in the rear of the balcony. The Alameda ceiling and walls seem to be a simple deco design which could easily be restored. Is most of the money being spent on ripping out the roller rink floor and putting in stadium seating?. The last film I saw at the Alameda was back in 1974 "Thats Entertainment". I hope restoring the marquee is in the budget. Good luck to everyone I hope the theatre is headed in the right direction.brucec

Yes, they are using federal grants-- that is part of the 9 million. Restoring the marquee is in the budget, and the interior light fixtures. There are lots of things they are missing, though, some chandeliers were used in the Paramount restoration, there is a large mirror from the lobby or the mezzanine that is missing. A lot of the expense is for seismic, a lot of it for ripping out the cement slab poured for the roller rink without damaging anything, and also to find a leak and repair water damage that has probably been continuous for a number of years. It has not been a working theater for 26 years--was the El Capitan ever vacant? I understand that the whole concrete facade is held up by 4 redwood posts. I am not thrilled about the stadium seating either, but there is no reason it couldn't be ripped out and sloped seating installed later. The restoration standards specify that it must be removable without damaging the historic features.

I just looked at the pictures of the interior of the Egyptian on the architects site-- Yech! It does look terrible. In the case of the Alameda, buffer walls were put in for the roller rink which will be removed and the ornamentation is behind them. The walls of the auditorium are to be preserved-- the niches will be cleaned and some metal leaf reapplied at water damage areas and light fixtures restored. There are going to be some acoustical panels installed on the concrete piers for THX rating. But my understanding is that the side walls and the proscenium arch, orchestra pit and stage will look much the same as they originally did, except some worn because they are not being restored, just cleaned and preserved. There are some good old pictures at http://www.ci.alameda.ca.us/theater/overview.html , follow the links to "Historical Photos." So there will be stadium seating put in, yes, but the modernistic stuff of the Egyptian on the walls is not to be put in the Alameda. The new concession stand will be under the balcony, as in the Egyptian.

There is now a Web site, friendsofalamedatheater.org , for the rehabilitation project.

Dear kbb, you are well meaning but deceived. Let me start by saying that there have been offers to operate the theater as exactly the 1-3 screen theater envisioned by citizens, showing first run and other films. The people making the offers were told to wait, until the City hammered out the sweetheart deal with the developer, and then it was all over. You can see the details on www.stopalamedamegaplex.com I suggest you educate yourself by reading the rest of the site too. Second, Conner (the developer) is not going to do anything in the old theater except install the stadium seating about which you are not thrilled, and the projection equipment (his primary business is selling theater equipment, get it? http://www.cinematecs.com/products.htm) The City is going to foot the entire bill for the proposed work on the theater. Can you explain why they need Conner? He is not putting in a penny—in fact he is borrowing from the City (on very good terms) to build his multiplex. Oh, I know—because we've been told that a 3-screen theater would not be successful unless there are 7 more C-rated movies to choose from? Let's talk about what successful means to who? The multiplex makes sense for Conner because it would increase his bottom line (more screens, more time movies play, bigger percentage for him). It doesn't make sense to the City to have a multiplex built—more screens will not put more money into City's coffers, unlesss the City was the operator (and neither will they bring the revitalization PSBA hopes for—see Hayward, San Jose, etc. for spectacular failures) . There is no sales tax from movie tickets, so it doesn't matter to the City how many screens are there really. The only sales tax comes from concessions. Granted, more screens, more popcorn sold, but can you really justify the subsidy of a begemoth multiplex just to get the sales tax on the popcorn?! the point is, kbb, that the City is helping a private developer make money by subsidizing his project with public bonds, and not expecting anything back, or rather expecting a net loss in the millions. They admitted this much at the City Council meeting on August 16. Remember Marie Gillmore going on and on how the City must invest the money in the old theater, she called it an albatross, in order to fulfil the desire of the people? This begs the very reasonable question, if that's the case, why spend even more on a multiplex? Give the people what they want—the Theater restored—and send Conner to ruin somebody else's town. One of the offers which I mentioned earlier was proposing to lease the theater and resore it over time at their own expense. They were apparently confident they would be successful. Don't you think that if the theater is already partially restored, as the City proposes to do, it'd be even easier to find someone to complete it and run it—especially if they got the very low lease the City is offering Conner? i guarantee you that if the original solicitation specified the amount of public subsidy of the project, including theater parking, the City propbably would have gotten a very different response. The game has changed—public money is now being used to restore the theater, and the public should have the final say as to what else, if anything, they want to spend it on. One thing you gor right, kbb, is that the public is quite capable of ousting their reps for fiscal reasons—except that the reasons are not the hypothetical ones you list, but the ones specified in the contract with Conner. You can read that too at www.stopalamedamegaplex.com

I have followed the fate of the theater for 20 some years, and have read everything on the stopmegaplex site-- there is nothing new there, and lots of misinformation. My question about these various proposals that supposedly arose in the last three years-- why didn't they get something together prior to that? After 2000, it was quite apparent that redevelopment funds were going to be used.
Once the city signed an exclusive negotiating agreement, in 2002 I believe, how exactly would they negotiate with someone else without being sued?

The other actual proposals that came around in about 1995 and 1997 were including extra screens, off to the side, just like this proposal. At the time, the city was unwilling to spend redevelopment money to solve the parking problem, so neither of those proposals went through because of the city's failure to solve that issue.
Obviously, pink, you disagree that having a cineplex downtown can be an anchor project that increases sales in the rest of downtown. I feel it can be, and if you have been to downtown Hayward and downtown San Jose, there is quite a difference between those cities in terms of what they did there and how the place feels than there is and will be in Park Street downtown, my neighborhood. Also, the city is not buying the Cinematecs company's equipment-- the developer has to spend $1.2 million of his own money at minimum on it, so since it is his own company I am sure he can get more for less. He is financing $7.2 million of the project privately and borrowing $2.4 million from the city, so I would disagree that he is not putting "a penny" into the project. The city needs and operator for the theater-- they don't want to be it themselves-- and Conner is available and stuck with the project when the other partner, Atlas, dropped out. All these people who say that they have a proposal that is financially sound-- I say, put the details on the stopmegaplex site and I will look at them-- meanwhile, I want this project to save the theater.

Wouldn't the base be a better site for a megaplex? For one thing, access from outside Alameda would be easier -- take the tube, turn right on Atlantic, then down to the cineplex -- and would pose far less traffic for the rest of the island. Access from within the island would be via Atlantic, Lincoln, Central. Plenty of options. Good public trans. can also move people up & down the lsland. Transmogrifying the historic theater into a multiplex with a six story parking garage attached would pose problems on all fronts: aesthetic, environmental, and economic. Aesthetically, it would ruin the historic, folksy feel of Oak/Central and Park while also obliterating the existing horizon and clashing with surroundings. Environmentally, there's increased traffic, noise, competition for parking, and the general disruption attracted by that kind of impersonal, mall atmosphere. In short, quality of life deteriorates. Economically, how will the thing pay for itself if tickets aren't taxable and the lease is so cheap? The trend is away from multiplexes now, especially with home entertainment taking over. The proposed garage can't support a full house -- and that is assuming that the place draws. The result: cars search for parking in the already crowded neighborhood and among the reduced curbside spaces. It's lose-lose: the original theater gets lost in the project; attendance at 6 C-grade movies and one B-grade film is likely to follow the existing, downward trend; and the community suffers more cars, noise, bad air, and congestion. The unique flavor of the area gets replaced by an anywhere-USA, generic landscape.

Put a multi-plex on the base, restore the Alameda Theater in the mode of the Grand Lake and Orinda -- subdivide the upstairs into two small boxes, restoring the big one down stairs to its retro glory -- and get someone who knows what they're doing to operate it. Instead of a six-level garage, make it three, shoving one underground. The solution to the rest of the parking scarcity is satellite lots.

The most compelling argument I've heard in favor of the megaplex is that parents don't like hauling kids or family off the island for a movie. Safety is an issue. Absolutely. And to that I would say that a three-screen mini-plex, properly run, is the answer. Meanwhile, Jack London and Emeryville (2 complexes there) are much closer and/or more easily accessible than the megaplexes that families further out in the east bay must travel for a movie. Let CineArts operate a three-screen, putting family or kid films on the two smaller screens and 'art' films on the big one. When the art film's crowd tapers off, move it to one of the small boxes and screen an occasional kid or family film in the main theater. It can be done.

It's true there is plenty of land for a theater on the base, but the traffic issues are even worse. Access is only through the tube at that end of town.
As far as the historic, folksy feel of the Oak/Central/Park-- I can only say that historic Alameda was very tall-- there was a huge tower on City Hall, also one on the building where Starbucks is now. I don't see why the cineplex extension isn't being considered an improvement to the existing streetscape as the building itself will fit in better with the surroundings than a weedy parking lot! Also, they are presently changing the design as directed by City Council to make it more compatible with the surrounding buildings, while still complying with the SHPO requirements to be clearly differentiated from the historic building.

New Web site: http://www.savealamedatheater.com .

the problem with the megaplex and garage is not only height but massing. Anything built on this corner needs to match the massing of the surrounding buildings and have setbacks to match the Historic High school and other civic buildings. kbb who claims to belong to the architectural preservation society should know better. also, the city is citing the zoning ordinance requirement for building to the property line as if it is the bible and not willing to concede on setbacks, at the same time they are allowing a height exceding the zoning height by 45%! The mass of these buildings will completely drown everything in the immediate neighborhood, and turn Oak Street into a canyon. You don't need to wait and see, just imagine. Take a slow walk down Oak street and visualize the 6 story garage. I guarantee you that if they build it, kbb, you would hate it too, but it would be too late. The saddest part is that the so called Planning department knows and cares nothing about city planning and is solid in the pockets of developers and other real estate sharks, while those who do and are trying to do something about their town are marginalized and labeled crazies. sad!

Yes, I have belonged to Alameda Architectural Preservation Society for 20 years since I moved to Alameda and my husband has belonged even longer, 32 years; of course it was called AVPS then because it was started to stop the destruction of Victorian buildings. The entire block does not have the setbacks of the buildings civic buildings pink describes-- it has the setback of the commercial block it is next to on Park Street. Twin Towers is also not set back. I totally disagree there is any problem with the massing.

Try this link for a slideshow of 20 historic photographs:

http://www.ci.alameda.ca.us/theater/overview.html

Wow what beautiful pictures! I had no idea it was in such good condition even in the 70's. It's hard to imagine how something so gorgeous can deteriorate so quickly.

This is another photo of the Alameda Theater.

Here is a recent 2006 photo of the Alameda Theater.

Here is a July 13, 2006 story about this theater:

"By Hanna Tamrat, STAFF WRITER

ALAMEDA -- An Alameda County judge has thrown out a legal challenge to the controversial Alameda Theater project because it was filed too late.

Superior Court Judge Bonnie Sabraw earlier this month denied a citizens group's petition asking Alameda to prepare an environmental impact report for the project. Sabraw heard the case April 27.

In October, Citizens for a Megaplex-Free Alameda filed a lawsuit alleging that the size and scope of the project would mar the neighborhood's quaint historical nature, increase traffic and conflict with land-use plans for the downtown Park Street district.

The Alameda Theater project calls for construction of a seven- screen, two-story cineplex with ground-floor retail and a six-story garage as part of the renovation of the historic theater at 1416 Oak St.

Sabraw ruled that the citizens group waited too long to file a petition. She said it should have done so no later than 30 days after the city signed an agreement in early May 2005 with developer Alameda Entertainment Associates and adopted a declaration stating the project's environmental impacts could be mitigated.

Members of the citizens group maintain they followed proper time lines.

"We were busy participating in the administrative process provided by law," said Ani Dimusheva, a member of the group. "The law does not require us to sue before the project use permits and design were even approved."

The project did not come before the Historic Advisory Board, the Planning Board or the City Council until last summer, she said, adding that's when its massive size was revealed to the public.

In July 2005, while Alameda residents signed petitions and protested against the project, the citizens group appealed the Planning Board's June approval of the project to the City Council.

A divided City Council rejected the appeal in August and a subsequent appeal of another use permit and design review approval by the Board in November.

The group then used the legal venue as a final resort.

Judge Sabraw's decision didn't surprisethe city staff.

"We are pleased that the judge vindicated the city's position, because we think we did absolutely everything above and beyond the minimum requirements of the environmental review," said David Brandt, assistant city manager.

Meanwhile, the city has contracted with Overaa Construction of Richmond to build a parking structure and is negotiating a bid with the same company to restore the art-deco theater.

The citizens' group has 60 days to appeal the judge's decision to a higher court, but has not decided whether to do so, Dimusheva said.

(c) 2006 Oakland Tribune. Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning. All rights Reserved.


The link to the website hosting this story is here.

Here is another recent photo of the Alameda Theater.

I found a new 2006 photo of this Alameda Theater.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/echoman/239461013/

Living in Alameda as a boy, I must state that I miss those wonderful days deeply. Along with the Old Rio on Park st. Many Saturdays were spent in the theater. I remember when "Trantula" came out and, then they ran "King Kong" wonderful movies. haha. You must remember to a young boy these adventuresome films were great and not forgotten. The alameda like the Oaland Fox, Paramount was really a first rate theater. I saw many wonderful films there.
When I see that these memories of the past are fading and, the wonderful years gone by, my heart sinks with sadness. The young today will never experience those great times. When "Rock Around the Clock" blasted on to the screen as the intro to Blackboard Jungle, the whole theater went nuts with teenagers dancing in the aisles. It was an experience that can't be forgotten either.
The Alameda theater was beatiful in decor. well organized and maintained. It was never dirty or dingy. It was first class in Alameda.

I think that Timothy Pfluger would turn in his grave finding out that the main floor of this wonderful theatre is being turned into stadium style seating, with only 450 seats?

I was born and have lived in San Francisco for most of my entire life. Now that I live in Alameda, it would be a great revenue for Alameda to revive and remodel the Alameda Theater so the Alameda residents don't have to get out of the island to across town to watch a movie or 2. My cousin, Frank Lee and his wife Lida Lee own 2 theaters in San Francisco: Presidio Theater and the 4 Star Theaters. He is planning to revive and remodel the Cinema 21 Theater to open up a 3rd theater in San Francisco so the San Francisco residents have movie theaters to go to watch great movies! For more information of the movies and showtimes at the 4 Star and the Presidio Theaters in San Francisco, check the website: www.4starmovietheatre.net For information of movies and showtimes at the Central Cinema Theater in Alameda, check the website: www.centralcinema.net

Lily Leung

So they are putting stadium seating in? That doesn't sound like a bad thing.

The Alameda Theatre rehabilitation is moving along very well. Seismic upgrades are pretty much finished inside the building. New pillars in the front of the theatre will be poured soon. Much more importantly, work is progessing on the ceilings. Once done, scaffolding will come down and work on the walls and floors will begin. Ornate details on walls and ceilings will be fixed as the budget allows.

If Timothy Pfluger were designing theatres today, he'd be designing them with stadium seating. The new rehabilitated main auditorium of the historic theatre is going to be a everyday working auditorium. Without stadium seating and the best sound system available it wouldn't be able to compete in the very competitive Bay Area market.

The exterior of the historic theatre is not being changed (except for the enlarging of two existing exit doors that will connect the old with the new) for the new 7 screen cineplex or the new parking garage. In fact, great care was taken when the foundations of the two new buildings were poured to not undermine the existing foundation of the historic theatre.

On another note, not only did the opponents of the project lose their initial court case, they've lost their appeal and the appeal court refused to rehear the appeal. They now claim they're going to appeal to the state supreme court. Both the original judge and the three appeals judges ruled that not only were they wrong in their assertion of what constituted the approval of the project (why they loss because of not filing lawsuit within 30 days of approval) both decisions went on to say that even if they had filed on time, they would have lost because they failed to prove their case. I doubt if the Supreme Court will even hear the case.

The entire project should be complete by this time next year.

Greetings to the people of Alameda from Ray Jordan, former co-owner and operator of the dance club in the lobby of the old Alameda Theater, known as the "Twilight Zone" on Friday and Saturday for young people and Big Band Swing on Sunday for us older folks. This old Art Deco building holds a lot of special memories for many of us. I know it does for me. On "MySpace.com" there are countless messages from former patrons, now in their 30s and 40s, reminiscing about the "good old days" (LOL) at the Twilight Zone twenty years ago.

In the mid-80's there was much talk about tearing down the old theater. A group called the "Friends of the Alameda Theater", through their strenuous efforts, kept it from being turned into a pile of rubble. Had it not been for them, there would be NO discussion about a MegaPlex theater today. Count your blessings.

We left the Bay Area in 2000 to become full-time RVers and world travelers. For the past year or so our latest adventure has been renovating a 26 room mansion built in 1837, transforming it into a Bed and Breakfast (www.allegroguesthouse.com) in the Adirondacks in upstate New York. Most of the 665 people in this tiny town appreciate us breathing life back into this old relic, though there are probably a few who don't. Oh well. If Bill Gates were to announce that he was giving every person in Alameda a million dollars, you can bet someone would form a small group to oppose his generosity. Go figure...

Our plans are to get back to full-time RVing in the near future. We look forward to visiting old friends and family in Alameda, as well as seeing the progress and changes in the Alameda Theater. We'd love to be there for the Grand Opening.

We understand that, since we left the Bay Area, there have been major changes, such as the second bridge to Vallejo as well as a second bridge being constructed to Treasure Island. This is called PROGRESS. We all need to get used to it, and life goes on.

This is a recent photo of the Alameda Theater.

This is a June 1933 program for the Alameda Theater in four parts. Part one, Part two, Part three, and Race night.

Robb thanks for the info on the remodel. It will be great, the movie people of Alameda will have a big movie theatre to go to again. Hope they put in a big curved scope screen in the main theatre. And curtains that work. The stereo will sound great in the old Alameda. Do you know how big the smaller cinemas will be on the side building? When will be the grand opening?

Terry and all other interested theatre lovers:

The work is really coming along. Steel for the second story of the new cineplex has been installed. Much more importantly, the scaffolding inside the historic theatre has come down. The ceilings and up high work has been completed and I'm told looks great. I'm touring the theatre tomorrow and will have new pictures on the Park Street website "shopparkstreet.com" by Thursday.

I don't know if the downstairs auditorium in the historic theatre will have a curved scope screen, but I do know the screen will be either the biggest or second biggest in Northern California. The original curtain is being restored and will be installed later this year. The developer, Kyle Conner, had the THX people out to test if that sound system would work. However it pans out, the historic theatre will have the best sound system possible. The last time I saw plans for the cineplex, the number of seats ranged from 300 in the largest auditorium to about 125 in the smallest. The main auditorium in the historic theatre will have about 500 seats. The opeing of the new cineplex and the historic theater should take place in early March of next year. For the latest and greatest on the project go to the city of Alameda web site or to ours, shopparkstreet.com. Between the two of us you can really see how the project is shaping up.

Best Regards,
Robb Ratto
PSBA, Executive Director

Another recent photo of the Alameda Theater can be seen here.

I'd like "Lost Memory" to contact me at "parkstreetrobb@alamedanet.net" We are planning the grand re-opening celebration for the Alameda Theatre and would like to see the program from 1933 you posted on this site. We want our graphic people to see it to use as a template for our program.

Please email me.

Best Regards,
Robb Ratto
PSBA, Executive Director

The Alameda Theater program is hosted on this website. You will have to contact the operator of that website to get permission to use the program. Scroll to the bottom of the page on that website and you can send an email. The program is also on that page.

I wish the Alameda success with there theatre. Is the Mezzanine portion of the theatre going to be used when the historic theatre reopens. Even when the theatre was tripexed the Mezzanine was kept with the main Auditorium. I hope the stadium seating in the historic house does justice to the theatre and not look horrible the way it does with the Egyptian in Hollywood. Most historic movie theatres always had a portion of the theatre as stadium seating either in the back Lodge area or in the balcony of the theatre. The El Capitan in Hollywood was restored many years ago now and the most popular seats are in the Mezzanine portion of the theatre. I have seen many movies here since the restoration and people race to the Mezzanine when they would let the line of people into the theatre.brucec

I just took a hard hat tour Of the Alameda Theatre and talked with several people incuding Ken Koch who is working on the poject. The Lobby looks fabulous as well as the Auditorium. They have a new slope for Stadium seating that looks tastefully down. They have expanded the lobby into the back of the house for concessions which will service the entire multiplex.The Vertical Marquee has been restored and they are currently working on the canopy.I took a tour of the BaLcony which has been undivided but is not being restored at this time. I was told that more money was needed to restore the Balcony which isn't in that bad of shape a little paint,restoration and seats.I wish the City of Alamdeda would step in and furnish the funds for the Balcony which then could be used for many civic events. I would at least restore the lodge part of the Balcony which are the best seats in the house. The painting has been done by Evergreen who is also working on the Fox Oakland. The Main Auditorium still needs its seats and light fixtures.I must say Im impressed by what I have seen thus far. The multiplex which is being built next store still has ways to go before competion.The historic Alameda lobby will connect to the new multiplex. This is the first time I have been in the Alameda since I saw "Thats Entertainment" in 1975. Ken Koch who I talked to at length grew up In Alameda and saw many movies during his youth at the theatre. He heads up the decorative electrical elements of the theatre and has been on site during the past four weeks and this is the first time he has been in the theatre in decades.I think the citizens of Alameda will be pleased and should insist that the Balcony be restored.brucec

If anyone's interested, the marquee was lit up this weekend and I took a photo:
http://flickr.com/photos/gwen/2044845472/

Looks pretty swank though the lettering on the vertical looks atypically thin for this kind of design from that era. I've only seen [in person and in photos] the pre-restoration marquee, does anyone have photos of it in its original state?

During a recent tour of the under-construction Alameda I was given a couple of weeks ago, I was told that the colors of paint now on the vertical sign and marquee are replicated after the originals, which were found by scraping. They are consistent with the colors of signage popular at the time--definitely Jazz Age-- orange and black being often combined with greens, blues, aquas, and turquoises for a very dramatic effect.

Also, the great amount of red neon on the signage is constistent with other theatres designed by Pflueger. In the late 1980s, I remember the marquee of the Pflueger-remodeled New Mission in San Francisco. Its marquee is very similar in design to that of the Alameda, albeit not as wide, being on a narrower facade. It was in near perfect operation at the time, and all the tubing, including the lettering, was red. I don't know about the New Mission's vertical sign tower as I never saw that in operation. A friend who grew up going to Pflueger's El Rey in San Francisco (now a church, and the neon's gone) tells me that the marquee and signage of that theatre had a similarly red-dominant neon color scheme.

The parking garage and megaplex is huge, ugly and I am sad. When you view the corner from Peet's coffee all you see is a massive wall of concrete. The Twin Towers and City Hall are completely block from view.
When I first heard circa 2004 that they were planning to build this massive parking structure I wrote city development and told them about my worries. They told me not to worry and they are not in the design phase yet. circa 2005 when it was in design phase I wrote and became more involved and was told (as well as many others) I was too late, we should have made our stance known earlier... Now I wonder if my original letter was ever passed on to the correct people or if it was dumped into the trash.
I was never against the renovation of THE THEATER I was against the parking garage and the megaplex. It is ugly, ugly, ugly

Here is a story from the Alameda Magazine January-February 2008.

This is another photo of the Alameda Theater.

The marquee soffit is now restored and operational, with a firmament of yellow, red, and blue bulbs. The effect is spectacular!

I took a photo of the cineplex addition yesterday. They've added the stucco walls and windows.

Here is the link to the grand opening gala on 5/21 and the family opening event on 5/24: alamedatheatreopening.com

This link should be the "Related Websites" link for this theater.

Alameda Grand Re-Opening photo.

Any one know if the theatre is near a BART station, or any public transit from San Francisco?

We recently saw a show Ironman in the new theater. Our ticket shows theater 5. When we first got in the theater it was chaos, no one showed us where theater 5 was. We finally figured out it was on the second floor, but the signs says Indiana Jones. One movie goer went downstairs to ask and verified Ironman will be showing up there. So we waited until Indiana Jones is over, normally the cleaning crew would come in and clean the theater, we waited and finally decided no one will be cleaning. We got in the theater and sat down and waited for the show. My son decided to go downstairs to buy refreshments, but decided the line is too long. On his way up an usher asked him where he was going so he said to watch Ironman.. the usher told him that Ironman is not showing upstairs, but downstairs in theater 4. I lined up to buy refreshments, the place was messy, wet counters and the counter crew was in chaos and confused. One girl opened the popcorn machine, not knowing it was in the process of popping kernels. She finally realized this when the lid opened up and few kernels hit her on the face. Overall... this place needs better management, training for the theater crew, tickets should be accurate, lines should be manage, better signs...etc...

Jackeboy--
Here is how to get there by public transit:
Take BART to the Fruitvale station. Take the AC Transit 50 bus to Park and Santa Clara stop. Walk one block south and one half block west to the theater.

We went to the opening gala on Thursday, and also to see Indiana Jones on Saturday night. The 7 pm show in the main theater was sold out so we bought tickets for the 8:15 pm show in theater 5. We found our seats, very comfy, and everything seemed fine for us. This showing also sold out. The show started about 3 minutes late but I think that was because people were trying to find places to sit together in the theater with only 1 seat gaps left. There was a Coke left in my seat cupholder from the previous show that I got up and threw away, so cleaning crew may need some more training. But overall, things seemed to run smoothly and I am so glad to have the main theater restored-- it looks fabulous.

This theatre is beautiful, and the renovation of it into a modern cineplex is tasteful. I was completely against the building of the ugly parking garage and multiplex addition, and still am not crazy to have them here. That aside, the original building is fantastic. A wall in the lobby (opposite the original main entrance) has been carved out for a new snack bar, which now sits in the back of where the auditorium used to begin, but that is the only big change that I noticed. The murals on the upstairs mezzanine are in fragments, and hopefully will be restored soon. It's been a dream of mine, for years to see this place showing movies again, and seeing the neon sign lit up at night is gorgeous and uplifting. I went to see "Indiana Jones" on Thursday night, for the 7pm showing, in the main auditorium. The screen was open upon entering the theatre, which was a bit disappointing, seeing as the lovely original curtain is still there. I know they are likely experiencing growing pains right now with the theatre just opening, but I was annoyed to find the brand new movie was badly scratched all the way through (after just a couple showings). I can only imagine this was the fault of an untrained or neglectful projectionist. The picture was out of focus for the first 20 minutes of the presentation, and there was the shadow of the film frame along the bottom and right side of the screen. The sound system is good, however. After watching this film, I went to check out the screening of "Singing in the Rain" that was happening on one of the newer screens. After a delay, because the film was threaded backwards (!), the movie ran fine. I noticed that both with the newer screens, as well as the main auditorium, however, that the screen material is highly reflective, resulting in glare (depending on where one is sitting). This is especially aggravating because it distracts from the movie. Hopefully as time passes, they will get their bearings and improve on the presentations, because the theatre itself is stunning, and a jewel for this city.

Saw Indiana Jones in main theater last night. I would not step one foot into the new addition, no matter how hard my husband tried. (I was never against the renovation, I was against the megaplex and the garage). What I did see from the doorway, the additon looked sterile. The original theater though is beautiful!!!
The one and only time I had been in that lobby was when it was a dance club in the 90s. I was trying to remember what my 16 year old self saw 16 years ago. My husband on the other hand who was a regular at said dance club went around and told me how these doors were always chained shut, how they used to hang out in this stairwell, how the DJ booth was over here. how these couches used to be red etc.

What a joy! I lived just a couple of blocks from this beautiful building in 1961-62. Even at a young age, this place impressed me. It says something about the propriety of movies in that era that we went to the Alameda every Tuesday evening. It just excites me that folks had the foresight (not to mention money) to get this done. I live far away now, so I won't see it in the foreseeable future, but maybe some day . . .

After all that work on restoring the marquee a too high for clearance Pepsi truck (presumably delivering to the theatre) did some significant damage to a corner of it within a week of the grand opening. It will be repaired of course but it's an eyesore right now.

The theater is quite beautiful itself, especially the lobby and main auditorium. I have no problem with the adjoining multiplex addition either. If people think a large single screen theater is going to survive showing movies alone in today's market they are dreaming. The addition was a much better idea than dividing the original theater. As for the parking garage that was pretty much a necessity in downtown Alameda with the increased traffic the Alameda will hopefully generate. I don't think that building housing the multiplex and garage is all that ugly either. Hey there is no way we are going to totally turn back the architectural clock to 1925 as much as some people apparently would insist we do!

My one negative comment is that they really need to get some competent personnel in the projection room(s). Our 1:30 PM Friday showing of "Sex and the City" was somewhat ruined by an out of frame splice between reels which threw the frame line right into the center of the picture. After several minutes the framing was only partially corrected. The frame line was brought down but not far enough...people's heads were still severely cut off. That took several more minutes and several more audience complaints before the film was finally properly framed. Another out of frame splice was apparent between the trailers but someone was actually in the booth at the time (believe it or not!) to correct that immediately. Very abrupt start to the trailer reel too...the picture start instead of the leader was already at the film gate when the motor was turned on and dowser opened so you suddenly heard that awful sound of dialog or music getting up to speed as the show started. Strictly amateur night at the movies as far as I am concerned.

We apparently weren't the only ones having projection problems. Walking around to view the multiplex portion before our show started one woman came running out of a smaller upstairs screening room and yelled to a staff member "Hey there is nobody in your projection room!" (Duh...welcome to modern cinema going!) Coming back down on the escalator another patron was complaining about the presentation in another auditorium. The Alameda has definitely got some work to do in the projection and presentation department in my most humble opinion!

Overall I loved the theater and am delighted at the restoration and reopening of this classic downtown movie theatre within easy driving distance of my home in San Leandro. I truly never thought it would see it happening!

For Stefoscope: The gala opening party was a fund raiser and enough was raised to fully restore the mural you mentioned and to fully restore the main stage curtain which currently has a patch on it. There will be money left over to address stenciling the ceiling of the marquee (after the Pepsi truck damage is repaired) and to possibly reproduce furniture for the second floor lounge area in front of the mural.

The simple fact of the matter is; without the cineplex and parking garage the restoration of the historic theatre would not have happened. Thank-you JWR for understanding the economic factors involved in the project as a whole.

For ciedo - Sorry you won't step feet in the new building. You're going to miss some really good movies. By the way, in post of January 20 you state the views of Twin Towers Church and City Hall are blocked by the new cineplex. While the view of the church has been blocked (you might want to walk up Central a bit to see the church), you could never see City Hall from the corner in front of Peet's coffee. In fact the building that blocks the view of City Hall from that particular corner (as you well know) is the historic theatre. It's always my pleasure to set the record straight when misinformation about the project is posted.

The theatre operation is going through some growing pains right now. All ships need a shake down cruise to get everything working properly. This ship's shake down cruise might be the most scrutinized in a long time. Please be patient and I'm sure the operation will working at 100% soon.

The historic theatre does look fantastic. The blending of the historic/huge auditorium and the new techology makes the movie going experience a unique experience that everyone should take advantage of as often as possible.

I'll see you all at the movies.

Robb Ratto
Executive Director
Park Street Business Association

We were at the new Alameda a week ago Wed for the 1 PM matinee of Jones in the big main theatre. While the remodel looks great many things bothered me. First like others have mentioned the main large curtain was open. They didn't open or close it. The first 30 minutes the projector stopped 7 times and the lights came up. I don't think they have union projectionists running the place. Its sad after spending all the money in the fix up and with new theatres next store they hired people that don't know what is going on. See other posts about projection problems. While even a union projection guy may have problems with new equipment not working they need to get a handle on the problem. Also upon entering the large theatre they had Dolly Parton music playing. Please how about having music from the 30'3 or 40's or pipe organ music playing on a CD. Bring back the art deco theme into this great theatre. Also I found they put in many stereo surround speakers In the large theatre even a double bank of them in the front side walls. The sound from the stage 3 speakers was way off and the surrounds were not up as they need to be. I was waiting for a nice curtain opening and a Dolby logo to show off the system but it did not happen. Another thing the screen was put in flat like a cement wall. With the huge angle way up in the balcony the light is hitting the screen the wrong way. At the top of the screen on bright scenes it is very cakey looking. I think most older movie palaces tilted the top of large screens for a better light angle. All said with the problems I think these can be taken care off in the future. I will go back in afew weeks. I spoke to Eric the manager about the curtains and also mentioned to him about having some color lights (blue) on when the movie is on. With all the nice lights on the ceiling some need to on during the film very low. he said they had some on the first week and they flickered? I hope they can get this fixed. I'll bring Kyle the owner over some of my organ Cd's next time when I am over in Alameda. Good Luck to the Alameda Theatre. You look great! I loved the deco lights in the lobby. I'll also bring over some color bulbs also. I don't know why so many theatres restore art deco lights and then put in hot bright white lights. The two large deco lights in the lobby just before you go into the candy counter are begging for blue, green and yellow lights. Visit the Alameda and tell the managers to open and close the main curtain. And send the projection guys to projection school.

Focus probelms....soft borders.....I'm glad I haven't visited this theatre yet.

Who installed the projection booths? Doesn't one normally run various test loops to check on focus, depth of field, border sharpness etc?

If I'm not mistaken this is the company that used to run the Elmwood and Rheem Theatres. The presentation at both of those theatres was often lacking.

Mike Croaro

quote: You're going to miss some really good movies... end quote

Isn't that a bit pretentious. A, you assume that WANT to see current movies. B, that I can ONLY see them in Alameda.

For A. There are few, very few NEW, first run movies I want to see and shell out $40 to $50 to go see them (2 tickets, 2 sets of snacks). If I want to see a newish movie on the cheap I can go to the Parkway for their "cheap date" deal and get two tickets, a large pizza, popcorn and a pitcher of beer or soda for $35. (or go on their 2 for 1 Wednesdays) Or even better, wait for it to go to DVD and get it via Netflix (averages $3 per movie and about $5 in snacks. Viewed on a 62 in TV with Dolby surround sound, pause and rewind at will and not have to listen other other people rude conversations... heaven.)

for B, I went to the Grand last week and saw Iron Man. The fact that Iron Man may or may not be in the Alameda's megaplex addition did not stop me.

Netflix movie this year about 40

first run movies this year: 3 (Sweeny Todd at AMC Emeryville, Indiana Jones at Alameda, and Iron Man at The Grand)

2nd run movies this year: 1 I am Legend at the Parkway

Cult Classics: 2 Pretty in Pink and Purple Rain at the Parkway.

Has anyone been to The Alameda in the last two weeks? Id like to go again to the big house for Get Smart. I don't want to go if they are still having projection problems. If I go and they don't close and open the new curtain and the projector stops next time I will write to the editor of the SF Cronicle. Many people don't know about this great Cinema Treasures site but they do read the SF papers. I can't believe someone has not written to the Entertainment Editor at the Cron about the problems at the New Alameda Theatre. I hope things are better. To bad the new Fox Oakland Theatre will not be showing films when it opens soon. They can give the Alameda Theatre a run for better Showmanship.

This is a nice recent photo of the Alameda Theater at night.

I saw WALL-E in the main theater on Friday and only the propaganda reel at the very beginning was miss aligned, but they fixed that immediately.

I saw WALL-E at the 7:30 show, Friday night, and the picture jumped out of frame (with the top of the image on the bottom of the screen, and the bottom on the top, and the frame line dead-center) during one of the more climactic sequences. It took a good 3 or 4 minutes to correct something that should have been instantaneous, had there been someone sitting in the booth. This upset me further when I learned from a friend that had seen an earlier show that day, that the same thing happened with his screening also. This should not be happening AT ALL, but an opening day film? Are you kidding me?
I was also disappointed when I walked into the theatre and asked if the balcony would be open, that it likely would not be. After getting lousy seats to start (it was a crowded showing), I noticed people up in the balcony just as the trailers were starting. If the balcony is going to be open (and it should), then that area should be available from the start, to people who came early, and not just at the last minute. The loges (first rows of the balcony) are the best seats in the house, and the unusual glare that I see from the ground level, is not visible from up there.

Stef**Did they open and close the curtains? The non union guys they have for projection people don't know how to splice correct. How sad I'll have to wait till I ever go back. Do you remember If they were playing Dolly Parton music when you came into the big art deco house? I need to get over there and give them some movie theme pipe organ music or big band from the 30's CD's. I guess they have done nothing to the big flat screen with glare. How was the Dolby Digital® did you hear split surround?

I could be wrong, but I thought that at the time of the opening, the curtain repair was still not funded or accomplished. the intent was to keep the original curtain, except for part which suffered water damage, and that was to be replaced with a reproduction. Not sure if they obtained the money to do that yet, so that could be affecting the opening and closing of the curtain.

I think the curtain is working but they are not useing it. I talked to the manager Eric opening week and he was going to close it for me but he had other things to do as I got into the theatre early. Hope they do make it work. It's all is place on the sides of the masking ready to go. Looks clean and very colorful. Turn on the red & blue lights and let it shine!

It's pretty discouraging that after over a month of operation they still haven't got any projection room personnel that know how to splice the 2000 foot reels together in frame as they make up the feature on the platter. I can't recall a theater that opened with such amateurish projection and I've been going to movies since the late 1940's...and spent more than a few days and nights in projection rooms too! I had that threading and splicing in frame thing figured out after about 10 minutes. It's not rocket science you know!

I don't want to come down too hard on the Alameda though. The craft of projection and the art of good film presentation has pretty much disappeared from theaters throughout the country and probably around the world. Just give one of the popcorn selling guys or gals an extra 50 cents an hour and let them handle the projectors in ten or twenty auditoriums. Most of the rubes who paid their $10 a seat won't know the difference! Now if only we could outsource it to India...and maybe with the upcoming move from 35mm to digital we'll be able to do that! Welcome to movie going in the 21st Century folks!

Terry
No, the curtain did not open or close at any point. The screen was open when walking into the theatre. Even the promo video they run before the trailers (talking about the restoration project), shows the curtain opening. We can see that it is in operating condition. The right side, bottom part of the curtain looks to be covered up, and I assume that is the damaged section. It would be very dramatic and a completely authentic experience if the curtains opened and closed, appropriately.
As far as the music entering the theatre, I did not recognize it, but it sounded contemporary, and not appropriate to the vibe of the place. I think pipe organ music would be wonderful, or at least something soothing, not some trendy Muzak. This would be great when entering the lobby too. Also, the lights were very dim in entering the theatre, which made finding a seat difficult.

The craft of projection and the art of good film presentation is pretty much got in many theatres around the country, because theatre chains can not pay a good wage as in the past for a true projectionist to be in the booth. And if they have one he is running his ass off running mega screens in a plex. And as for music in auditoriums, remember theatres may have to pay for a service or make a payment for the performance rights to play music in the theatres. (ASCAP) ASCAP and the other music rights company, will ask for payments for the singer or artist or music label. (Everyone wants their cut of the performance pie.)

got in the first line should be Gone.

I see a lot of complaints about the theatre renovation, but as for me, my experience was quite different. I was awestruck by the interior. Absolutely marvelous. Couldn't get enough of it. I was even impressed with the modern additions to the theater, such as the metal rail in the main theater, made and imported from Germany. I have been watching the process, and documenting as much as I could with my camera. I was able to take a few hand-held shots of the interior. Would like to go back with a tripod and do it right. Take a look, and judge for yourself-- Photos.

Most of us have no problem with the remodel. It's the projection problems that happen everday! Plus many other things like training candy help and not opening the main curtains in the big house. How long will it take to get things in order?

Agreed. The renovation of the historic theatre is not a problem, It's beautiful, as most have said. While I minded the cineplex structure and parking garage, even those are not so bad and have some merit (the top of the parking garage provided a spectacular view of the 4th of July fireworks). However, after nearly two months of being open, the theatre's management really needs to improve. Not opening the curtain is a minor quibble, but has been noted by a few, and would make a difference to the class of the place. Keeping an intermittent schedule for opening the balcony is also a gripe that really should be corrected. However, more major issues are lousy crowd management and more importantly, poor presentation. It's not that hard to splice together film accurately and anyone running a projector should know this already. Worse, not having someone in the booth, AT ALL TIMES, to make corrections when needed is deplorable. Particularly for such a lavish and beautiful theatre.

"AT ALL TIMES" is a thing of the past. Most small theatres can not afford a projectionist in the booth at all times. The larger plexes have a projectionist type person in the booth, but he or she is watching over 10 plus screens.

Yes, unfortunately that is the sad reality of today. However, when presentations are consistently riddled with problems, something must be done to up the quality control. An opening day film (packed house) with focus/sound/screen glare/framing/projector problems, is simply not acceptable. So much for 'state-of-the-art'.

I'd like to see the new 3-D video the Alameda is now showing 'Journey. Can you imagine if they have so much problems with regular projection how will they do with Digital 3-D? Has anyone seen the 3-D system the Alameda? I know a few old Fox West Coast Theatre managers that can get this place in A-1 shape both in the theatres and candy counter. They know how to teach the new kids that the Alameda has hired that know nothing about the movie theatre business. To bad 'Elmer' is no longer around with the projectionist union. The theatres he and his crew worked in Oakland had the best screen presentation. This was before the platter or Digital Video. Bring Jack Tillmany out of retirement! Let him clean house at the Alameda Theatre.

Several of you have taken photos of the theater recently-- does anyone know how the Cinema Treasures photo can get replaced? The green and mauve is driving me nuts.

I'm a freelance writer working on a story for the East Bay Express about projection issues at the theater, and I'm wondering if any of you locals would be interested in talking to me. My email is rinkelly AT gmail DOT com.

kkb. The photo add section has been off line for quite a while now. I think there are either server issues or an overwhelming amount photos being sent in. This site has grown so much it must be a major task just to keep it as current as the webmaster does. I am just grateful this web site exists to document and keep track of the many theatres that either existed or still exist around the country. Many thoughtful people add links to photos of theatres on the internet in the comments section which is fine to me. Any I stumble upon when on the internet I try to add a link to the comments section of the theatre here.

Well, someday it would be nice to have an updated photo, and i am not sure about the seat listing either-- I think that is the number of seats for the old theater.

saw Dark Knight on the 2nd night of release (first true evening)..

Propaganda reel, check
Watchman trailer, nope
Out of focus opening, check
tons of fan boys and girls hissing and booing at the screen for being out of focus, check
Only a few months of being open and already turning into Jack London, check (one person next to us continued to text even after we asked them to stop, and after we got an usher, the left when we got the usher a 2nd time, but by that time the first 20 minutes was ruined.)

Regarding cledo's comment above:

And they wonder why sensible people are staying home more and more nowadays! Hey DVD or better yet high definition DVD or satellite service doesn't look too shabby on a plasma TV. In my humble opinion it looks better in fact that the image in many multiplexes, especially multiplexes with incompetent projection personnel as well as incompetent management like the Alameda sadly appears to have. Don't get me started on those cellphone, texting, talking airheads either! I was giving the Alameda the benefit of the doubt after their sloppy opening but my patience is now completely exhausted. Even though I just live a few miles away it just ain't worth the drive!

Wait till the article comes out in the regualar paper The East Bay Exprees about how things are so bad at the New Alameda. As of now only the limited people reading our great Cinema Treasures site can see what is going on. Now with the public and the many people that have had trouble with the Alameda going in a telling their horror stories maybe they will get some new people that know projection and management. The worst thing If there is a problem they give you a pass but when you try to use them they show in the paper no passes on all the films they are showing. When I go to use my pass (because the projector stopped 7 times in 20 minutes) If they don't honor It I will call the police. The scam about passes will come to a end.

"Most small theatres can not afford a projectionist in the booth at all times."

Millions of dollars are spent on a brand new 8 pleax and they can't afford to have one projectionist in the booth at all times? I don't buy it.

Mike

I think the poster means it's not practical or financially possible to have a projectionist monitoring each auditorium at all times. Let's face it. with platters it's not necessary. The days of carbon arc lamps and films on 2000 foot (20 minute) reels which pretty much required constant attention are long gone except in a very few specialized theaters.

You do have to prepare the films on platters right, splice the reels together in frame for example, a procedure which the Alameda still seems to be unclear on the concept. You do have to check your focus and framing and sound volume when the show starts. It's a good idea to re-check these things after the trailers at the beginning of the feature. When you are running the projectors in anywhere from 4 to 25 auditoriums you just can't give each auditorium your constant attention, as much as that would be an ideal situation. By hiring competent personnel you can minimize your problems and audience complaints though. Again the Alameda seems to be unclear on that concept!

I have yet to actually see a film in the big theater except for at the gala. But, saw Indiana Jones on one of the other screens-- no problems except 3 minutes late starting. Saw Wall-E a couple weeks ago, no projection problems, and just returned from Mamma Mia and it was fine. So are these horrible problems just happening in the big theater or have I just been lucky?

The Alameda Theatre, was refurbished beautifully. It was extremely disappointing to walk into this theatre with the curtains not closed. It ruined the atmosphere. I attended the Alameda regularly, I remember when the balcony was being converted to two theatres, they still showed movies - we were watching the movie downstairs and heard the hammers banging up above. When the Alhambra in San Francisco was de-twinned, and restored to its original condition, the curtain was not closed as well. I asked why to the Management of both. It was interesting of the responses I received. The Alhambra Manager replied, "closing the curtain went out with Mickey Mouse" - Alameda Management replied, "we have received a few complaints, I don't know why they don't". As a former projectionist, and my father being a projectionist, I was trained young to the fact that you always use the curtains to provide the customer the best in their movie value. It is an art, and unfortunately this art is gone in a lot of houses, plagued by the responsibility of the projectionist having to run up to 14 projectors, and 10 in another house at the same time. I was in San Francisco yesterday and was allowed to walk around at the El Rey in San Francisco, which is Alameda's sister theater, with the interior layout exactly the same, with a totally different motif, interesting layout of mirrors to reflect light though the lobby and different murals. Missing from the Alameda lobby was a mirror with a sunstar border, that was centered between the entrances Aisles of 2 and 4. The wall between these aisles were removed which was not part of the original condition of the theatre. The El Rey had this mirror also and it is still there. However, despite the curtain situation, the Alameda is a wonderful restoration, and well worth the trip.

Here is an August 2008 night view of the Alameda.

This is a nice November 2008 photo.

As far as I can see this hasn't been posted yet, and it is freakin' sweet:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/grope4mac/2897327157/

Also freakin' sweet:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/bwchicago/2771716131/

Way to go BW.

Here is another shot of the Alameda at night.

I can't access that one.

It still works for me. See if anyone else has problems with the link.

See if this link works for you. It's a smaller version of the other photo.

That one works. Nice color photo.

Here is an item from the Oakland Tribune, 2/12/73:

The Alameda Theater has been purchased by Robert Lippert’s Affiliated Theater Service, which plans to refurbish the theater but not change the building's Alhambra-style design. The theater at Central Avenue and Park Street was built in 1932 by the same architect and contractor who built Oakland's Paramount Theater. Until recently it was owned by the Nasser family.

Lippert, a native of Alameda, said he plans to reduce the main floor seating capacity from 1,350 to 750, installing new seats and widening isles. New seats will also be installed in the balcony. Lippert also owns the East Bay’s Showcase Theaters in the Rockridge shopping center, in Alameda and Fremont.

1980 photo of teh Alameda Theate.
http://americanclassicimages.com/Default.aspx?tabid=141&txtSearch=CATAdvancedSearch1%2c5%2c3%2c-1&catpagesize=25&ProductID=23500

There will be a talk by Therese Poletti, on Timothy Pflueger, the architect of this theater as well as 11 others around California, sponsored by the Alameda Architectural Preservation Society on January 24 at 6 p.m. Ms. Poletti wrote a book on this architect called "Art Deco San Francisco: The Architecture of Timothy Pflueger". The lecture will be hosted by the Alameda Theatre in the main, historic auditorium. Please see http://www.alameda-preservation.org/ for more information, and also http://blog.timothypflueger.com/ .

quote: When the Alhambra in San Francisco was de-twinned, and restored to its original condition, the curtain was not closed as well. I asked why to the Management of both. It was interesting of the responses I received. The Alhambra Manager replied, "closing the curtain went out with Mickey Mouse"

What an odd explanation. Because when the Alhambra in SF was twinned it actually HAD waterfall red velvet curtains on both sides of the twinned theatre...and they were still working, at least in 1976.

Someone should have said to that manager that Mickey Mouse never went out, and neither did presentation, opening and closing the curtains should be part of the presentation if the curtains are in working order. Some of the newer multiplexes are going back to curtains.