Cinerama Dome and Arclight Cinemas

I am anxiously awaiting more info as to when the "dome" will be ready for "This Is Cinerama". I am a former member of IATSE and ran a Cinerama booth in New Jersey, back in 1963.

The last film I saw there before it closed for renovation was "Godzilla". The one before it was a revival of the uncut version of "The Wild Bunch" in 70mm. Although I have seen it dozens of times, it was like seeing it for the first time. Amazingly, that nearly 30 year old film played for six weeks.

The first film shown here was "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World".

The Dome, along with the new Arclight complex around it, have opened. It now costs $14 to see a movie there.

Just attended a screening of Spider Man at the renovated Dome. While the outside looks the same, save for the new complex built around it, the inside is another matter. The lobby cases showcase the history of the theater and the Cinerama process. The seats are new, as is the carpeting and curtains. The decor has gone from gold to a dark blue which allows the theater to become darker, involving the viewer in the image on the huge screen. The image WAS huge, even though it was not anamorphic and the sound was excellent. Only complaints: The presentation began out of focus which should never happen at $14 a pop and the curved screen distorted the picture some. There was a minor hassle when the theater sold the same seats twice (all seats are reserved). 3 hr parking is included in the price. In the Arclight complex, sporting 13 new auditoriums, are poster reproductions from 3 strip Cinerama productions which are from the American Widescreen Museum. The Dome is now equipped to show these for the first time and will later in the year. There is a cafe and a gift shop containing some Cinerama souveniers. Unfortunately, those Cinerama posters are not available although others are. An interesting historical fact is that Pacific Theaters bought the Cinerama company before this theater opened, then discontinued the 3 strip process in favor of Ultra Panavision 70 beginning with "Mad World".

Yesterday I took my 14 year old daughter to experience the restored "This Is Cinerama" in the original 3-strip process. This is not the first time this film played here but the first time was 70mm single strip. Despite it's name, 3-strip Cinerama never before played in this theater. In the lobby was John Sittig from Pacific Theaters' Cinerama archives answering questions and displaying Cinerama Camera #3 used to shoot several Cinerama productions (not this one). David Strohmaier, Producer/Director of the documentary "Cinerama Adventure" manned the Abel projection booth. It did, and still does, require 5 projectionists to present Cinerama. The presentation of this 50 year old film was excellent. Projection was flawless and the only drawbacks were in the film itself (some fading, deterioration, etc). While the actual screen size appeared to be about the same as 70mm presentations here (the screen and throw are only so large) the film is still impressive and I heard comments afterwards about how spectacular the film still is. Following the feature was a 3-strip trailer for "How the West Was Won" which is said to be scheduled for after the first of the year. The trailer looked even better than the feature. Reprints of the original souvenir program were available in the gift shop. In all, this was a wonderful trip through some cinematic history and I look forward to the next one.

A special engagement of the original 3-strip Cinerama version of "How The West Was Won" is scheduled for February 2003. In answer to the comment below, both of the films mentioned were indeed shown in single strip 70mm although referred to as Cinerama.

How the West Was Won is now re-scheduled for Spring 2003.

The Dome is celebrating it's 40th anniversary this year. It will recreate it's grand opening with a benefit screening of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" in 70mm on Oct. 16. Sid Caesar, Jerry Lewis, Edie Adams, Jonathan Winters, Mickey Rooney and others are scheduled to attend. The event is sold out.

Went to the "Mad (etc) World" screening and had a great time - the movie was 70mm and stereo (even in the Shirelles song!) for the first time in ages. Got to meet Edie Adams (told her she was one of the funniest performers ever; she said "Well, it was all those years at Juillard!"), Stan Freberg and Marvin Kaplan. Stanley Kramer's widow and Billy Bob Thornton introduced the film. Only downside? It was the shorter version of the film. But the clarity was amazing! Right before the end of the last chase you can see a big "Nixon for Governor" banner. Still Hollywood's finest theatre IMHO.

What a theatre! I saw 2 of the Lord of the Rings movies in the dome and was in awe! The surrounding theatres are fantastic as well, and prices are less than what I had heard beforehand. The Cinerama screenn is magnificent!

Architect was Welton Becket and Associates

Official website is: http://www.arclightcinemas.com

What is the size of the screen and what is the length and the cord?

86 x 34 ft.

Very nice. If only we had something like that in NY.

Lets get Clearview to convert the Zeigfeld to what it was built for. I hate their flat screen. Let CINERAMA live in NY.

New York had a great Cinerama theater from the 60 until the middle 80's when it like most times square theaters was torn down to make way for a hotel.I remember going there for the first time in the late 70's to see Hello Dolly which was presented just as it was originally in 1969 when it opened. I remeber being amazed at the curved screen. RKO kept the cinerama screen until it closed the theater in the 80's.

I remember that festival at The Cinerama it was called Broadway on Broadway and had alot of 70mm prints. I remember seeing The Sound of Music, My Fair Lady and Funny Girl. Thanks for jogging my memory. It's just I want to see "This is Cinerama" so bad and will go to LA if I have to to see it at the dome.

From the Pacific Theatres website:
"ArcLight Hollywood's 14 new auditoriums begin with a “black box” design aesthetic which favors undistracted viewing over opulence...."

Meaning: We're too cheap to spend on any interior decor...
Many film lab screening rooms are nicer than some monsterplex mini-theatres.

The festival above called Broadway on Broadway which played at the R.K.O. Cinerama Twin as it was called at the time played the upatairs screen which was known as the Penthouse. I have the original theatre handout flyer listing all the shows. One film was "Finian's Rainbow" which played "reserved seats" the Penthouse on it's first time around 10 years earlier in 1968. I saw it with with the 7th grade music class on a school outing day. ( 10 a.m. show Adm. was $1. or $1.50 ), we had lunch at the automat next door.
The balcony screen in the Penthouse was also curved. I never was in the orchestra ( Cinerama Theatre ) for any film.

I also went to that Broadway on Broadway festival, and saw Oklahoma! for the first time, but the print had faded to that terrible pink color and needless to say it was a major disappointment. What were the dates of that festival?

Orlando
Teh screen in the downstairs Cinerama theater was great. It was the curved cinerama screen. I saw Hello Dolly there in the Broadway on Broadaway series in 1978, As I just posted on abnother site, I hate the fact that we don't get to see 70mm films anymore.

'Hoe The West Was Won' was the last of the three-strip Cinerama films. Thereafter all 'Super Cinerama' presentations were either 70mm, 65mm or 35mm prints. 'The Greatest Story Ever Told' started to be made in 3-strip but after a week it was decided to make it in 70mm. I firmly believe there is a new market for 3-strip Cinerama and i hope someone will take the plunge one day soon. There is nothing to equal the clarity and depth of focus in Cinerama, except maybe IMAX, but then again, that is another story...

Maybe 'hoeing' the west wasn't such an error, eh? ;)

Correction the Cinerama Dome is still owned by Pacific Theatres this is there flagship operation. The Arc Light has wonderful programming such as the Director Series, AFI top 100 films,etc. This is an industry house. Its the Cinerama Dome that sets the complex apart from the others. The Arc Light complex is has top presentation and sound. The Arc Light has been successful but the Dome is its greatest asset. The Grove megaplex near the Farmers Market is more popular unless the film is playing in the Cinerama Dome. The Arc Light black box auditoriums had major input from the film industry where the Grove was built by an independent developer who wanted his theatre a little more upscale than the norm to match the upscale shopping center.The Grove pays homage to the old Hollywood including the uniforms worn by the employees. Pacific had the managing contract in running the Grove which became the top gossing megaplex in Southern California. In fact a bidding war broke out to purchase the Grove when the owner put the Theatre up for sale and Pacific who had ist choice to by it had to purchase the Grove for 25 Million.I think the film industry should take a good look at the Grove and build more megaplexe's like it. Its to bad the Arc Light complex that includes the Cinerama Dome didn't build it a bit more luxurious like the Grove and it would have been a bigger success.brucec

We do have to remember however, that the Arclight exceeds THX Certifaction standards. The Grove is not even THX Certified (in any auditorium). I've been to both theatres many times and the presentation at Arclight is much better than the Grove hands down. Technically speaking the Arclight is superior to the Grove in sight & sound presentation. The picture is always razor sharp & there is never any dirt or scratches even after a film has played for a week or so. The sound system is from JBL: Projecting this immersive sound throughout each auditorium are custom-designed JBL systems that feature technology honored by the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences with a technical achievement Oscar, March 2002. Their two largest auditoriums are equiped with Dolby Digital SRD 6 channel, Dolby EX & SDDS 8 channel and have 3 stage speakers, 2 subwoofers and 9 surrounds, all JBL., the other auditoriums have Dolby Digital SRD 6 channel, Dolby EX & DTS ES. The two largest auditoriums have 70mm projectors & all auditoriums have scope screens with sizes ranging from 40 - 60 ft. The Grove may be more luxurious looking but I am going to see the film not the architecture or uniforms. The front row in all auditoriums (except the dome) is as far back from the screen as it is wide so that patrons are not forced to look up or turn their heads to see the entire screen. People will not be seated 5 min after the movie start time so as not to disrupt those already seated and watching the movie. Each movie is introduced by an arclight employee who gives a brief synopsis & lists the cast. On a comfort note, the arm rests are double width so you don't bump arms with your neighbor and they are 3 inches wider than other stadium seats. There is no better theatre in LA.

I agree 100 percent with the last poster, the Arclight is incredible. The Grove is nice, but much more of a suburban kind of outing, with crowds, teenagers, and families.

It may be the best theater in the country...or maybe that is the Chinese. Not that I've been in every theater, but is there a better one?

As for the Dome, why aren't they showing more Cinerama presentations? I missed the first round.

I love the Cinerama Dome and I like the ArcLight Cinemas but the Grove usually does more business on the same film unless its in the Dome. The Grove is a little more popular than the ArcLight. Pacific Theatres owns and runs both theatres but to there surprise the Grove has been more successful as has been stated in Variety a number of times.I am from the old school I like the decor of a theatre like Grauman's Chinese where the theatre can be as exciting as whats on the screen.The Arclight has great picture and sound and presentation and Pacific has invested a great deal of money in there flagship operation.I have friends who live on the westside and will make a special trip if a film is playing in the Dome but not a special trip for the Arclight blackbox theatres unless its an exclusive run.I have to applaud Pacific Theatres showmanship in bringing a little class back to moviegoing in Hollywood.I regard the Cinerama Dome,El Capitan,Grauman's Chinese,National and Village theatres as the best theatres in LA to see a movie.brucec

Does anyone remember when "Evita" premiered at the Dome? I was shocked when I walked in and saw that they had installed a FLAT screen and masking in front of the normal huge curved screen! Does anyone have the story on why they did that for this one film? weird. I'm glad they didn't leave it like this. My first trip to the Dome was in the early 70's when my dad took me to see "2001: A Space Odyssey" in 70mm 6-track stereo. I'll never forget it.

I remember going to see "Evita" expecting to see it on the 86 x 34 ft. screen, boy was I shocked. Apparently Alan Parker, the director, did not want that deeply curved screen. He shot the film to be shown on a flat screen (what a disappointment), and I read that he was very insistant that a flat screen be installed. With the deep curvature of the wall behind, the screen could not be made very wide. Although the screen was moved forward a little, I guess to allow more room for width, you could only go so far because of the seats in front. In my opinion, this did not look so good when sitting in the back balcony. It was really designed for the curved Cinerama screen. If you want a flat screen, show it at the Chinese or even the Village in Westwood, both are big theatres with big screens.

Why go to all that trouble? Just play it somewhere else, already. "Evita" was before the remodel so the other theaters weren't there yet. As for the curved screen, "This is Cinerama" is showing twice in original 3-strip format Thurs at 7 and Sat. at 10.

I have said so much about the Dome but I need to say more after seeing "This is Cinerama" again last night. I could write an essay but will keep it brief. For a film 53 years old which is definitely showing it's age the presentation was flawless. I particularly enjoyed the Kinopanorama clip from Russia which looked better than TIC and the tour of the projection booths (with a copy of Cinema Treasures on a table in the Abel booth). To see that equipment (the projectors came from the now closed Hawaii Cinerama and updated) was a real treat. However, here comes the soapbox. Pacific remodeled the Dome and made it one of only 3 places in the world where true 3-strip Cinerama can be shown. They schedule 2 showings (2 years after it first played there) and there should have been great interest in this. Yet, last night's show was not a sell out. Today I see why. Tomorrow morning at 10 another screening of the film in 3-strip will be held. In today's L.A. Times that program is not even mentioned in the Arclight ad as playing tomorrow. No ads, no mention, NOTHING!! What a rare experience to go completely un-publicized. This becomes even more shocking when you remember that Pacific actually owns the Cinerama process! How many film buffs, fans, etc. will miss this because they simply didn't know? It's a crying shame.

Back in the early 80s, I can recall William Shatner being one of our regulars. Bill used to party often back then. On a few occasions, we would arranged for his transportation home. Leslie Ann Warren once presented a part of herself by accident to me. I then went upstairs to do a changeover and mixed-up the reels out of sequence. Like a jerk, I denied doing it, even though the screenplay writer was in the auditorium. OOPS! :)

Can't we build these kinds of theatres anywhere else? Why should Hollywood have all the fun???

I recall seeing "Krakatoa: East of Java" and how awful the special effects were. Even then, it was pretty lame. The theater, however, was amazing, and was worth the admission to see it alone! I also remember the press later said that Krakatoa was not "east of Java", but rather "west of Java", so they renamed the film "Volcano" for the European release in 1975 and added "Sensurround"... remember that?

I saw "Evita" at the Cinerama Dome (however the first movie I saw here was "Fletch" while I was in high school). It was the only place in Los Angeles where "Evita" was playing before its general release. I remember it was very crowded and we waited for hours. I returned recently to see "The Phantom of the Opera" and the place is much better after the remodel.

When "Evita" play at the Cinerama Dome, they installed a special flat screen and special sound panels in the ceiling for this engagement. The days when it only played at the Cinerama Dome was long over by the time "Evita" opened.

I am sorry "William" but in December of 1996 "Evita" did only play at the Cinerama Dome in Los Angeles before its general release in early 1997. Sometimes reality differs from an idolized, isolated view of history.

During my time playing in the Marine Band at Twentynine Palms (CA), we played a swearing-in enlistment ceremony at the Cinerama Dome in 1965 or '66. We played for the swearing in of the "Bob Hope Platoon." Hope couldn't make it so one of his daughters, Nora, if I remember, stood in for him. First there were some speeches followed by an public relations film about the Marine Corps, showing scenes from Vietnam and the Dominican Republic. (There was a revolution occuring at the time and the Marine Corps went sent in to keep order.) Then came the swearing in of the Bob Hope Platoon, about 30 guys. Immediately after, they had roll call. Two guys were missing. After being sworn in, the platoon would head to Marine Corps Recruit Depot at San Diego.
That was the only time I was ever in the Cinerama Dome. Anytime I drive by it, I think of that day.

Some info that I came across on the Cinerama Dome.
"The 937 seat Cinerama Dome opened Nov. 7, 1963 with the movie "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World". This theater was the world's first concrete geodesic dome".

Can anyone out there answer a question for me? It concerns the film HOW THE WEST WAS WON.

I was six years old in 1963 and one of the first motion pictures which made an impression upon me was HOW THE WEST WAS WON. Although I was only a child I remember being awe struck by it's grandeur.
I have hoped for many years now that I would some day be able to relive the Cinerama experience of this film. As much as I appreciate the efforts nowadays of DVD producers to present films in their original wide screen format, it still doesn't translate very well where HOW THE WEST WAS WON is concerned. While recently visiting a web site devoted to the making of this film, I learned that it had played about a year and a half ago at the Dome. Being relatively new to Los Angles it was the first time I had heard of the Cinerama Dome. I was so disappointed to learn that I had missed it. My question is; Do they ever bring films back to the Dome once they've played? I would assume since HOW THE WEST WAS WON is one of the most famous of the Cinerama productions that this would be the case, but I would appreciate it if anyone out there has knowledge of how they plan their scheduling. Also; Is there any kind of mailing list that one can sign up for to keep abreast of their schedule?
They seem to be rather difficult to contact by phone. Whenever I call the number at the top of this page(323-466-3401)the phone just rings off the hook. There isn't even any voice mail. So if anyone out there could be of help, I would truly appreciate it. Thank you all.

Regards,

Peter John

Peter, I again think at least one of my posts has vanished but I can assure you "How the West Was Won" will eventually return. I saw it during it's first 2 week engagement here and it was a historic event. "This Is Cinerama" has played twice although the second time was for 2 days only. Keep checking their website www.arclightcinemas.com When it, and any other of their many special events, are scheduled you will find it there. Will probably be an announcement on this site too.

Lest anyone read this comments page and get the wrong idea from edward's post: "...too cheap to spend on any interior decor. Many film lab screening rooms are nicer than some monsterplex mini-theatres" -- this is simply not the case with the Arclight.

Yes, the decor is aesthetically minimalist. But, I can assure anyone that Pacific Theatres was not being too cheap when designing the Arclight. These are, simply put, the best public screening facilities. The picture and sound quality is top-notch and, even better, the auditoriums are the best-designed with the viewer in mind. There is not a bad seat in this house, no matter where you sit (unless you may be sitting in the seperate first three rows, but as someone else already pointed out, these are MUCH FURTHER away from the screen than one would assume). I prefer sitting in the middle, but I've had tickets in the upper or lower corners and the view is still fantastic. Plus, these are not mini-theatres, as stated in edward's post. The Dome and a number of the black-box screens are huge, with a couple of the black box screens of medium size and few more being the smallest size. BUT, here's the thing -- the smallest of those is still a good sized screen (about the size of most multiplex medium screens). As someone who is quite picky about paying $10 to see a movie on a screen smaller than my tv set, I was thrilled to find out that even the least-known art house film is playing on a great sized screen with perfect sound. (The Grove has a similar set-up, as far as the size of their screens)

As a writer/producer, I'm thrilled that the Arclight is around. Yes, I love going to the old palaces! The El Capitan, Chinese, Egyptian, and The Orpheum are all amazing. I'm still hoping for more of the old Broadway theatres to be renovated and reopened (and the Warner Pacific to the general public!). But, when it comes to presentation perfection, I can't imagine going anywhere other than the Arclight.

On the "About ArcLight" portion of their web site is this statement: "ArcLight Hollywood's 14 new auditoriums begin with a “black box” design aesthetic which favors undistracted viewing over opulence...." Statements such as this are found throughout the new, aesthetically-challenged wunderkind that populate most of our cinema world these days, where they give lip service to the beauty of the palaces, but then turn around and dismiss them with statements such as the above. MANIFESTLY: if a film is so weak or unappetizing that the viewer can be 'distracted' by an opulent decor, then the film should be seen as the culprit, not the decorations! It is only the supreme arrogance of the filmakers that makes them assume that anything put on a screen should automatically command the complete attention of each and every member of the audience. Those few of greater humility will acknowledge that much of what comes upon screens these days is self-indulgent crap where pretension masquerades as art. Give me a gorgeous 'palace' to see a move along with good projection and sound and service, and I will then have something to occupy my time and justify the stiff admision fees when portions of a film are bad or dull, and there will ALWAYS be portions of any film that do not command attention at every second. The ArcLight and other such screening rooms should never be called theatres, but only cinemas at best. They may not be 'cheap' as the previous post explains, but in no sense was their expense evident in the decor, for true 'decor' they never have had.

Jim the aesthetic which governs our black box rooms also governs the criminal blighting of our neighborhoods everywhere. The northern immigration from the south in the 70's which destroyed the lower middle and middle class fabric of so many of our cities has now transformed itself into glass and steel box fungus which is eating away at what was left.
Most of the films made today would be ludicrous if presented in a movie palace or even a single screen 60's theater. Their stripped down faux intensity(where nothing really happens which is ad nauseum the point) is the critical and audience rage. For goodness sake people just wait for the DVD.
Would you really want to see Sideways or Million Dollar Baby at the Roxy or the Cathay Circle?
By the way these black boxes are not cinemas they are screening rooms.

Vincent is, of course, right; the demise of most real motion pictures is part and parcel of the demise of our culture, though it is not just caused just by greedy and slovenly people, no matter how much they have spent on their clothes from Rodeo Drive. The reason is multifaceted and peers into the very fabric of humanity itself, and is therefore beyond the scope of this forum, sad to say. With today’s modern communications, however, it no longer takes any immigration of peoples anywhere to influence the nature of film or most anything else; blight in the aesthetic sense travels even more quickly by electronic media than automobiles. I must agree that most of today’s films if they could be seen in such as the ROXY and other true palaces, would be so dwarfed in significance that the audience would indeed see such films as “ludicrous.” However, the “glass and steel box fungus” of ‘architecture’ which Vincent refers to is not so much a cause of the demise of the glorious palaces, as a symptom of the cultural degeneration which Vince refers to. Merely read the short novel form 1980: FROM BAUHAUS TO OUR HOUSE by the noted writer Thomas Wolfe, and you will notice the real reason that the ‘fungus’ spread so quickly through the architectural garden that we once enjoyed, complete with movie palaces blooming right and left. (Of course, we cannot forget that it was television which did the major damage to those palaces along with other cultural phenomena of the “black fungus.”)

Wow....I just kinda like the place. :-)

The Cinerama Dome is one of the last remaining venues on Earth that can properly exhibit both three-strip Cinerama as well as 70mm Super Cinerama. As such, it should be revered. It also happens to be the most spectacular place in the 21st century to see a movie. It brings back memories of all the roadshow houses of yester-years that are gone, gone, gone. I have been fortunate enough to see "El Cid" in 70mm, "This is Cinerama" and "How the West Was Won" in three-strip, and "Mad, Mad World" in 70mm Ultra Panavision at this venue. Once in a lifetime experiences in our age of mini-screen multiplexes. The presentation this past Christmas of "The Phantom of the Opera" was a stunning thing to see and hear at this theater, even if it was 35mm anamorphic and DTS Digital, it still played like gangbusters. Fabulous theater like nothing else around. Not even the Ziegfeld in New York, a superb late-era 70mm roadshow house, can compare with the sweep of the Dome...

I wish they would put a curved screen in the Ziegfeld to make the experience more exciting. I never understood since it opened why they went with the flat screen.

They did Robert in '73 and it was pathetic.

Well that was just the temporary Cinerama screen, I'm talking about a permanant curved screen to use for all formats.

Yes that would be a great idea. To install a larger curved screen maybe 65 to 80 ft with a curtain. Suitable for all formats much like the NY Capitol after Cinerama was installed there until it's demise. So that between first runs they could show all types of widescreen restored classics so they could make money instead of being dark.
But of course that would make too much sense. I've found in life that for the most part that when it seems as though people don't know what they're doing they really don't know what they're doing.

I think it's funny how these 20 year old kids are complaining about Star Wars playing here instead of at Graumans. Of course Graumans is the living legend. But anyone who knows their movie theatres knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Cinerama Dome is the best movie theatre in LA...if not the whole darn country. It will be a pleasure to see Star Wars here in 2 weeks!

So Agreed Chris. Glad to see you!

I saw IT'S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD here when the theater first opened, then THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD several times. The last film I thought was awesome, and I must have been among the only youngsters (and adults for that matter) at that time who thought the film amazing. Once I had my brother take me for an evening show (my brother was a minister), and I remember forcing him to sit in the very first row dead center, so that the power of th screen would overwhelm us. I have forever after almost ALWAYS sat in the first several rows of any theater, as I'm convinced that that's the location of maximum impact. I also remember attending the film on enough occasions that I was able to buy all three folios of the gorgeous large-scale color photographs from the film that were offered in the lobby along with the souvenir book. I loved to sit at the front of the theater before the show started and smell the fresh-printed odor of the souvenir book--some vintage copies of souvenir books in general still retain that odor, even when I've purchased them on eBay. In any event, I considered (at the age of 14!) the GSET's souvenir book to be the most artistically-produced of any souvenir book in the history of motion pictures (it's only rival in my adolescent opinion was LAWRENCE OF ARABIA's).

My family had something of an indirect connection to composer of the film's score. Ken Darby, Alfred Newman's collaborator, was the son of my junior high school English teacher. My mother, who worked as a highly respected music teacher and choral director for the Santa Monica school system, and who was renowned enough that the Santa Monica city council shut down operations for the day when she passed away, collaborated with Alfred Newman on at least one occasion to produce the popular Stairway Under the Stars. The highlight of the program was Alfred Newman himself conducting the rousing closing music from CAPTAIN FROM CASTILE, which has gone down in soundtrack history as "Conquest." You better believe I was in the audience that day.

One of the things that my mother said about the music to GSET has always stuck in my mind, primarily because I couldn't believe it was true. She told me that the main theme from the score was lifted from a Classical composer (I believe it was perhaps Bach). I genuinely loved the film score and didn't believe her (there were a lot of things I didn't believe her about in those days, much to my deep regret).

Years later I had a chance to visit the Cinerama dome with my own children, just before the Archlight rennovations (I have yet to see in person what they did to the place). The film showing was WILD WILD WEST with Will Smith--not a particular popular film. There were maybe three or four additional audience members in the theater besides myself and my son and daughter, so we pretty much had the run of the theater and could explore all we wanted to. Naturally, I grabbed the center seats in the very first row, just as I did more than thirty years ago.

Now, WILD WILD WEST was not a particularly great movie, but after seeing it projected on (only about 2/3rds) of the curved screen and overwhelmed by the stereo system, we all came away thinking we had just watched the greatest movie ever made!! We live in Albuquerque where movie screens are puny by comparison. I just don't think that kids nowadays realize how great the impact of even mediocre films can have when shown at colossal scale--the way films were meant to be seen in the golden age of widescreen cinema. Imagine what viewing a full-scale three-strip Cinerama film like HOW THE WEST WAS WON in an original Cinerama theater can do to the senses! How we've given up so much simply for the sake of convenience. Students in my college art history classes just can't believe that films used to be 3 1/2 hours long or what could keep an audience fascinated that long. It was the magnitude of the bid screen to be sure!

John: I've heard talk that HOW THE WEST WAS WON in 3-strip Cinerama is coming back to the Cinerama Dome sometime this fall. It's worth the trip from anywhere!

One other thing about Alfred Newman's excellent score for GREATEST STORY - for many years I thought the music heard while Max Von Sydow was carrying the cross on the way to Calvary was some of the most beautiful film music I'd ever heard. Years later I found out that it was not part of the original score at all, but the opening music to Giuseppe Verdi's "Requiem". It still fits that scene perfectly. I envy you getting to see that movie on that screen.

Star Wars and The Empire Strikes Back will play here on 6/1 and 6/10 respectively. 2 tickets will be given away to the AFI tribute to George Lucas at the first screening. It does not specify if the screenings will be in the Dome or not.

I've been lucky to have seen "How The West Was Won" and the 40th anniversary print of "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World" here in 2003. In addition, I've seen my fair share of current Hollywood fare as well. I will never forget the first time I saw a film here (Terminator 2 on Opening Day 1991). I love this place!

I have some friends from NYC and London coming into town on June 9, and they want to see Star Wars. So of course I'm taking them to the Arclight. My question is whether to put them in the Dome or one of the other theaters. Does the digital projection make a significant difference? Does the curved Dome screen distort the film? Where's the best place to sit?

If HOW THE WEST WAS WON will play this fall at the Cinerama Dome, I will unquestionably drive to Hollywood from Albuquerque to see it. I think if I could choose how I wanted to go out of this world when I die, it would be while sitting in the middle of the front row watching the end of HTWWW!!

Saw HOW THE WEST WAS WON at the Cinerama Dome and I was duly impressed. Beyond that, I like the black boxes at the Arclight, they fulfull a real need for quality screening rooms.

As much as I love quality vintage single screen theaters, the real question is whether or not motion picture exhibition as we have known it will survive. This is an age of changing public tastes. We are on the verge of a new era of on demand program delivery via a high speed internet connection to home theater systems, as well as High Definition DVD. Increased demand will bring down the price of High Definition Home Theater systems. Then the marketplace for motion pictures will change dramatically.

The only kind of motion picture exhibition that stands a real chance in this brave new world will be a high quality presentation. Of course, the Federal Government may have to allow the media conglomerates that own the movie studios to own a larger stake in movie exhibition. While that may seem to run counter to present Federal Anti-Trust law, it may be the only way traditional movie exhibition can survive. The movie studios still need a theatrical launch for their releases. Media conglomerates probably have the political clout to get their way in the current political environment. While I am not an advocate of corporate control of government by any means, movie studio investment in exhibition may be the way of the future. Allowing media conglomerates a 49% interest in exhibition may be the only way that movie theaters can survive in a changing marketplace.

The Arclight Cinemas could be part of the way of the future.

To answer Eric's inquiry, there is no question that the Dome is THE place to see any film. When the Lord of the Rings trilogy played here the 35mm print image was huge and the sound was perfect. Was it distorted? Some, because the film was not shot for presentation on a curved screen. Impressive? More so than any other theater currently running film in L.A. including the Chinese. I have not seen a digital presentation in the Dome but it is advertised as filling the entire Dome screen which, as noted above, is 86 feet wide. The "black boxes", while quality houses, can't come close to that kind of experience. Make sure you sit in the center section on the main floor. This section always sells out first and for good reason.

Don K.'s discussion is right on the nose, and it will be intersting to see what developes now that big business virtually 'owns' the govenment. Much more discussion about his is in the FORMUS of the site: www.bigscreenbiz.com

In the late 60's or early 70's, after the success of "2001 A Space Odyssey" at the Warner Theatre on Hollywood Blvd. in 70mm "Cinerama", the Dome on Sunset Blvd. ran a special engagement of "This Is Cinerama". It remember it well. What it was like to get tickets for a family of 5, the hours we spent in line taking turns standing and what an event it really was.

I also remember the faded condition of some of the 3 "panels" and how they didn't always match the one next to it and how the registration wasn't always the best, especially the water sking scene in Florida. But despite it all, it was truly an event. The Rolller Coaster sequence opening to three panels after Lowell Thomas introduces the film on the one center panel alone was worth every moment spent in line and every dollar we paid. The ads boasted the 3-strip projector showing as well as a newly restored multi-channel stereo soundtrack.

Now here's the reason for my post. "Not until the Dome's two-year restoration was completed in December 2002 did the venue show a film -- a reissue of 1962's "How the West Was Won" -- in Cinerama." This is simply not true!

Because their press release and subsequent news coverage was so wide spread, the re-creation of history (or honest error?) is being quoted by everyone as truth.

If anyone can provide me with information regarding this event, I would surely appreciate hearing from you. I plan to go to the Los Angeles Times research library and search their microfilm archives to get copies of the articles and ads. However, without a date or year this is one very huge undertaking.

I want to present this proof to Pacific Theatres management so they can set the record straight and correct the misleading story they are busy telling people. Then hopefully this falsehood can stop being perpetuated. I know rewriting history is popular, especially when it can be used as hype. Cinerama is bigger than that, it deserves good historical documentation, not hype.

CineBill,

The engagement of "This Is Cinerama" at the Dome you are referring to was a 70mm presentation, not a 3-strip Cinerama. Its Dome run began Feb. 15, 1973 and ran for about three months.

Any statements or article references to the Dome not running 3-strip Cinerama until a couple of years ago remain correct.

http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_los_angeles_1973.htm

Michael,

Thank you sooooo much for the information. This isssue has been driving me crazy since the Dome was redone and I kept reading and hearing the claims. Your site filled in all the details and jogged my memory cells - It was a "Re-Premier", Six Track Stereo and promoted with "Back To Entertain a New Generation". I was that new generation. I was only 20 yrs old.

One final question, if I may impose? What accounted for the mismatched color and registration? Did they transfer all three image strips to 70mm film for the showing? It was after all those two things (flaws) that led me to believe I saw 3-strip Cinerama.

Thanks again, I appreciate you taking the time to help me. I am happy to say "I stand corrected." Now I can't wait till the Dome runs it again - so I can actually see - that which I thought I saw -but didn't - LOL

Anyone remember any films featuring the Cinerama Dome? The sequel to the first (and best) 'Gone in 60 Seconds' shot the climax on the roof. The film 'The Junk Man' was one of writer/director/star H.B. Halicki's last films.
'The Big Picture' starring Kevin Bacon had him filming a very cheesy music video featuring life-size PEZ dispensers. This segment was filmed directly across Sunset with just the top 10 feet or so of the Dome showing in the background.

One film that I have never heard mentioned in regards to playing at the Cinerama Dome is BEN-HUR. Has this ever played there? I would love to see this once again on the big screen. I should think it would be absolutely magnificent. To anyone who can shed some light on this, thank you.

Regards,

Peter John

"Ben-Hur" played the Dome in July of 2000 as part of the special festivities just before it closed for renovation. Alas, it was a 35mm print but a new one and Charlton Heston appeared in person. "Lawrence of Arabia" and "Terminator 2" both played during those 3 days in 70mm.

Here's a link:

http://www.cineramaadventure.com/domepix.htm

I've been reading the arguments regarding gaudy opulence vs. cheap minimalism in theaters. I personally enjoy the baroque beauty of our historic filmhouses, as they remind us of the Golden Age of Hollywood. They are the places to take the kids or out-of-towners who are surely as awestruck as we are at the grandeur of them. BUT, for those who wish to see the FILM, Arclight is King. The black-box format dispenses with the flash and drama of glittery wall fixtures and points only to the screen. Rather than speaking to me of cheapness (to the contrary, a friend who worked on the construction of the auditoriums assures me that no expense was spared, and anyone familiar with the stage or cinema knows that flashy rarely equals expensive) they speak to me of concern for a focus on the experience of sight and sound. Even the finest painting can be overwhelmed by an overly loud frame, and Arclight obviously understands that bright, brassy fixtures belong only in suburban multiplexes and in Wal-Mart at Christmastime.

I just finished watching Star Wars Episode III at the Dome (for the fourth time there), and the digital projection and rich, powerful sound were flawless from the first frame to the last. The quality of film presentation at Arclight is without rival, in my experience. For the Hollywood buff, the after-film treats are in the lobby, where gems of movie craft, usually related to the Dome feature, are cleanly and respectfully displayed. No, I don't work for Arclight or Pacific Theaters--I just like them that much. And while there is surely something to be said for the older, more opulent venues, if you feel that Arclight is "too cheap" to wear anything other than black, then stick to your local mall, and stop annoying me with your criticisms.

Daniel is entitled to his opinion, and no doubt Arclight is the ne plus ultra of projection, but I must stand by the conviction that if whatever is on the screen is so weak that the audience is drawn to look about at the auditorium, then it shouldn't have been on the screen in the first place, and the audience was then well served to have had something else to look at.

Considering you have both the Arclight and the Chinese/El Capitan experiences available within a couple of miles of each other, I see no reason to argue. How many people outside of Los Angeles are thinking they wish they had the same sort of option? For what it's worth, the best picture/sound quality is in the Arclight, and the best Old Hollywood experience is the Chinese type. (I say type as I would be hard pressed to choose between a few different palaces, but would probably go with the Chinese).

Universal presents KING KONG. World Premiere Monday, 12 December 2005 Ziegfeld Theatre, New York City. Regular performances start Wednesday, 14 December 2005 at the Ziegfeld Theatre, New York and the Cinerama Dome, Hollywood, CA.

Yes Doug, I agree with you whole-heartedly. While I argued in favor of Arclight, my overall point was that each has its own attractions, and Arclight should not be put down for having a different aesthetic. Both types are enjoyable, and favoring one over another is merely a matter of taste.

I second Doug23's comment and responses to the previous bickering! Celebrate the fact you have the choicest venues to experience movies. The BEST! If you were in Washington DC, your choice is a decent looking art deco structure that can boast bad sound and lousy projection (Loews Uptown), or a smaller suburban multiplex.

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

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

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

Enough with the spam already.

Yes, the Dome had Cinema Digital Sound installed in the early 90's, and what a great system that was! I saw "Terminator 2: Judgment Day" there in 70mm and CDS. This was an expensive format, and faded with the advent of the much cheaper Dolby Digital and DTS formats.

But Cinema Digital Sound was MUCH higher quality, the best sound I've ever heard in a movie theater, ever.

First time I went here was to see T2 on opening day in 70MM and CDS. One of the greatest movie experiences of my life!

Now if they'd only get permission to show 2001 in here!

The Dome *has* shown "2001"...on several occasions.

Yeah...but not in this decade...and not since it's reopening.

I'm waiting patiently (or trying to) for the announcement of the dates for the rumored Fall 2005 engagement of "How the West Was Won". Wouldn't it be great if they had a Cinerama festival (3-strip as well as 70mm) and showed "2001" at the same time?

HTWWW is coming back? Great. Maybe I'll take some friends who've never been here.

To piggyback on Bill Huelbig's comments, the American Cinematheque is running their yearly 70MM festival in the wrong theatre! With all due respect to the Egyptian, the Dome is THE PLACE to experience the true glory of 70MM projection!

I think the Dome should be running festivals and classics during the not so busy season. There's no reason why this auditorium should be showing anything "fluffy" in the slow months. January-April and September-October are the perfect times for the Dome to go retro and show classics worthy to fit on that glorious screen.

Chris, I agree. Recently "T2", "Lawrence of Arabia", "Gandhi" and others that cry out for that huge screen have played during Arclight's AFI series but always in one of the smaller houses. However, when the L.A. Conservancy had their annual meeting and no film was shown where was it? The Dome. Go figure.

Out in Philadelphia, a former Cinerama theatre is being restored. the RKO stanley Warner Boyd Theatre, which was also known as Regal Entertainment Group's United artists Sameric 4 Theatre. This cinerama house (it was one of the first cinerama theatres on the east coast, along with the RKO Stanley Warner's Warner Cinerama & Penthouse Theatre.

Sameric's auditorium #1 was the former Boyd Theatre, which had all incarations of Cinerama until it was moved in the late 1960's to William Goldman's Randolph Theatre (which closed in 1971 with Tora! Tora! Tora! as the last film).

It would be great if a cinerama style theatre was built in Philadelphia, that uses cinerama, imax, 70mm, 35mm and digital formats.

"How The West Was Won" in it's original 3-strip Cinerama format returns to the Dome for one week only (10/28-11/03). Tickets on sale now and I have mine in the sweet spot. See you there!

Ticket sales must be dragging as the engagement of HTTWW was just cut back by a day and now ends 11/02. I just checked and so far the center section has not even sold out for today's shows. Either support these showings or they will go away.

If you live on the West Coast and can attend one these screenings of HTWWW, please do. You haven't seen this film in its proper presentation until you've seen it in true Cinerama. The picture (or pictures) shining on the large Dome screen are clear and bright, and the sound is good, warm analog sound.

John Sittig and his crew put on a spectacular show, and a lot of effort goes into these special engagements. They deserve an audience and deserve applause for their efforts. Sittig has been at the forefront of many special engagements at the Dome of Cinerama and Super Cinerama shows. It doesn't get any better than this.

The films that audiences see in their local shoebox megaplex are such a far cry from the epic quality of HTWWW. Before I saw it at the Dome in 2003, I had only seen it on LaserDisc and wondered what was so special about it. I found it boring and stagey. BUT, when seen in Cinerama, what a difference! This is a true film with showmanship in mind and shouldn't be missed!

Today "How the West Was Won" opens and shows twice. Today there are zero print ads (in the Times), no comments by any writer and more space is given by Arclight to the listings of "Saw II" than for this special presentation. Lots of seats still available for all 12 shows even in the center. What a waste.

It was sad to see that the Friday and Saturday night shows did not sell out, especially when compared to the overflow crowds in 2003, but I hope this doesn't deter Arclight from showing the film every couple of years or so. The Cinerama faithful will come from all over, just to experience it one more time. As I said to one of the ushers, entering the Dome to see "How the West Was Won" was like walking into a church.

Bill Kallay and Manwithnoname are right - if there's any way you can get there before the engagement ends, you won't be disappointed. In fact you won't believe your eyes. Cinerama can turn a simple shot of Debbie Reynolds and Carroll Baker standing among a bunch of trees on a riverbank into a truly beautiful, awe-inspiring sight. Don't even get me started on what it can do for the action sequences.

When I went to HTWWW at the Dome in 2003 the joint was packed like sardines on a Sunday afternoon. Maybe the crowds are scarce because of the fact that this film has already played in the Dome fairly recently. Could it be that LA area audiences are hungry for other classic films (like "2001") to play in the Dome as opposed to reruns such as this?

I said it before...I'll say it again. The real crowds and $$$'s are waiting for Arclight to steal the annual "Great Big 70MM Festival" from the American Cinematheque/Egyptian Theatre and to bring it to the Dome where 70MM belongs!

I was at the early show Saturday and it wasn't anywhere near being full. In fact, it was disappointing in terms of attendance but (except from a buzz in one of the Dome's speakers which may have been in the soundtrack) the presentation was awesome. Interviews were done with some audience members and we participated in a matte shot which will be used in the new DVD of the film to be released in 2007. "Cinerama Adventure" will be an extra on the DVD and the picture for HTWWW will use the curved "smilebox" technology. We also got a tour of the projection booth and an envelope containing a film clip from This is Cinerama which was a piece of film from each of the three panels and a fourth which was the mag soundtrack. The Dome has run Cinerama every October since 2002.

Tomorrow night, Arclight is presenting 2 sold out showings of "Pee Wee's Big Adventure". Go figure. Paul Reubens in person must have been the draw.

I just hope they put tarps down on the floor.


Sorry, couldnt resist.

From May 20 until June 16 1994, The Cinerama Dome presented a “Columbia Classic Film Retrospective”, advertised as “The way they were made to be seen”. The films screened included “Bridge on the River Kwai”, “Lawrence of Arabia”, “The Guns of Navarone” and “Tommy”. I had the chance to see “Kwai”and “Navarone”. They sounded and looked majestic on the giant screen. I don’t believe that a retrospective such as this has been presented in recent years. The last one I recall was done right before the renovation.

It’s about time for the Dome to host another event like this…

JSA

I have an ad from New York Times for Columbia Pictures 75th Anniversary Film Fetival, with my own note that it played the Dome. This series was more recent than above. On other side, a revie of Message in a Bottle.
Lawrence of Arabia (70mm!)
Dr. Strangelove and Easy Rider
It Happened One Night and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington
Bridge of the River Kwai
Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and Tootsie
Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind -DTS (Definitive Director's Cut)
From Here to Eternity and On the Waterfront
Taxi Driver

I see a comment above about Philadelphia's Boyd, a former 3 strip Cinerama house, being restored. It won't have the orchestra booths to project Cinerama, but the historic movie palace will survive! www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org
We found some Cinerama sound equipment tossed into old storage space. There was an old, not too exciting Windjammer poster, and I'm not sure if it was tossed. It was on the floor and not too clean. And, a ticket price sign for This is Cinerama, which we have for exhibit of the Boyd's history.

I got the above dates from the program that was handed during the engagements (I've been doing some spring cleaning!). I recall a later date for Columbia's 75th Anniversary, but can't exactly remember when. I just hope they bring back those films, right where they belong!

JSA

I've been going to the Dome since it first opened with Mad World. One thing that hasn't been pointed out and should be is that one of the reasons their current three-panel Cinerama isn't quite the real deal was their inability to install a proper slatted Cinerama screen. Hence, the projection is not as bright as it should be. The other lesser problem is that the screen really isn't tall enough - the Dome was never designed to house a true Cinerama screen. I saw Seven Wonders of The World, HTWWW and Brothers Grimm, all at the Warner Cinerama on Hollywood Blvd. and it was a higher screen (and maybe even a bit wider) - I've never seen anything like it before or since, and the image was incredibly bright and beautiful thanks to the louvered screen.

The Columbia Pictures 75th Anniversary festival was held during February 1999.

As to the comment re "the Dome was never designed to house a true Cinerama screen" -- I don't believe this comment is correct. The Dome WAS designed to be a 3-strip Cinerama house. It wasn't until very close to its completion that a decision was made to install the non-slatted screen and only 70mm projection. United Artists, the studio that produced the Dome's debut attraction, "It's A Mad Mad Mad Mad World," wrestled throughout its production as to how best to release it, and this is well-documented in the industry trades. UA's original plan was to release the film in 3-strip.

And to say the Dome doesn't have a tall enough screen -- come on! The screen is huge.

Sorry, but as Dave Strohmaier, the fellow who made the documentary on Cinerama, will be happy to tell you, while the screen may in fact be huge, it was NOT as tall as the Cinerama screen at the Warner Cinerama or any other of the original Cinerama screens.

While bigger is certainly better when talking about the screen size, assuming the proper light and focus are there of course, it is the ratio of the dimensions that are the key. Anyone who was lucky enough to make it to the Neon Movies in Dayton during their Cinerama days can attest to this. I doubt if the place held 300 seats, and the screen was no bigger than one you would see at some megaplex throwaway house. However, it was a ribbon screen, the curve was perfect, and the relation of height to width was exactly right. And, the projection booths, which were located in the back corners of the auditorium and in the lobby, were level with the center of the screen. I always sat on the fourth or fifth row and had as great a movie going experience as if I had sat at the equivalent seat at the Dome or Seattle, which I hope to do some day.

The screen at was installed at the Dome was 86 feet by 32 feet with a 126 degree curve. The louvered screen at the Warner Cinerama was 76 feet by 28 feet with a 146 degree curve. If you go back stage and look at the front lip of the stage behind the current screen you can see the original curve that was cut into the stage for the Cinerama screen.

Michael,

Thank you for the Columbia Pictures 75th Anniversary info.

JSA

Just attended a screening for the first time at the ArcLight. Fantastic multiplex theatre. Assigned seating, ushers in the theatres actually guiding people to their seats, very confortable seats and great sound and picture quality. Decor is somewhat minimal. Too bad the movie, Ask the Dust, was a big beautiful bore.

The Dome is the most unique theatre in Los Angeles.

OK, folks. What must we do to convince Pacific/Arclight to take a page from the Ziegfeld in New York and run a similar classic series at the Dome - not Arclight, BUT THE DOME! They're currently running "Scary Movie 4" there. Pathetic! Was this the company's vision when they restored this theatre? Somehow, I don't think so. The kids who saw that flick this weekend know NADA about grand and epic cinema! They are in desperate need of a 70MM history lesson. What better place than this theatre! Just picture it: the same films that the Ziegfeld showed on a screen that is worthy of their glory! At the very least, can AFI take a page from American Cinematheque and run their own 70MM Film Festival here? Imagine the possibilities!

Unfortunately "Scary Movie 4" is playing at the Ziegfeld right now as well. But the theater's director has assured us that the Classics will be returning in the fall. I hope the same thing will happen at the Dome, the ultimate place to see 70mm in the entire USA.

The top two theatres in Los Angeles that presents 70MM the way it should be shown, Grauman's Chinese and the Dome.

In the Ziegfeld’s CT page, I suggested a coast-to-coast classics revival that could take place simultaneously at flagship theaters in both the East and West Coasts. My thoughts were that, if successfully executed, such an event could demonstrate that there is substantial audience interest in classic films, in terms of proper theatrical presentation. In addition, this revival could offer industry, enthusiasts and the general public, with an opportunity to discuss in an open forum issues of interest such as restoration, preservation, and presentation of classic films. The Cinerama Dome would be the ideal place to host this event, particularly when it comes to 70 mm.
As Bill pointed out, the Ziegfeld is planning another classics series for this November. It would certainly be interesting if both venues coordinated efforts, along with the film distributors, the studios and other technical professionals, to bring out the best possible prints and stage a large-scale classic series.

JSA

Pacific/Arclight already has a "leg up" regarding the "Classics" concept. They regularly show classic films (old & new) in the Arclight portion of the complex every week...twice a week, I think. It shouldn't be too much trouble moving certain films to the Dome.

One more thing I forgot to mention: In anticipation for the release of "Kill Bill Vol. 2" a couple of years ago, Arclight held a "Quentin Tarantino Retropsective" of all his films from "Reservoir Dogs" through "Kill Bill Vol. 1" IN THE DOME. The final event was a 9:00 PM showing of KB Vol. 1 followed by a midnight showing of KB Vol. 2 on a Thursday night. This is also the much ballyhooed incident where QT was supposed to be there holding a Q&A after KB Vol. 2 but "missed his plane". :o)

Maybe a place to start would be to show classics at the Dome Saturdays and/or Sundays, at a special matinee or other regularly established time. Some smaller theaters do this already.

JSA

Anyone (besides me) going to see M:I-3 at the (digitally projected) dome this weekend? I've got tickets for the Saturday night 8:10 show. Let the summer begin!

GOOD NEWS: Showing June 7: The King & I (1:00 PM) & (grab hold of something) Lawrence of Arabia (7:00 PM - IN 70MM!)

BAD NEWS: They're showing both of these in the Arclight wing and NOT AT THE DOME!

Dang!

Details at Arclight's website. Here's a tiny URL link to the actual details page: http://tinyurl.com/lbr4f

More bad news for me: They have to do that the week I'm out of town on a business trip...

The architecture firm responsible for designing the 14 screens which now accompany Welton Beckett & Associates' original Cinerama Dome are Gensler Architects, a massive diversified global company with offices in 28 cities and over 2000 employees and an equal number of clients.

a number of people have said that the Dome has the finest presentation of any theater in L.A. I don't see how you can possibly say that. According to the Arclight website the screen is 86 feet by 32 feet.

86/32 = 2.69. This is ok, I guess, for those tiny handful of Cinerama movies that were ever made, but for all first run films in 2.40 or 1.85 the image gets badly distorted on the sides. In the center area of the screen the geometry is ok, but out towards the sides it is stretched and looks awful. In Revenge of the Sith for example, there is a shot of a planet in space a little off center. The part of the planet in the middle of the picture looked circular, but the part towards the side looked elliptical, and the planet looked like an egg.

And its so deeply curved (and not louvered) that it reflects on itself and can look washed out if something bright is on one side and something dark is on the other side.

And there are still sound imaging problems caused by sound reflections off the domed shape of the ceiling, even thought they covered it with acoustic panels during the remodel a few years ago.

Pacific/Arclight probably has the best projection and sound equipment money can buy in the Dome, but unfortunately for showing regular first run films, the auditorium suffers from really serious design flaws. Best presentation of any theater in L.A.? LOL! Far from it!

does anyone know how many subwoofers the Dome has?

Excellent view of the Hollywood Cinerama Dome all dressed up for the premiere of Lucille Ball's 1974 "MAME":
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/cineramadomepostcard.jpg

The ArcLight complex is loaded with flaws (many are easily correctable) and it doesn't even begin to live up to its own hype.

However I wouldn't fault the Dome's design for the inferior picture problems. It is entirely possible to have a brighter picture without any geometric distortion on a curved screen, but Pacific/ArcLight chose not to make the necessary adjustments. Instead, they used cheap workarounds... The bottom masking is actually curved UP on the ends to try to hide the keystoning, which doesn't really work, and there is still a dip in the horizon line. They also chose a low-gain screen material to lessen cross-reflection. As a result, the picture is indeed much softer and dimmer than it could be, and darker curtains on the walls don't hide that fact. The picture is distorted even with digital projection, (which one would think should have some capacity to adjust for the curve).

So many details in the Dome and the adjoining houses could have been much better with some thoughtful showmanship and finesse, but sadly, the ArcLight decision-makers are utterly clueless to that kind of thing. There aren't many people around who know how to do it well, and the ones in charge don't like to listen to them.

It is amazing that the ArcLight promotes its zero decor in their ads, and that they got someone at the LA times to say they had the best screens and best popcorn. I personally don't find sitting in a "black box" a plus, I have seen seams on several of the screens, and I've gotten sick from the popcorn, which is rarely even warm, and often filled with broken pieces and unpopped kernels.

I much prefer the presentation and atmosphere at the El Capitan... not perfect, but there is at least is an attempt at showmanship, and I always have a better time there.

Regarding the June 7 screenings of "Lawrence Of Arabia" and "The King And I" mentioned a few posts back, that event also included a birthday party/roast/tribute to Tomlinson Holman, best known as the developer of the THX Sound System. For those who may have an interest, here is a link to some pics:

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

From the Los Angeles Times, November 1963: the premiere of "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World" and of the Dome itself. Get a load of that celebrity guest list:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/billhuelbig/dome.jpg

Bill,

Thanks for the posting! Ten sold out evening shows!

What really gets me is that "Cleopatra" was playing in Todd-AO less than a mile away at the Pantages !!

JSA

... and a midnight show every night! Those really were the good old days.

OH WOW Bill, THANK YOU For that advert.

Amazing.

Thank you

<speechless>

And...of all those drive-ins listed in the "Palm Springs Weekend" ad, the Vineland is the last man standing!

On closer inspection of the ad, there weren't midnight shows every night - only Fridays and Saturdays. Still, that's pretty cool - I would've loved being able to stagger out of the Dome at 3 AM onto Sunset Blvd. after seeing "Mad, Mad World".

Here's another ad from December 1959 featuring L.A. area drive-ins: 39 of them! (wow)

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/billhuelbig/ladriveins.jpg

Another ho-hum Fall at the Dome. No Cinerama. No 70MM Special Engagements. Just digitally projected Hollywood mediocrity. The management at the Ziegfeld in New York got a clue. Why can't Pacific/Arclight?

The Ziegfeld is back to their standard fare of Hollywood films.

This is the first time since Arclight opened that the Dome has not had at least a couple of Cinerama screenings in the Fall.

How well did they do the last time they ran them? Maybe they are just putting alittle more time between the last runs of them.

I saw HTWWW last November. For that particular show, attendance was not that great. I agree that they should put a few years between 3-strip Cinerama shows. In my opinion, a single-strip Cinerama retrospective is in order, if good prints are available. Hopefully not "Krakatoa: East of Java"!

Chris: My sentiments exactly...

JSA

They're slightly stepping things up at the Dome with the upcoming Premiere engagement of "Dreamgirls" starting December 15th. They're doing it Broadway/Roadshow style. $25 bucks a person gets you a seat, a souvenir program, and access to "Dreamgirls" merchandise.

I'll be there on Saturday December 16. Should be a blast!

There doing the same thing at the Ziegfeld Theatre in NYC for "Dreamgirls". They said it was going to be digital projection.

It opens everywhere on December 25th at popular prices.

Has anyone seen Dreamgirls at the Dome yet?

Yes...4 times and each time it just got better and better. Perfect picture...perfect sound. Sold out all 4 times (that I attended).

Saw it on 12/16. Absolutely stunning!

Here's a link to a list of the Cinerama presentations at this theatre (and other Cinerama venues in Los Angeles).

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

Michael,

Thanks for posting the link! As always, great information!
I’m going to repeat myself, but I think a single-strip Cinerama retrospective at the Dome would be a cool event. But other that “2001”, “It’s a Mad, Mad… World” & “Grand Prix”, what other titles have available prints?

JSA

Will there be an Arclight-like theater in the New Jersey area? The Rockaway theater that just opened doesn't look at all like the theater in California!!! Probably the new Xanadu 26 theater should be like the Arclight.

Wow, Michael - another first-rate job. I really hope the Cinerama Dome plays "2001" again soon, for the 8th time!

Oh wait - for the 7th time at the Dome. 8th time in L.A., though.

Not that it matters much, but a 70 mm print of "2001" also screened at the Carpenter Performing Arts Center in Long Beach on October 1996.

Bill: You, EdSolero, andreco and the other NY area CT members that have "2001" in high regard should make the "pilgrimage" to LA next time it screens at the Dome!

Regards,
JSA

You're right, JSA. That's a pilgrimage I would really love to make. I'm surprised it hasn't played there for more than 11 years.

Cinerama Dome decorated for the 1998 film Jack Frost:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomejackfrost1998.jpg

Hello.

I've always wanted to plan my first visit to Hollywood according to the schedule of the Cinerama Dome (I live in Brazil). It's been a dream of mine to see a movie in 3-strip Cinerama at least once, since I'm too young to have seen those in Brazil.

A friend of mine is there now, and he told me people at the theater (employees) told him it was not going to show Cinerama 3-strip films anymore, and that it would be demolished this year! I think he's pulling my leg, but if there's any truth in this I'd really like to know... It'd be shameful to the history of cinema.

Thanks,

Max M. Fuhlendorf
Sao Paulo, Brazil

The Pictureville Cinema at the National Media Museum in Bradford, England, shows the three-trip original Cinerama movie, 'This is Cinerama' at 1.30pm on the first Saturday of each month. They are also showing 'How The West Was Won', during the Bradford Film Festival next month. Pictureville is the only cinema in the world which has regular performances of three-strip and 70mm versions of Cinerama. Why not visit our country instead of the USA, you will be pleased with what you find!

Max , your friend is pulling your leg about the matter. The Dome and ArcLight plex is save from being torn down. As for the films there might be less bookings or longer waits for them to return.

The Dome and ArcLight plex is safe. I hit the v instead of the f.

That's great!

So, when they do have special Cinerama screenings, do they say so in their website? Do people here post news of any Cinerama films that are to be shown?

I've read most posts in this forum, and the consensus seems to be that Pacific tends not to advertise their special engagements to anyone at all...

Thanks

Max,

More than likely, Pacific would advertise a Cinerama screening on the Arclight web site. Previous engagements were advertised in the LA Times, but not with a lot of fanfare. Also, I'm pretty sure that someone will post it here as well.

JSA

Thanks a lot.

I'll always keep an eye on this forum, I might get lucky and be on vacation when they show the next Cinerama spectacle. I'd not think twice before hopping on a plane.

And David,
I've always read about the Cinerama Dome and since I've never been in Hollywood, I want to visit it for other reasons beside it (Chinese Theater for example), but I want that trip to coincide with a Cinerama movie at the Dome :D

I'm not in a hurry though, and it's great to know that the Pictureville Cinema shows "This is Cinerama" every Saturday!! I was in fact planning an Europe trip by the end of this year, and England was on the top of my list (a big plus, it's one of the few countries north of the equator where brazilians aren't considered potential terrorists, and don't need to jump thru fiery hoops to get a visa :). Now, last week I saw "The Queen", and I felt an urge to hop on a plane and go to the British Isles immediately... Helen Mirren's Elizabeth accent is flawless, I just loved the movie and its delicate storytelling.

Thanks to all,

Max M. Fuhlendorf
Sao Paulo, Brazil

Is this the place that's almost right next to the Ameoba Music store?

Yes.

Here's a link to a photo of the Cinerama from the sky:
http://local.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&cp=ppgn6y545bzs&style=o&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=3597300

Does anyone know where the Manager of the dome is Jim Sutton?

From Jan. 2007:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdCineramaDome2007.jpg

I posted this before on Jan. 17th, but I wanted to mention to those readers with an interest that my historical list of Cinerama presentations in Los Angeles has been updated.

[Bill Huelbig: you'll be pleased to know that your all-time favorite film has been given two additional entries on the list! Granted, they were "D-150" presentations at the Egyptian Theatre that are being included on a technicality. Other revisions have been made to the list as well.]

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

We also now have posted on our site a companion list of Cinerama presentations in New York City which I will predict that some of you Cinema Treasures regulars will eat up.

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

Michael: Another stellar job. Thanks so much - and thanks for the new picture of "2001" at the Capitol, which I hadn't seen before.

I think 12 years is way too long a gap between "2001" screenings at the Cinerama Dome.

Michael: “FSTDVD” keeps getting better. Thanks for keeping us up to date!

I agree with you 100%, Bill. I chose to skip the 1995 engagement, taking it for granted that the Dome would screen "2001" every few years or so! The last time I saw the film in its entirety was at the Cal State Long Beach Performing Arts Center, in 1996. It would be cool if Warner decides to strike new 70 mm prints for the 40th anniversary of “2001”. Maybe screen them at the Uptown in DC, the Ziegfeld and the Dome.

JSA

"2001" is 40 years old next year. They've gotta run it here!

"I'm afraid I can't let you do that, Chris".

Decorating the dome for the benefit premiere of 1974's MAME. This photo is very old and the weather that day was really ugly:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomeMAME5.jpg

Arclight is expanding. The Sherman Oaks Galleria 16 is becoming the Arclight Sherman Oaks. The theater will remain open during phase one and will close in August and reopen during the holidays. More on the arclight website.

Note to Max from Brazil - let me know if you come to LA. My wife is from Rio, and we were actually in Sao Paulo last month. We would be more than happy to show around LA and Hollywood.

The Dome for spideys visit:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdDomeSpidey001May2007.jpg
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdDomeSpidey003May2007.jpg
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdDomeSpidey004May2007.jpg

Here is another recent photo.

Several other pictures of the Hollywood Cinerama Dome:
Outer shell:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomedec2006018.jpg
Lobby:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomeoct05031.jpg
Stairs to upper level:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomeoct05018.jpg
Cinerama projector (?):
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwddomeoct05023.jpg

The picture above is for a Cinerama camera, not a projector. The Dome has 3 35 mm Cinerama projectors.

JSA

Since I've never seen a cinerama camera or projector, I wasn't sure..hence the ? Thanks for correcting.

You're welcome!

The last time the Dome screened 3-strip Cinerama, they opened the booth to the public after the show. It was awesome to see the 3 projectors!

JSA

I'm curious..why did Hairspray, a big splashy colorful movie open in one of the small theaters and Chuck & Larry, ANOTHER Adam Sandler comedy open in the Dome??

ArcLight has no sense of showmanship, it's all about money. They booked that awful comedy then the Bourne picture and Put HAIRSPRAY in the back. They had one Thursday night Midnight screening of HAIRSPRAY in the Dome but kept it a secret by not mentioning it in their weekly newsletter email or the features column on their site. The only LA theatre playing the film that can match the big, splasy colorful HAIRSPRAY is the Majestic Crest in Westwood.

Well, according to Arclight's website Hairspray is now playing in the Dome.

HAIRSPRAY is playing in the Dome.

THE SIMPSONS MOVIE is not.

Not a joke.

I noticed that HAIRSPRAY has moved to the dome on the Arclight sight. I little late for me since they all ready got my $11 for the showing in the smaller theater. Tho, if it's still playing at the Crest next week, I will go see it again there. Actually, I just want to see the Crest Theater interior.

When I tried to see HAIRSPRAY at the unpublicized midnight preview, I had a run-in with an arrogant manager, and got a ticket to return later. I said I'd just wait until CHUCK & LARRY got moved to the back, because HAiRSPRAY would inevitably end up in the Dome, and she swore that HAIRSPRAY would NEVER play the Dome again. She also swore that her staff never allowed feet on the seats and always looked for disruptive patrons. Wrong on every point.

Went back to the Dome yesterday afternoon and found HAIRSPRAY a joy, but the picture was dim and fuzzy as usual because of Pacific's bad projection decisions. You can read more on that elsewhere... I have also never found the Dome's sound system to be particularly impressive. Sure it's loud, but I don't ever remember hearing much in the way of discrete channels or high fidelity. Ditto the ArcLight's "Black Boxes"...

I still want to see Hairspray at the Crest. Their picture will be sharper and brighter than the Dome's. For More on HAIRSPRAY at the Crest and a look at the interior, Visit http://cinemasightlines.com/cinemas_showmanship.php There will eventually be an in-depth review of Arclight/Cinerama Dome there, among other theatres.

The Crest certainly looks like great eye candy but the auditorium looks a lot like a jazzed up version of the Bruin(ie shoebox shape with a screen at the end). An opening curtain show sounds great though. Disney should take notice.

Not going to defend the Dome's projection/screen problems although the sound can be VERY GOOD when the planets align, which is kind of rare now. LOTR 1 sounded INSANE.

I don't go to that many movies at that many different theaters these days so I can't really make a comment on the sound. I rarely notice any "stereo" or "surround" sound. The last recent movie I saw where I could swear people in the audience were clapping and talking behind me was DREAMGIRLS and that was at the dome. Only after seeing it a 3rd time did I realize the sounds were from the film and not from the audience. I noticed some minor sounds behind me when I saw HAIRSPRAY in the Arclight black box that were from the film and not the audience. Perhaps I am sitting too far from the screen? I can remember seeing THE FUGITIVE at the Chinese. I was gripping the armrest during the scene when the train jumps the tracks and the sound started from the front to the left to behind me and then to the right. You could really feel the train moving through the films sound...even with your eyes closed. Maybe there are too many channels today to notice the individual sounds. Maybe I'm not seeing the right kind of movies where the sound would be so noticeable. I know absolutely nothing about the advances made in motion picture sound so I don't know if it's in the films editing or just the particular theater you are sitting in and where you are sitting that causes you to hear sounds from the front, left, behind and right. THE FUGITIVE was an experience I'll never forget and nothing has come close to that since. (And my hearing was checked in 2004 and is as good as it ever was.) Arclight is showing GREASE this month...that should be a good test.

Mark, I know what you mean about the Bruin, but the Majestic Crest is designed opulence from the marquee to the screen, so it beats the hell out of the Bruin. Disney has no need to notice the Crest's presentation... their El Capitan has a great opening curtain and light show... by the same designer as the Majestic Crest. The Crest is an example of what Joe Musil could do without interference from the Mouse Factory.

And speaking of the ultimate curtain show, Me. Musil's Musem of Theatrical Design in Santa Ana has a theatre with something like a dozen curtains! Makes the El Cap look like a puppet show. The Crest/Hairspray page you were were looking at has a link to his website. He's ahveing a show Saturday with clips from movie musicals, and his museum has an entire wall dedicated to designing and outfittng the Crest.

Hwd9, I am no expert but I can recognize fake audience surrounds (it was one of the first surround sound I ever heard decades ago) I have to warn you that the last time ArcLight's zero decor "Black Box" showed GREASE (with Director Randal Kleiser present) either the print was flat mono (highly unlikely) or the surrounds weren't even turned on. Sounded like loud mono. Part of the problem is most of the "black boxes" are wider than they are long, so the surrounds are probably too far apart to be noticed. Just don't expect much from GREASE.

ArcLight is just SO FAR away from being what they say they are.... but more of that will surface elsewhere later.

Actually the El Capitan doesn't have the grand curtain opening preshow anymore. Apparently they stopped doing it a a few years ago, around the time of the first Pirates movie. Now there's just one yellow curtain that rises and falls between the stage show and trailers. It's still a very nice curtain though.

Roadshow, if you despise Arclight so much why did you go there? It would be like me going to an AMC theater.

Mark, actually the El Cap did not discontinue the curtain show. All 3 curtains are still there, I've seen them all used in the usual manner within the past few months, and the management has confirmed they're all still in operation. The curtain opening is preprogrammed, and if they have the screen in front of one of the curtains (as was the case for a couple of the 3-D features) or the stage show set precludes use of all three curtains, if one of them is being cleaned or replaced, or whatever, then they can't do it. The Pirate movies had their own curtain show, (and their own curtain).

I never said I despise ArcLight, just that they don't live up to their hype. One is just as likely to be bothered by inconsiderate people there as anywhere else, and though they make a big show of staying inside to check on things, they really don't monitor the audience for disturbances, even when they are in there. The new seats AMC put into Universal are way more comfortable than ArcLight's. (though the new Uni lobby is hideous) For the record, ArcLight happens to be the closest plex to me.

Well, I'll take your word for it. There was no curtain show when I saw Ratatouille last month though. Probably to accomadate the stage show.

I know this is OT but it's pretty neat how the El Capitan's screen operates. I wonder how big the screen speakers are as they must go up and down with the screen.

The ArcLight is running "Hairspray" Sing-A-Long version now. Enjoy!

The gift store in the lobby of the Pacific Arclight no longer sells Cinerama shirts. The rude lady told me they took a bath on them.I don't think so. I have seen many people with them in the last few years. They had many styles with the Cinerama logo. They don't even sell the new Cinema Treasure book that has the Cinerama Dome in it. I asked about the book she never heard of it. Of all places to sell this book this is the place. the Pacific people don't care about Cinerama anymore. In the LA Times the theatre is just called the Dome. Why not call it The Cinerama Dome. They can put in the little logo for Cinerama. At one time the Seattle people and the Pacific guys wanted to restore all the 3 proj prints. Is this ever going to happen?

Pacific doesn't want the Cinerama name and brand, they think the ArcLight brand is going to be as popular as The Hard Rock Cafe or Planet Hollywood. Delusional, huh? With only one or two exceptions, (good people who aren't given enough clout by the owners) the Pacific/Arclight folks in currently charge have never had any knowledge, interest or respect for the Cinerama name or the process.

Actually the CInerama stuff sold just fine. They really took a bath on the ArcLight branded merchandise, because really, who cares about that name?. Cinerama is one of the more recognizable names in entertainment history, and it actully means something, while the ArcLight name ("borrowed" from a foreign theatre chain that sued Pacific over it) means nothing. Ask one of the employees what ArcLight means. They have no idea. I once asked someone in middle management there, and the answer was comically clueless.

Adding the 3 Cinerama projectors was not corporate Pacific's idea at all, it was the result of much prodding from Cinerama enthusiasts, and Pacific chose to ignore much of the expert advice about how to get a good picture on the Cinerama screen, which is why movies at the Dome are generaly dim and fuzzy.

Seattle and Pacific aren't the ones who wanted to restore any or all of the Cinerama movies, and they aren't willing to pay for it all. And by the way. none of the films has been "restored" They just struck new prints of two features and that's all. The costs were shared by special arrangements. Again it was the Cinerama enthusiasts (many of whom are employed in entertainment and know how to do it right) that prodded these theatres into doing what's been done so far, and both theatres' execs resisted fully installing the screen and process, so the screen image in both Seattle and the Dome are not as effective as they could be.

If Seattle execs really cared for Cinerama, they would have listened to the experts and permanantly installed a proper Cinerama screen (with the strips anchored to the front) instead of rolling it up behind a flatter screen. Their designers were so enthralled with making that showy new ceiling that they neglected to allow for the full size of the Cinerama screen. The ceiling obsturcts part of the picture, so the screen has to be masked down from its full picture size because of the ceiling.

The Cinerama name and process was not really being kept alive by the corporations in charge of Pacific or Seattle, it was some vocal and resourceful enthusiasts and experts who prodded both into action, and in both cases their expert advice was not fully carried out and the installations are compromised.

Cinerama inc. is a very small division of Pacific, and has maybe a three person staff consisting of the two experts mentioned before and a secretary. Again these are good people who know showmanship, and if they were in charge of things, the Cinerama Dome experience (and the rest of the theatres) would be far superior to what it is today. The execs only listen to money.

Do you think Pacific may dislike the Cinerama name because their entire chain was called "Cinerama" in the past? Perhaps they're just tired of hearing it.

Hey, I have an Arclight shirt around here somewhere. ;-)

I'm curious what advice Cinerama enthusiasts were suggesting. A proper strip screen would elminate the cross reflections, of course.

When the Cinerama Dome re-opened in 2002, they had some Cinerama branded merchandise like fridge magnets and floaty pens. Earlier this year they had Cinerama mugs and a booklet all about the Cinerama process. Currently, blue Arclight teeshirts are being sold. Originally they were red. I've never seen Cinerama branded teeshirts sold in the gift shop.

Roadshow: The screening of GREASE in the Arclight blackbox #8 was a bit odd. The sound was as wonderful as it was when I originally saw the film at the Hollywood theater on Hollywood Blvd. I don't know where the print came from. Some of it was blurry...some of it faded...some of it had vertical scratches, but it had excellent sound which was my main reason to go see it. I actually heard sounds from the side and rear speakers...a first for any film I've seen in one of Arclights blackboxes. And tho not advertised, this was a sing-a-long performance so the words to the songs appeared at the bottom of the image. Always one of my favorite musicals, despite the bad print, I had a very enjoyable time. We'll see what happens when they screen the more recent Moulin Rouge.

Scott: Pacific was originally called Pacific Drive-Ins, the chain was never called Cinerama. They acquired Cinerama inc. (not including any theatres) in the sixties after the Dome was built.

Mark: The Cinerama enthsiasts had more experience with and knowledge of Cinerama than anyone at Pacific, except for the two people I mentioned before. The louvered screen would be made of a high gain material, and most important, each strip needed to be angled so that is was flat toward the audience and anchored into place so that it wouldn't move. Seattle got the louvered screen but never bothered to angle or anchor the lovvers, so it was effectively just a sliced up sheet screen. First time they showed HOW THE WEST WAS WON, the AC was turned on behind the screen, and all those strips began to flutter, causing bleck lines to appear all across the screen, so it looked like it was raining all over the picture. Apparently Pacific Execs were there and that scared them away from installing louvers in the Dome. Of course had the strips been angled properly and fixed into position, and a white scrim was hung behind the louvers, you would never get that fluttering, and even if you did, the white scrim would prevent the black streaks in the picture.

The experts also demonstrated how the severe angle from the existing booth distorts and weakens the picture, while a more direct throw from the back of the mezzanine would give a brighter undistorted picture. But Pacific didn't want to loose the 39 seats back there.

It was also the Cinerama folks who suggested that the Dome be retrofitted for 3-strip Cinerama, further that it be shown regularly (but not too often) as a tourist attraction. There were filmmakers who were itching to shoot new footage in 3 strip, like a short prologue in real Cinerama to be shown before every feature, but again, Pacific execs aren't really interested.

90038: who do you know that would pay for an ArcLight T-shirt? the Cinerama name and logo are more attractive and interesting than that ArcLight scribble. They had more than one design of Cinerama shirts at one time. Not by any stretch of the imagination cold ArcLight merchandise outsell Cinerama.

Roadshow: I agree 100%. Arclight merch. will never outsell Cinerama merch. I wish I had known they had Cinerama tee shirts at one point as I would have bee-lined up there to get one. I was brave enough to ask and lucky enough to receive a copy of the short 5 minute film of the building of the Cinerama Dome that was shown when the theater reopened in 2002. THAT is my greatest cinema treasure and my sincere thanks go to JS at Cinerama Inc. and RB at Arclight.

JS is the onePacific/ArcLight folks should be listening to. I've met RB as well. Just don't ask him what ArcLight means...

If the Pacific/Arclight Execs are indeed so disinterested in showing true Cinerama in The Dome then I would honestly prefer they install a proper screen (Cinemascope) and fix the projection problems. Then instead of showing compromised Cinerama a week out of the year and dim distorted 35mm/2k digital for the rest they could have top notch projection the entire year.

Mark, as I've said, the screen is not the problem, it's the location of the projector. Taking the CInerama screen out of the Dome would be like taking all the Chinese decoration out of Graumans Chinese. Put another booth in the back of the mezzanine and the picture would be brighter with no dip in the horizon line. Make the screen out of properly aligned louvers and the brightness and contrast would be much better. But Pacific/ArcLight folks just don't think that way.

PS: even a flatter Cinemascope tyoe screen would have a distorted and certainly dim picture if the picture was thrown from the current booth.

Wouldn't angling the screen upward help as well? How does the projection angle compare to Grauman's or the Village? Also, for those that were there how did Evita look when the temporary flat screen was put in? Was it hung higher to avoid the distortion?

The thing is that there isn't a Cinerama screen in the Dome. It's a D-150, which is too curvy for anything shown on it nowadays.

The problems at the Dome have been the same problems it's had for the last 40 some years. "Evita" looked good but I did not like the flat screen. The studio have over the years struck special lighter prints for that curved screen. I've run the Dome many times, it was a fun booth to run. (Before the automation install) The operator ran that booth, everything was run manual.

I should've added that it probably wouldn't/doesn't matter much if the screen in the Dome isn't technically a Cinerama screen. As long as it's huge and somewhat curved and the sign on the building says Cinerama then I think Joe Public will be satisifed.

Supposedly the picture at the Dome was worse before the Arclight addition. The focus across the screen wasn't as uniform as it is now.

Roadshow,

I'm pretty sure that a branch of Pacific was called Cinerama Theatres. I was under the impression that the theatres they operated in Marin County were all operated by Cinerama Theatres Inc.

Again, don't blame the screen. Cinerama screens in places like New York, Washington DC, Seattle and Omaha, have all shown standard movies on a reduced area of a Cinerama screen for decades with very popular results. Tilting a curved screen upwards is problematic and doesn't really solve the problem as much as change it.

Evita's flat screen happened because Alan Parker freaked out over the throw angle making her coffin looking like a wiener. Disney engineers came in and turned the Dome into a black box. Flat ceiling, flat screen with no curtains, looked like a cheesy multiplex. I was there to see Evita. I can't tell you how many people went down and peeked behind the flat screen to make sure the curved one was still there.

Except for using a low-gain sheet in place of louvers, the screen at the Dome is a Cinerama screen. Check with American Widescreen Museum http://widescreenmuseum.com/index.htm for more information on Cinerama. There were not really a hard set of specs for the screen. Could be 146 or 126 degrees, curved sides like a cylander or flat sides like a bowtie. A lot depended on the venue.

Later processes like Todd AO and D-150 tried to imitate the Cinerama screen, and AWSM has a neat illustration about D-150 and the areas allowed for each format. You were never supposed to blow up 35mm to the full size of the screen because you lose to much light and sharpness... but the Dome does now, and you can see the result.

As for the current geometric distortion at the Dome, ArcLight's insistance on using the entire screen for everything magnifies the distortion, and the enormous task of closing up the place to build a new frame with a flatter or tilted screen makes much less sense than simply building another booth in the rear mezzanine where it should be. It could be done in stages without missing a single screening, and the result would be a nearly straight throw to the center of the screen, eliminating any horizon sag. And since a straight line is a shorter distance than a diagonal line, the shorter throw means a brighter sharper picture. Louvers could be put onto the existing screen frame in a couple days if they had the right people working on it. BTW, 3 strip Cinerama hasn't much problem with horizion sag becaust it's 3 projectors, aimed directly at left, center and right, so they can stay where they are.

Are you talking about a Cinerama screen still in New York? Where? or maybe you are talking 20 or more years ago?

No I meant the downstairs of the old Warner theatre after it was converted in 68 to the Penthouse/Cinerama/Orleans. They ran regular movies on the Cinerama screen for years until it was torn down about 20 years later. I saw National Lampoon's Vacation there in its initial run. No picture distortion because the booth was in the back of the auditorium.

Roadshow, since you were there for the Evita experiment how did the image look? Was there any distortion on the flat screen?

I heard that for the recent It's A Madx4 World showing at the Dome the screen was masked so all of the frame was shown, something like this:

http://img411.imageshack.us/img411/1350/domescreenmadworlduc8.jpg

A similar masking configuration could be used for 2.35:1. Only the bottom would have to be masked. This would decrease the projection angle and allow for more of the frame to be seen that would otherwise be cut off if all of the screen was used. The last time I was at the Dome was for Spider-man 3 and so much was cut off at the bottom of the frame that the Sony Pictures text under the Columbia Pictures logo was completely cut off.

Wow, Mark, sure looks bizarre, doesn't it? Red masking? Is that a real picture or a simulation of what the masking may have looked like? The red part clearly defines the odd shape caused by the throw angle.

You're on target about the masking, the further down the picture goes, the more distortion there is, which is why you want to keep the picture closer to the top of the screen than the bottom, and not use the entire width like they try to do now.

Evita looked okay but strange... in order to have a flat screen they needed to bring it forward so far that at least a third of the orchestra level was behind the screen, and and to reduce the keystoning, it was up so high that the only decent place to sit was upstairs. This made the screen feel a little too "in your face." Not an ideal situation at all.

Yeah, that's a simulation I found somewhere. Red masking would be kind of wild. lol

Flat 1.85:1 films aren't actually too bad at the Dome so just masking the sides work for that. The masked 2.35:1 image would use the full width, just not the bottom. I'm surprised this isn't done now. The benefits would far outweigh using the bottom sides of the screen.

Good news in todays LA Times Thurs Aug 9 the Pacific team has the listing CINERAMA DOME not just The Dome. Did they read my note this week? Now lets get the great Cinema Treasure book for sale in the gift shop and bring back the Cinerama shirts. The tourists will snap them up. It's time for a new print of Cinerama Holiday to play. Play it up for the summer vacation people in Hollywood.

And some cool Dome nitelights like those sold at the Chinese Theater.

There were several Dome souvenirs in the works a few years ago, including a Dome snow globe, but they never happened and aren't likely now.

I'm glad I got my Cinerama Dome and Cinerama logo fridge magnets in 2003. They gave them away, too, for "It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World".

I also have a Cinerama logo baseball hat, a keychain with a rubber reproduction of the Dome building and a coffee mug with the Cinerama logo along with the magnets. All of these things I bought at the gift shop and they definitely had shirts along with tote bags with the Seven Wonders of the World ad. Some other goodies in the "Mad World" giveaway bag were a postcard, a reprint of the This Is Cinerama program (which also sold in the gift shop) and a card celebrating the film/theater's 40th anniversary.

I still have two Cinerama tee-shirts, a jacket, and real frames from HTWWW, all from the New Neon in Dayton.

Breaking News:

American Film Institute is hosting their 40th Anniversary celebration on October 3rd at the Arclight.

http://www.afi.com/tvevents/40th/default.aspx

Not only are the films they're showing monumental, but wait till you see who's presenting them!

I AM SO THERE!!!

Yeah but with eleven films and 15 screens, what is showing where? I asked AFI and got no answer. Who gets the Dome? My guess is nobody.

My money's on either "Spartacus" or "Star Wars" to play The Dome. Crossing my fingers that "Spartacus" gets it - cause that's what I wanna see!

Either way, if I missed this event, I'd never forgive myself. It don't matter what plays where - just as long as I'm there!

Chris: I also think "The Sound of Music" has a good shot at playing the Dome, along with the other two you mentioned. I guess we'll find out tomorrow when the tickets go on sale. If only I didn't live 3,000 miles away ...

I can't imagine a more painful experience than seeing your favorite movie distorted on the Dome's screen. I remember seeing Lawrence of Arabia in there and it was like viewing the desert through a fishbowl.

Bill, just make a left on John F. Kennedy Boulevard and go about 2783 miles...you should be there in about 40 hours.

Are they showing any of the three 70mm films in 70mm? Is the Cinerama Dome the only theatre in the ArcLight complex ready to show 70mm? The list up on the AFI site does not tell you anything about 70mm. I guess everything will be in 35mm how sad.

Saps: it's very tempting. At least I did make the trip to this great theater twice in my life on a kind of impulse, to see "How the West Was Won" and "Mad Mad World". Not this year, though.

If ANYTHING is shown in 70MM, those will be the first to sell out. As for Kram's "Lawrence" in a fishbowl experience, it couldn't have been worse than the time I saw it in 70MM on a puny 45 FOOT SCREEN(!!!) at the Egyptian almost 7 years ago. I'd suffer through edge distortion just to see BIG MOVIES projected on BIG SCREENS as they were intended.

Anyone know if the tickets go on sale at Midnight or later in the morning? I hope to have my ticket purchased by 8:00 AM PST.

Mark: it's not the curved screen that disorts the picture. It's the severe angle of the projector throw. If the projector were in the back of the mezzanine, the picture would just wrap around the curve with no dip in the horizon line. Cinerama is not the only film format to use a curved screen. Todd-AO (70mm) was conceived for a screen just as curved as the Dome.

And AFI called back this morning. The movie in the Cinemama Dome will be Sparticus.

Oh boy. Early morning typo. Cinerama Dome, not Cinemama Dome, which sounds kinda funny.

Spartacus it is, then! I had a feeling.

I've never seen Spartacus... maybe this will be a good excuse.

I saw the restoration of Sparticus when it first opened at the great Ziegfeld years ago. What impressed me first (after seeing the blank screen clearly through the title curtain all during the overture) was what a very bombastic score... the opening credits sounded more like a John Philip Sousa marching band than a film composer... but hey maybe that's what he was going for.

It was certainly epic. And I love Tony Curtis's intro. Each of the slaves interviewed is gruff and butch, then they come to Bernie, who says "I am a singer of so-wungs. And I also worked at da Kestle, ware i tawt dem da klessics." No worse than John Wayne as Gengis Khan, just amusing.

It would be great to see Kirk Douglas introduce the film, showimg how hard he's worked to overcome the effects of the stroke. He's come a long way.

Oops. that's "showing." I am a lousy typist... and I don't even know da klessics.

Chris Utley: I really hope you score a ticket to "Spartacus" in the Dome. Wow - seeing it on that screen, with Spartacus himself in the house ... it doesn't get any better than that.

Be sure to tell us all about the show.

BTW, what sound system does the dome theater use? I guess it's every major surround sound system used up to today. Also, is the dome better than the omnimax theater in Jersey City? I wished they just show other IMAX movies, not just docs on science and stuff.

Arclight's selling 'em now (Tuesday 9/17). I just got my tix! SWEEEEET!

I will post a report of the festivities. Stay tuned.

Justin: The Dome uses Dolby Digital EX or SDDS 8 Channel for 35MM films (depending on the film)and DTS for 70MM films (that have been encoded for DTS).

UPDATE:

As of 7:55 AM PST, EVERYTHING except a few seats for "The Birds", "Beauty and the Beast" and "Spartacus" is SOLD OUT. I suspect everything will be gone by 8:30 - 9:00 AM...if not sooner.

I sure hope the AFI is going to record all the celebrity introductions and make them available for viewing on their website. This is the kind of event we could never pull off in New York City, sad to say.

If tickets went on sale earlier than my email stated they would then they suck for doing that. Those of us who have lives and can't sit online all day are the big losers. I'll be checking ebay to see how many tix turn up there.

Will 'Spartacus' be shown in 70mm In the Cinerama Dome? Hire some new ushers and put them in gladiator outfits!

Crossing my fingers, Terry.

As of 11:35 AM today, all tickets have been sold out. So glad I got mine!

I was walking by the Cinerama Dome last Friday (9/14/07) on my way to a movie at the Arclight and a crew of guys was covering the outside forecourt of the Dome with signs and photos from the 1976 movie "The Slipper & the Rose: The Story of Cinderella." I have never heard anything good about this 30 year-old movie; were they really planning to show it in the Cinerama Dome? Or was someone shooting a movie set in '76 and the Dome was being put in period? Did this movie play at the Dome in '76? This has been on my mind all week; anyone have an answer? Thanks.

Chances are they were shooting something.

Alright folks! Here's the report from AFI's 40th Anniversay on 10/3/07:

The entrance to Arclight was covered in Red Carpet (neato).

Folks were dressed in everything from suit to jeans and everything in between. I shoulda dressed sharper.

All the movies got started REAL LATE. The events were supposed to kick off at 7:00 PM - most didn't start till close to 8:00 PM.

They broke the cardinal rule of cinematic presentation: NO SLIDE SHOWS! The Dome screen was 50% open so AFI could run a myriad of "Spartacus" triva stuff over...and over...and over...and over...and over again! Ugh!

Far Left/Right seats & the whole stadium seated section of The Dome was full. The middle floor seats, though, had some serious gaps. A bunch of folks didn't claim their seats at all.

1st intro to the night happened round 7:15 or so when one of the directors of AFI's Silver Springs Maryland branch did a mini intro.

7:45 - 8:00 or so gave the REAL intro. Curtaiss close, lights dim, and a 1-2 minute clip of AFI's history kicks off. Clip shows President LBJ announcing the forming of the American Film Institute and finishes with a plethora of clips with a voiceover underneath. The Chairman of AFI's Board of Directors makes his spiel and introduces LA Mayor Antonio Villarigosa. We gave him a nice applause - no boos. He talked about how "Spartacus" influenced him to get out there and change the world, blah blah blah. AFI Chairman comes back and introduces Kirk Douglas.

Weird seeing Kirk Douglas at 90 years old. Not used to seeing him in his twilight. Speech was slurred (of course) but absolutely passionate. The highlight of his remarks were about how he fought to get Dalton Trumbo's screenplay on screen and, of course, how he fought to ensure that Trumbo got his proper screenplay credit. We gave Mr. Douglas 2 standing ovations.

Mr. Douglas leaves, the Oveture kicks in, lights dim, curtains open (and open and open and open), Universal International logo pops up on screen and we're off and running.

The version of "Spartacus" that we saw was the 1991 restored version. No one told us (and nothing was advertised on site) if we were seeing the 35MM or 70MM version. Heck...doesn't matter. That film looked AWESOME on the Dome screen! As much as many folks balyhoo about images on edges of the Dome screen being distorted & out of focus, I have to say that I didn't notice any of those issues at all. Everything looked crisp, sharp and, most of all, BIG!

Film ran without an "official" intermission. The "Intermission" title appeared onscreen but, 2 seconds later, the Entra'cte (sp?) for Act 2 rolled in and we were off and running.

Film ended after the 11:00 hour and was greeted with mucho applause.

All in all, it was a night to remember.

bcareful:

Yes, "The Slipper And The Rose" played at the Dome. It opened March 25, 1976 and ran for eight weeks. The presentation was 35mm & 4-track mag stereo.

Thanks so much, Chris. It does sound like a night to remember and I'm really glad you shared your memories of it with us.

I was also in attendance for the Rocky show in the regular Arclight complex (lower theater #6). Much like Chris's show, Rocky started very late (I'd say 7:40). Same spiel (repetitive Rocky trivia, "Gonna Fly Now" on an endless loop for an hour, then the Maryland AFI rep, AFI film clip...) then Talia Shire comes out to introduce Stallone. She talked for a few minutes about her experience shooting the film and then introduces Stallone, who enters to a standing ovation. He talks for about five minutes and then away we go with Rocky (at which point a huge group of people all rush Stallone to get various Rocky products autographed at the side of the theater - I was surprised they let as many people get stuff signed as they did).
Now, here's what I found interesting (and I need to call the Arclight to double check). I'm about 90% sure what we saw was a digital projection and it looked pretty amazing, but it also showed every flaw in both the photography and sound mix (which was the original mono, but was terribly shrill and painful at times). The reason I think it was digital projection is that I saw no changeover dots or reel changes throughout the entire film. There were a few points that showed odd cuts during shots, but there were none of the tell-tale signs of a film splice or reel change (any extra dirt, analog pops). The audio sounded to be some form of digital and, like I said, showed more flaws in the mix than I've ever really heard before. I could be wrong and it could have been film, but if it was, it was the best made up print I've ever seen in my life. Regardless, it probably looked better last night than it did in 1976.

But one of the coolest moments of the night was the arrival. People coming from the Sunset side of the Arclight, had to walk just to the other side of the red carpet as the presenters were all doing their press interviews. So as we entered the complex, it was, "Hey, look, it's Rob Reiner! Oh, and there's Clint Eastwood! Hey, George Lucas! And Billy Crystal! Wow, Kirk Douglas!" In fact, the only presenters we didn't see there were Jack Nicholson and Warren Beatty.
And the poor people who bought for The Shawshank Redemption were SOL because Morgan Freeman couldn't make it so that show was cancelled.

Chris and Cliff,

Thanks for sharing! Indeed sounds like it was a lot of fun, despite the late starts and the micro-intermission for Spartacus . When this all came about, I was on a business trip back in the Midwest, and by the time I got to my hotel, the shows were sold out.

I'm wondering about those empty seats at the Dome...

JSA

One would think with an organization such as AFI, care would have been taken to either present the intermission properly or cue a changeover before the title came on. Someone should have known better... I wonder if the same thing didn't happen with the other roadshow feature they were running...

Chris: Did Kirk have anything to say, nice or otherwise, about Stanley Kubrick?

Roadshow: They DID close the curtain when the Intermission card came on.

Bill: Kirk just gave Kubrick the normal "great director" accolades. Dalton Trumbo was truly & literally the focus of Kirk's remarks.

BTW: Said remarks are now available at the LA Times Calendar section (www.latimes.com)

(1) Somebody might want to ask the AFI if 35 or 70 mm print of Spartacus was shown. I hope there's still a good 70 mm print available.

(2) People bought tickets and were looking forward to seeing it, but weren't shown The Shawshank Redemption? Why didn't they just borrow one of the celebrities from another auditorium to give an introduction?

Regardless, sounds like a great event.

You can tell if it's a 70 print by the shape of the changeover cue marks.

"You can tell if it's a 70 print by the shape of the changeover cue marks."

?????

Please tell more.

70mm: perfectly round marks in upper right corner of the screen
35mm: oval marks

Is that right?

All cue scribes for cue makers and cues are round, it's the lens that makes them oval. So a round cue printed on a Scope print will be oval. When you look at it on a bench it's round. For 70MM there round and scribed on to the print at the lab.

I was at the AFI event and saw "The Sound of Music." They did not do an overture. We had the same intermission problem. As soon as the intermission went up on the screen, people start to leave. But, they went straight to the blank screen entr'acte. Most people in the audience didn't understand what was happening. They thought they were missing part of the film. Very confusing and it dampened what should have been a wonderful night. No exit music either. All of it exists on the DVD.
BTW, in our auditorium, Julie Andrews was introduced by George Stevens Jr. In the audience was the girl who played Liesl as well as the widow of Robert Wise.

Since we were talking about how a print looks to a viewer, that's what I meant about the cue marks.

The Dome used to cover 2/3 to 3/4 of the screen for 35mm, and wisely reserved the full screen size for 70mm.

Since ArcLight now insists on using the full size of the Dome's screen for every format, 35mm will look dim, and grainy or soft. 70mm will be a much brighter and sharper image.

In other words, 70mm would look much better, so you would probably see the difference.

LenK: Sound of Music never had an overture. I agree the presentation was awkward, as if the operators had no idea what an intermission was, and just ran it like any other reel change, maybe from a platter. Again someone whould have told them, either actually have an intermission break or just changeover from the actone fadeout to the act 2 fade in.

The last real roadshow I paid to see was Fiddler on the Roof at NYC's Rivoli in 72. They had 3 shows that day (prob a Sat) 2-5-8. I was at the 5... At the end of Act I the picture faded out, then the fade in to Act II came on imediately. It was done quite smoothly but even as a kid, I knew they skipped the intermission to allow more walk-in time for the 8pm show. Having that in mind, the professional union projectionist most likely threaded the second act reel past the blank entr'acte, and did an early changeover before the intermission title.

from much personal experience with them, I doubt there are any management staff at the ArcLignt who know what a roadshow or intermission is.

In the old Dome booth panel they had five aspect settings to choose from: Flat (1.85) / Scope (2.35) / 70MM (1:85 masking) / 70MM (Full width) / Cinerama (full screen). So people who saw films there from 1963 till the late 1970's could have seen a film on the full screen. When they put Xenon lamphouses they only used four of those buttons on that panel. Pacific's projection department disconnected the Cinerama button from the panel. The full screen was still there but the operator could not open it the full Cinerama width. The D-150 type houses did the same thing too.

Roadshow, thanks for the clarification. I could swear there was an overture on the DVD, but I am sure you are right. We essentially had the overture for about 90 minutes prior to the screening as they played the soundtrack on a loop for the early arrivals. I heard that, in the Rocky room, "Gonna Fly Now" was played ad nauseum.

Howard: They announced the cancellation of "The Shawshank Redemption" long before the event. Those who bought tickets either got refunds or got tickets to one of the other movies.

Thanks Rizzo. If that's the case, can you try to give those as much notice as possible.

Some of us would really like to see Cinerama and need to book airfares, etc.

And what happened to all the Cinerama merchandise? Certainly it sold better than all the ArcLight stuff.

I have a better question: Why not borrow a page from the Ziegfield and run classics in the Dome instead of crap like "The Heartbreak Kid" during off-season? January - April & September - October are the times when Hollywood puts out crap. Why indulge their lust for greed by showing their crap during these down months?!

I heartily agree, Chris, but seeing the way ArcLight operates, I have little hope for it.

Chris: I would venture to say that many times the "lust for greed" doesn't even pay off. Which makes such indulgence even more puzzling. Just a few weeks ago you could not find a seat for a 70 MM screening of "Baraka" at the Aero, and "Lawrence of Arabia" plays there to capacity crowds. Go figure...

JSA

Until the projection angle is fixed I can't imagine sitting thru any 35mm, 70mm, 2k, 4k, film in the Dome. Just no.

How good can Digibeta look on a theater-sized screen? I would've asked for my money back but it sounds like it was passable.

I remember hearing about how ArcLight moves platter footage between the Dome and the plex in a big box... with some kind of magnetic closure... and that it didn't occur to them that transporting an expensive 70 mag print of Lawrence in that magnetic box wasn't a good idea. I hear it pretty much ruined the soundtrack.

And remember that the curved screen is not to blame for the horizon sag at the dome, it's their refusal to put a standard booth in the back of the mezz where a straight-on throw would eliminate the sag and brighten the picture... heaven forbid they give up 39 seats under the main booth that no one wants to sit in anyway... Even with the upstairs booth, 35mm scope looked better there when they had the sense not to try to fill the whole screen. Bring the botttom masking up and the side masking in at least. Oh yeah, andinstead of using a properly anchored louvered screen to avoid cross reflection, they put in a low-gain sheet screen, so the bad picture is a combination of an inferior screen, bad throw angle, and blowing up 35mm far too big to give a bright sharp picture on that screen. 2 or 3 4K digital projectors running together would increase brightness and sharpness, and they could be digitally rectified for the curve.

If you want to make the Dome more of a showplace, get rid of the blue lights, make sure all the ring lights go on and off at the same time, explain to them that the curtain is there to ensure that we never see a blank screen, and schedlue regular "event" screenings so that anyone visiting could see at least one Cinerama and/or 70mm screening whenever they visit. And are you SURE they don't have at least two reel to reel projectors up there?

Well, guess I'm heading to Seattle. The Cinerama Theater there will showcase a 70 mm series through 2008 that includes "2001", "Tron" and "Lawrence of Arabia".

JSA

I might make the trip to Seattle myself for "2001". That was meant to be seen on a gigantic curved Cinerama screen. It's an entirely different experience from seeing it in flat 70mm. I was hoping either Seattle or the Dome would someday show it again.

I agree with Bill's comments.Seeing a gorgeous 70 mm 6 track print of "2001" at the Uptown in Washington DC with its huge curved Cinerama sized screen was one of the best moviegoing experiences I've ever had! On a huge curved screen, "2001" is an incredible experience.

You're so right, Howard. The Uptown is another great place to see "2001" in Cinerama. Maybe they'll show it again there too someday? It's a lot closer than Seattle (I'm in NJ). I saw it there in November 2001 and, from the front row, it really was the ultimate trip!

Bill,

I checked, but wasn't at "2001" on the same day in November that you reported seeing it at the Uptown. I was there on another day.

Under the relatively new AMC operation, the DC Uptown isn't showing classics, 35 or 70mm. They'd likely need to bring back the union projectionists for presentation of classics. In addition to the platter that the union projectionist hated to see arrive in the booth during the prior Loews tenure, the Uptown has the projectors. I believe AMC operates the Seatle venue, so maybe they should learn from Seattle!

For that matter, the two side projection booths are still there, though sealed up. The original Cinerama screen has been replaced, but if the current screen isn't suitable, a new Cinerama screen....and Cinerama could return to the Uptown if an operator was willing.

The two side booths are still there, but no equipment. And the only Cinerama films available in 3-strip are "How the West Was Won" and "This is Cinerama". The cost to re-equip the theatre would be too high for the return.

I hope that was a joke about the Egyptian and Aero making a trip to Seattle unnecessary. Both rooms are the very antithesis of what we look for in a theatre. Yeah they have 70mm, but they have even less character than the ArcLight. The Egyptian feels like a big cage in a basement, and the Aero, well that just looks like a basement.

Seattle Cinerama has more character and theatrical atmosphere than the entire ArcLight complex, including the Cinerama Dome. However someone talked Seattle into not using the Cinerama screen except for "special occasions" - where they have to close for at least a day and pay a crew of stagehands thousands of dollars to dismantle the front screen, unroll the Cinerama screen (they probably still haven't aligned and anchored the louvers, which makes it just a shredded sheet screen) then they have switch the center section of the curtain track to follow the deeper curve. First time they did that, the curtain got badly ripped and was bring hastily sewn back together as the audience came in for the first show. With the unanchored louvers fluttering in the breeze of the AC blowers, it looked like How The West Was Rained On.

Unfortunately some Pacific Theatres folk were there, and the fluttering louvers apparently scared the hell out of them. That is why the renovated Dome has a low-gain sheet screen instead of louvers, because Pacific didn't want to pay for what they thought would be the constant maintenance of a louvered screen. Of course all that they would have had to do was make a couple phone calls and a squad of Cinerama expert/enthusiasts would have happily come in, aligned and anchored the louvers in place. Also a simple white scrim hung behind the louvers would prevent black streaks in the pictures in case a louver should ever snap or flutter.

I've been longing to make the trip to Seattle to see some movies in the Cinerama. But before those of you who can go get too excited, make sure they are using the curved screen for the 70mm features.

Damn! Another typo: bring = being.

PS: I have never heard of any horizon-sag problems on the Cinerama screen in Seattle, which is a deeper curve than the screen at the Cinerama Dome.

Despite the sometimes interesting programming the Cinematheque comes up with, I never really look forward to seeing a movie at the Egyptian or Aero. Even with a 70mm Roadshow print, it's impossible to impart any degree of theatrical showmanship to their presentation. It's just like setting up a big screen and watching home movies in the basement. It's cereal without milk, pizza without cheese...

I've not been to the Aero. In 2002, I saw a film, in 1.37 ratio, "Bob LeFlambeur" in the main auditorium of the Egyptian. With no disrespect meant to Roadshow, I think his comment is unfair.

It is true that the Egyptian's interior wasn't restored to its original 1920's glamour and over the top decor. Nor is the movie screen as large as the screen was from sometime in the 1950's, a huge screen like the Chinese (and Pantages, Warner then Pacific), etc. I believe the current auditorium takes up only the original balcony? of the Egyptian.

Regardless, if I could travel more, I'd love to see more classics there and especially the annual Film Noir series. I do tend to think 70 mm classics would be better at movie theaters with much larger screens. But, to say it "feels like a big cage in a basement" that I can't agree with.

Howard, the Egyptian Theatre Hollywood never had a balcony. The Best screen that the Egyptian Theatre had was installed in 1969, it was the D-150 screen. It was there till they closed the house. You can see shots of the former house in the movie "Jimmy Hollywood".

Geesh, some people get so technical about millimeters and ratios!!

Well, next year will be "2001"'s 40th anniversary. It must be seen on the big screen, period. Since at this point it's unlikely that it will screen at the Dome, the trip to Seattle is a possibility. I travel frequently to the city for business, so hopefully scheduling will not be an issue. And figuring out if they are using the curved screen for the special presentations should not be a problem. The only question remaining is will Warner strike a new 70 mm print (s) for the occassion. My guess is that they will not.

As far as the Aero and Egyptian, well, the issues are well known. But really they are the only ones screening 70 mm regularly around LA. I saw "Baraka" at the Aero a few weeks ago, and the place was packed. Did it feel like a basement? Probably, but not during the show. And last year the Egyptian featured the only remaining 30 fps Todd-AO print of "Around the World in 80 Days". Granted it was faded, but fun. Just ask my 9-year old son!

There's an audience for this type of presentation, and in my opinion Arclight is not capitalizing on this opportunity.

JSA

Original print in "B" condition of 2001:
http://www.cinerama.com/special_events.asp

Ok, so what's "B" condition??

My guess is that it is still very enjoyable,and even more interesting because it is an ORIGINAL print. Perhaps there's a little color fading in a few places or the sound isn't perfect. Remember that B means good or very good, by definition. I sure wouldn't want to see a print in a D condition, but that's not this one.

Thanks Howard. Yes, the fact that it is billed as an original print does indeed make it worthwhile!

An original 70MM print from that era would be faded. Is it an original Cinerama recified print or an original flat 70MM print? And who wrote the copy for the site?
"Screening now through March, 2008, you'll have the opportunity to view six classic films there, Shown in super crisp 70MM, Shot on film twice the sizeof a typical 35mm motion picture, these super high-resolution films are known for their amazing charity and detail on the big screen."
The films: Top Gun, Ghostbusters, Titanic, 2001, Tron, Lawrence of Arabia.
The statement sounds like all six classics were shot in 70MM. Only three were shot in 65MM and given a 70MM release. The rest were blow-outs from 35mm (anamorphic or Super 35).

"And who wrote the copy for the site? "
Probably the same person who got the entire first paragraph of "Early Development" under "Cinerama Technology" wrong.

Good points William. Top Gun, Titanic and Ghostbusters were blow-ups. And I would not necessarily label them as "classics". But that's just me.

I would not bet on it, but it's my understanding that for "2001" there were no Cinerama rectified prints (ie not like the Ultra-Panavision). I wonder, however, if rectified prints were struck for later re-issues to be screened at D-150 theatres. Anyway, this was a "Cinerama" presentation in name only, since Geoffrey Unsworth and Kubrick shot it in Super-Panavision. Could "original" in this case be a print before the 2001 re-issue?

Questions, questions....

JSA

Having seen "Lawrence" in 70MM at the Egyptian since the Cinematheque took over, I wholeheartedly agree with Roadshow. 70MM in THAT theatre is PATHETIC. May as well watch a 70MM presentation in one of these mall multiplexes or something.

Maybe I'm not as technically savvy as the rest of y'all and too dumb to realize that I'm watching a distorted presentation of a 70MM film, but I'd gladly forgive all the distortion and what not just to say that I saw ANYTHING at the Dome in 70MM in the 21st century!

Roadshow & Chris,
What is upsetting about 70mm at Egyptian? Auditorium and/or screen not large enough? Don't use any curtains?

For me it's the size of the screen compared to what was in there before. To put that second screen in the complex, the main house was downsized. During it's last conversion for D-150 it seated around 1100 seats and the screen was huge.

The reason I participate in Cinema Treasures and Cinema Sightlines Is their focus on real THEATRES, and the value placed on showmanship. I do not consider ArcLight or most multiplexes to be theatres. Good theatres are special environments that make you feel special, and provide a proper showcase for the film, perhaps like a frame to a painting or a setting to a jewel.

Keeping on topic here, I am not overly fond of ArcLight, because they have made misguided choices to stray from their better potential, and they have absolutely no clue about presentation and showmanship... (the only time you see a hint of it is when someone not on their in house staff is involved) They hold themselves up as the best of the best, with a substantial degree of attitude and arragance, but in most ways they are really just another multiplex. Their level of customer service is not up to their ostensibly high standards. The staff is not in the room through the movie, to look out for talkers, noisemakers and feet on the seats. At their prices, they make it your job to get up, miss the movie, and go look for someone, to report something they often don't understand is a problem. They don't understand why feet on the seats is wrong, which is why I have to choose the last row every time.

Having said that, I would absolutely prefer to see a movie there than the Egyptian or Aero. Bland as the ArcLight rooms are, at least they're somewhat finished - you don't see the bare walls of the building's shell. American Cinematheque couldn't affford an El Capitan calibre restoration, and there was nothing left in there but four walls, so they opted for this overly modern metal box built into the old space. It was purposely desifned to be removable in case anyone found enough cash to do a real restoration. You can pretty clearly see that this is not the intended configuration for the place.

The Egyptian is not remotely a theatre anymore. it's not even fixed up like a standard multiplex. The metal panels, that slide out to close you off from the original walls, make the seating area feel like a cage. They could have at least fixed up the room's focal point. Instead all they did was paint the inside of the building shell black. The wall you look at the most is unfinished, not shaped like the front of any theatre or screening room. It looks decidedly makeshift and temporary, like a basement or a warehouse. So yeah, draping off the screen area would have helped... some carpet, a little wall covering... not a lot of money needed for that. The Egyptian, as it is now, is not a pleasant place to watch a movie. Bland as the ArcLight rooms may be, theyre not exposing the bare walls.

PS: I do like some of the Cinematheque's programming, it's the venue that ruins it for me. Yes William, I miss the Egyptian's former configuration, and don't think it was worth ruining that just to put a screening room in the lobby.

Back to ArcLight: Does anyone know what the name refers to, and what the heck that blurry slide they project onto the screens is supposed to be?

Arclight refers to the method used to produce light for projecting movies, and also for those big searchlights which are so closely associated with movie premiers. In an arc lamp, electricity arcs, or jumps, between two electrodes, generating an intense but harsh light as the electrodes are consumed. Arc lights were actually invented in the early 19th century, but didn't become practical until later. Early electric lighting systems were based mostly on arc lights, but during the late 19th and early 20th century arc lamps were displaced by single-filament incandescent lamps for most uses other than movie projectors and searchlights.

Wikipedia has a fairly decent article about arc lamps.

I don't know anything about the slide they project on the screen at Pacific's Arclight Cinemas, as I've nver been there.

I know about the obsolete use of carbon arc as a light source, (even the "roach clips" we used to burn the carbon rods down to stubs)... and the big lamps used for searchlights, and sometimes on movie sets. But the ArcLight management has denied that their name refers to either. They said, as if groping for an answer, "uh... it's an arc of light."

The blurry slide, that doesn't quite fill their screens, is their corporate logo: a fuzzy pair of hands trying to form the letter A. Line up a dozen people (including the staff), ask them what it is and what it has to do with movies. Good luck with that. They have a name and logo that are apropos of nothing, yet they think it's brand that people will want on t-shirts.

Movie theatres use xenon type lamphouses now, but before that theatres use carbon arc rods as a light source. Carbon Arc gives off a purier white light than xenon. But it needs for have someone maintaining it, during the show. So theatres had projectionists to maintain them and a full set of pos/neg rods would give just over 60mins of burning time.

I was a projectionist back in the mid seventies, carbon arcs, changeovers, etc. I know Xenon lamps made the platters possible, which rendered most professional projectionists expendible to owners. Not such a good thing as it turns out. You and I know that, but does the public? The ArcLight name, doesn't represent movies to the general public it's a stretch even to imagine what it refers to. But Cinerama, even for civillians, is not such a stretch, it conjures thoughts of movies, maybe panoramic movies, you know, like a combination of Cinema and Panorama. ; ) A far more effective brand name for a "specialized" movie chain, don't you think?

Roadshow, you're right there.

If Arclight's management has made up a secret meaning for their theatre's name, then I'm as clueless about that meaning as anybody else who doesn't belong to their special club. For all I know, those who named the place might simply have been bad at spelling, and actually meant for the place to be called Ark Light, in oblique homage to Spielberg. Or maybe the current staff members are bad at spelling and actually think the place is named in oblique homage to Spielberg: "It's, like, the Arc is full of light, dude. You open the Arc and the light comes out! It's an Arc of light!"

Thanks, William.

LOL! Joe!

Quote from JSA on Oct 10, 2007:

Well, next year will be "2001"'s 40th anniversary. It must be seen on the big screen, period. Since at this point it's unlikely that it will screen at the Dome, the trip to Seattle is a possibility. I travel frequently to the city for business, so hopefully scheduling will not be an issue. And figuring out if they are using the curved screen for the special presentations should not be a problem. The only question remaining is will Warner strike a new 70 mm print (s) for the occassion. My guess is that they will not.


Given that the films to be shown are in addition to regularly scheduled programs, the Seattle Cinerama will not be using the giant curved screen for the 70mm films. However, the presentation will still be top-notch on the large 68' screen, assuming prints are in good shape.

The only time the giant Cinerama screen is used is when three-panel Cinerama is shown. It's been a couple of years since this has last been done, so hopefully it won't be too long before it happens again. Should I hear word about another Cinerama/70mm festival where the big screen will be used, I'll be sure to post information.

Another comment made light of the air-con system causing the louvred screen to ripple. This was an early problem, but has since been corrected. It's a shame that the Pacific folks witnessed it, otherwise the Dome might have had a true Cinerama screen, too.

DR: How exactly was the loose strip problem corrected?

It is unfortunate Seattle's decision makers think that the curved screen is only for Cinerama. The Seattle Cinerama Theatre has been a local favorite for decades because of that screen. A Cinerama theatre without a Cinerama screen is a shame. It's like going into Grauman's Chinese and taking all the Chinese stuff out.

I've been to the Seattle Cinerama and saw the standard screen. It ain't that bad. And...it's curved, too.

Thanks D Roben for the info. The standard screen will do it for me. I'm sure the 70 mm presentations will be top-notch. But I agree with Roadshow: they should use the giant screen!!!

JSA

Yes Chris, I know the "cheap" screen ; ) is slightly curved and not bad. But it's not worth schlepping all the way to Seattle for. Did you know when they were designing that big-deal rippled starry ceiling they did not take into account that there would be a bigger screen for Cinerama? Yup. It obstructs part of the big picture, so they have to mask it down, and because of that ceiling you will never get to see the full size of the Cinerama screen. It always bothers me when the people in charge won't listen to the people who know better.

Thanks for the commments. First off, I'm not aware how they fixed the screen so that it wouldn't ripple. I'm guessing that each slat was attached to the bottom frame, but I could be wrong.

There are two major reasons why they are not using the Cinerama screen for the 70mm series. One has to take into consideration the time and cost of tearing down the "flat" (but still gently curved) screen. As mentioned above, it takes all day and night to do the job and I'm sure those workers don't come cheap. And since AMC is continuing with their regular programming at the same time, films not presented in 70mm or three-panel Cinerama look absolutely
horrible on the Cinerama screen. Because of the deep curvature, a standard scope film (the Seattle Cinerama never seems to show flat films) is terribly distorted, with the most bizarre masking you've ever seen (I can't really describe it in words, but trust me).

In a perfect world, the Cinerama screen would be used, but logistically speaking, it doesn't make any sense. Still, I don't think you'll find a better venue for 70mm in the country.

As for the ceiling obstructing some of the Cinerama screen, this is the first time I've heard this complaint. If it is true, and it may very well be, the effect is minor at worse and to my eyes, never even noticed (and I've seen four Cinerama films (HTWWW, This is Cinerama, Cinerama's Search for Paradise and Windjammer) on that gorgeous screen).

If any of you are planning to come up to Seattle to check out one of the films, here's a tip regarding where to sit. The theater is split across the middle with a crossover aisle. This aisle is where the handicapped seating is. The problem is that if there are any patrons there, your view will most definitely be partially blocked if you sit in the upper half. I personally love the row just in front of the crossover aisle. There's nobody behind you to kick your seat (handicapped seating is on a ledge at about the level of your head), and the image will fill your eyes and then some. There's also a balcony, but unless you are in the front row, blockage becomes a problem there, too. Besides, the impact of the big screen is somewhat diminished since the balcony is rather small and, in my opinion, too far away from the screen.

Of the films being screened, I personally would go for Lawrence of Arabia. Not only was it originally shot on 65mm, you'll get to experience the theater's amazing sound system with the films' DTS soundtrack. And, unlike some of the AFI event films at the Dome/Arclight, there WILL be a real intermission!

2001 is also very impressive, to be sure.

As I noted above, at some point, real Cinerama will make a reappearance. The moment I hear of anything (I personally know one of the three-panel Cinerama projectionists), I'll post on the Arclight page as well as the Seattle Cinerama page.

This was taken from the official Seattle Cinerama website:

"True to its namesake, the new Cinerama also features a completely restored curved screen for special presentations of 3-strip films such as "How The West Was Won" and 70mm Cinerama classics like "2001: A Space Odyssey."

This massive, 90-foot-long, 30-foot-high screen, constructed of 2,000 independently angled louvered strips, provides a clear, brilliant picture for patrons sitting anywhere in the theater. For screenings of modern 70mm/35mm first-run movies, however, Cinerama architects developed a second screen that sits immediately in front of its massive counterpart. An impressive display of engineering, this modular 68-foot-long screen breaks down in a matter of hours in preparation for special Cinerama presentations on the larger screen."

After reading that, should I get my hopes up for "2001" on the Cinerama screen after all? It's baffling to me to have a real Cinerama screen installed in a theater named after Cinerama, and then not to use it.

I e-mailed the theater about this yesterday and am awaiting a reply. If they're not using the bigger screen, I won't be going.

Exactly, Bill. As I said, Seattle patrons have been enjoying movies on the real Cinerama screen for decades. They are on the edge of inaccuracy and certainly misleading when they refer to the second screen being developed by "Cinerama architects," They are referring to an independant company that has no relation whatsoever to Cinerama, other than being hired to revamp a theatre with that name. The way that sentence is written gives wholly undue credence to a group whose main objective was to get the real Cinerama screen out of the way.

The line about "2,000 independently angled louvered strips" was written before the screen was ever used, and at that time, the strips were not in fact angled at all. Anchoring the strips firmly in place is one thing, angling them correctly is another. The strips were attached to the top and bottom of the frame, but they are held to the frame with something elastic enough to allow them to flutter in the breeze of the AC.

The strips would have to be anchored horizontally with thin wire (often the same stuff used on fishing rods). It would take great care, and attention to detail, to anchor and align the 1" strips into proper position, and it's not likely to have been done right if it was done by Seattle's own staff without some kind of guidance and supervision from Cinerama experts. Just imagine the precision necessary to turn 2000 one inch strips, which overlap each other, so that they are facing straight to the front around the entire curve.

The entire setup for the two screens in Seattle was deliberately designed (by the non-Cinerama designers) for the real screen to be the lowest priority. It is a very complicated and expensive process to bring out the big screen, which guarantees that it would rarely be used. It would probably take about 2-3 full capacity houses to pay for the conversion. Seattle would need to be sure of at least a dozen full houses to be willing to pay for the switch, which would require them to close for 2 days before and after.

I would hold out no hope at all for the big screen to be used for 2001. It's a shame, but a reality.

Maybe we should report all this to Paul Allen, so he can get on their case. Didn't he pay for the Seattle renovation specifically because of his fond memories of Cinerama?

Bill and Roadshow:
Your 2001 Cinerama postings brings to mind a big dissapointment. When 2001 opened in '68 it played at the PALACE here in Tampa in 70mm Cinerama, and it was breathtaking to see AND hear. The film was brought back at least two additional times in 70mm within 2 years after the initial roadshow engagement. By now the Cinerama logo had been replaced by Super Panavision.

The last time the film played it was part of "MGM's Fabulous Four" series (Gone with the Wind, Dr. Zhivago, Ryan's Daughter, and 2001.) Knowing these films had played in 70mm in years past I was anxiously chomping at the bit in anticipation of seeing 2001 once again on the big screen, although there was no mention of 70mm in the ads.

I remember thinking, "surely they can't run 2001 in 35mm in a Cinerama theater when they have 70mm capability not to mention the big Cinerama screen!" What a rude awakening it was when the curtain parted revealing the screen had been masked down for 35mm presentation...one of the biggest letdowns for me ever in a theater. Seeing 2001 in 35mm on the same screen where it had been shown many times in 70mm was a total downer to say the least :-(

Well "2001" was photographed in Super Panavision to begin with and Presented in Cinerama. MGM made a licensing deal with Cinerama for three pictures (2001, Ice Station Zebra, Grand Prix) tobe presented in Cinerama. And that's what the logos say on most of the films. There was a similar licensing agreement with the D-150 process. In the projection booths of the Cinerama and D-150 houses there was masking setting control buttons. That controlled the size of the screen to be used. There was flat/scope/70MM and then the full screen setting for Cinerama. So if the producing company/studio paid that special licensing fee they could advertise and use the whole Cinerama name and screen for their films. So there was a dual-invertory of prints of these titles. So later reissues of those titles many not carry the Cinerama logo on them.

Thanks William. That's amazing! Had no idea there was so much more involved regarding licensing fee/screen size/print exhibition. I think your explanation may clear up a mystery I've been wondering about since 1965 when "The Sound of Music" first opened.

They projected the print (I'm assuming it was 35mm ) from the Cinerama booth on the main level. The screen was masked at the top and sides for 35mm Scope, and I recall changeovers being made. I'm guessing the three Cinerama projectors had already been stripped out, and the print was being projected on the recently installed 35/70mm projectors. I do recall the soundtrack being in stereo.

Now here's the mystery: after the first few weeks of showings they suddenly switched from the downstairs booth to the old upstairs 35mm booth. There was no change in screen size, and the only noticable difference was the sound...it was no longer in stereo.

My guess is that a print with a stereo soundtrack was more expensive to lease so once they got the crowds in and were assured of an extended long run, the decision was made to save some dollars and exchange the stereo print for a monural print. As such there was no longer any reason to project print from the 35/70mm booth. That's my take on the switch. Sound plausible?

Nick it sounds plausible. But it might have been that the studio needed that 4-Track Mag print for another engagement. When the change happened was the grosses still great or just good on the business. Studios have done that by pulling the print if the grosses were falling to a point too. So if they moved that print to the upstairs booth thta booth must have had the mag penthouse on the projector since the CinemaScope conversion days in the 50's.

Thanks William. When the change occured the grosses were phenomenal and still breaking b/o records. The film played for a year and 5 months. The Palace was the first in town to convert to CinemasScope in '53 opening with "The Robe" in stereophonic sound, so it may be that the upstairs booth still contained the mag penthouse. But apparently they didn't utilize it when they went upstairs with the SOM print as the soundtrack reproduction was no longer in stereo. Unless the unit was not operational? I think you offered the best explanation: the studio probably pulled the Mag print for another engagement and exchanged it for an optical print.

RE: "The Robe"
All original CinemaScope release prints for 1953 were 4-Track Magnetic. 20th-Fox contracts stipulated exhibition in this sound format only. The Magnetic/Optical and Optical prints did not come into play until 1954. A few standard, non-CinemaScope prints were struck for exhibition in flat venues. The film, as you may know, was shot flat and scope (20th-Fox's secure undertaking if CinemaScope failed). The same was done with "How To Marry A Millionaire" and a few other titles. The Disney/Buena Vista "20,000 Leagues Under the Sea" was given the same dual treatment. A few theatre chains thought they could beat the added cost of the stereophonic sound system by using the stereo magnetic penthouse on the projector and wiring all channels to a single channel for their monophonic system. They were soon taken to contractual task by 20th-Fox and delivered an ultimatum: play the film in 4-channel or we will not supply you with future product. 20th-Fox won out.

Ceiling blocks showing the one center pentagon surrounded by the hexagons:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/hwdCineramaDomeOct272007008circle.jpg

Anyone see Beowolf in digital 3-d here? I was thinking about going but heard it's being shown letterboxed, not using the full screen. If that's true then forget it.

So essentially it's playing windowboxed. Jeez, no wonder people would be disappointed.

Is the Village showing Beowolf like that too? I hope not.

Is Beowolf being shown on a 2k projector at Arclight? They used to have an older 1.3k DLP.

Thank you Rizzo, that's great news!

HELL YEAH!!!

Per the Arclight website, "2001" will screen January 30, 2008. Other goodies for the month of January include "Dr. Zhivago", "El Cid", "Close Encounters of the 3rd Kind" & a few more classics. Not a lot of details though.

JSA

Tickets are now on sale, but unfortunately it's not showing in the Dome, but rather one of Arclight's smaller theaters. Also no indication of a 70mm show. Arclight is continuing to become one big bust. They seem so preoccupied with their branding that they've forgotten why they bothered in the first place. It's quickly becoming something quite different than "where movie-lovers belong."

Well, that's a disappointment.
Might as well head north to Seattle: "2001" will screen in 70 mm at the Cinerama early next year...

JSA

Rizzo, I'm sure your source was very clear, but the show (Jan 30th @ 8PM is now available for sale and it does NOT indicate a Dome showing. The showtime isn't bolded and when you get to seating, it's clearly one of the black box auditoriums. There's also no indication at all that this will be in 70mm. The show page just has info on 2001's AFI rankings.

However, I also bought tickets for Beowulf's Pre-Opening Thursday Dome show about a month ago and a few days before the show, the listing suddenly became Black Box. When I called to ask about the November 15th 10PM Dome show, the first time I was told that it was still in the Dome. When I called back the next day (the day of the show) I was told that it was never for sale in the Dome. I'm fairly confident that I know the difference between the shape of the Dome and the shape of the black boxes (oh and the seats I had don't exist in the boxes.

But the moral is, there's no guarantee that 2001 will ultimately end up in the theater its booked for right now (for all we know, Arclight could move it to a smaller screen by Jan 30th). But I'm fairly confident, based on their track record, that 2001 will NOT be in the Dome. These AFI shows never are, especially if Arclight manages to snag either Cloverfield or Rambo.

FYI, the ArcLIght website is no longer selling 2001 tickets.
It is now in the "On Sale Soon" box.
And since the topic of 70 mm has come up...
Is there a 70 mm print of Dr Zhivago available? I thought there was one for the 1995 re-release but I've not seen anything since.

My fingers are crossed...

Call me crazy, but I'm willing to give Arclight a pass if they can't get a good 70MM print. Just as long as they boot "Cloverfield" or "Rambo" out of the Dome if only for 1 night so they can show 2001 in there.

Well, it looks as if the Chinese is getting Cloverfield on the 18th, so I would think Rambo in the Dome is a good bet now (which actually makes 2001 in the Dome a less likely proposition since Rambo will be in its first week). I hope 2001 was pulled from sale so that they could establish a Dome showing (although, based on Rizzo's new info, I wonder if they are waiting to evaluate the condition of the 70mm print before committing to the screen).

Oh, and it appears tickets for Close Encounters have gone one sale...

At the Arclight Sherman Oaks!!!!

Hey Rizzo, does Arclight know that they actually own the Dome?

I call Sherman Oaks "Arclight Lite." It's literally a smaller version of Arclight Hollywood - but they went too far trying to replicate Arclight Hollywood's lobby at the Sherman Oaks location. "Cramped" is an UNDERSTATEMENT!

Why would anyone want to see 2001 on the Dome's smile-vision screen?

While I won't debate or defend technical problems with the Dome, I will say I still enjoy the Dome because it's one of the last big screens available in Los Angeles/Hollywood. Movie lovers in most towns would kill to have a screen like the Dome, but unfortunately have to settle with the latest Carmike/AMC googleplexes. Unfortunately for us though, Arclight treats it just like screen #1 of a 15 screen plex. I would love to see Arclight rotate some of their new releases a bit more. In a week such as this one with a ton of new openings, why not run Sweeney Todd in the Dome on Friday, National Treasure in there on Saturday, maybe run Charlie Wilson's War in there on Sunday, and then run your Christmas Eve showing of Gremlins in there on Monday? I'm not saying you have to do it that way every week, but why not try some variety? National Treasure is going to be the number 1 movie this weekend, and there's not a single large theater showing it in LA. The fact that they feel Sherman Oaks is adequate to show Close Encounters is embarrassing (ditto for Scarface, a film so successful when they DID run it in the Dome a few years ago, they actually had to hold it over).

Cliff, what's playing in the Dome? National Treasure is #1 movie, so I don't understand why they didn't open it in the Dome in place of whatever is playing there (which could be shown in one of the other screens).

Kram said:
>> Why would anyone want to see 2001 on the Dome's smile-vision screen?

Because it's a Cinerama screen, and "2001" was shown on Cinerama screens exclusively when it first came out in 1968. It was meant to be shown on a screen like the one at the Dome. I wish we had one here in the New York area. Even though Arclight doesn't seem to be taking full advantage of it, Los Angeles moviegoers are lucky to have that screen.

I guess you're right. It has it's nostalgic purpose. The distortion is godawful though. Prepare to see a bannana-shaped Discovery.

The Star Gate sequence is at its most spectacular on a curved Cinerama screen. Sit in the front row for the full effect!

Arclight just launched their own message board as part of their site. I wonder what would happen if all of us registered on it and made enough of a ruckus about how they're mismanaging the programming at the Dome. Do you'd think they'd listen?

As far as "Sweeney Todd" showing at the Dome right now, I have no beef with that. I've seen it twice (BEFORE it was released) and I can declare that it's Dome-worthy. The only thing missing is the fact that Tim Burton shot it in 1:85 instead of 2:40.

Speaking of which, do films shot in 1:85 have the same distortion issues?

There always was some distortion when "2001" is shown on any Cinerama screen; this was true even during the original engagements simply because it was filmed in Super Panavision 70mm, rather than three-strip Cinerama. From the projection point of view, the center of a Cinerama screen is further away than the sides, and even with custom projection lenses, when a single strip 70mm film is projected onto a screen such as this it is difficult to compensate for this fact. Essentially what is happening is that a rectangular image is being projected onto a curved surface. (Tape an old 35mm slide to the lens of a flashlight and point the beam onto something curved; the problem will be obvious).

When the decision was made to go to 70mm for Cinerama exhibition (initially with It's A Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World") there was an attempt made to minimize the distortion by filming in Ultra Panavision and then using what was called "rectification." Ultra Pan does use an anamorphic squeeze and the rectification process altered the squeezing during the film printing process by reducing it gradually across the printed frame so that there was most squeezing at the sides and gradually less until at the center of the frame there was none. This helped reduce but did not eliminate the distortion at the sides when the film was projected. (This process is described in detail on Martin Hart's excellent "Widescreen Museum" website in the Cinerama section).

Films shot in Super Panavision (and some other processes such as Super Technirama) were shot on 70mm stock without using an anamorphic lens and these prints were never "rectified" for Cinerama showings as far as I know.

The degree of distortion is also affected by whether the film is being projected on a classic, louvered, deeply-curved Cinerama screen or one of those installed in the 1960s or later (including the one at the Dome) that were not quite as deep.

Thanks, Rizzo.

One reason why I've never witnessed the distortion for myself: in almost 17 years of being a Dome customer, I have managed to always sit in the center section...never on the far left/right sections. Everything looks alright to me from a center POV.

Another question, Rizzo: any chance your bosses will browse this thread since a few folks seem to have an idea on how to fix the distortion issues?

Actually the Dome's problems are not limited to geometry distortion which is visible from any seat. There's also cross reflections, the loss of vertical picture info in the middle of the screen, and the lack of light. 70mm probably helps quite a bit there though.

IMO 1.85:1 films are much more tolerable in the Dome but the light problem is a deal breaker, even if it's being projected in 2k. It's just too dim.

I attended a 70 mm presentation of “2001” at the Dome back in the early 90’s. To me, the distortions were tolerable, with the notable exception of Discovery’s image during the “Jupiter Mission” segment, as described by Kram a few postings above. To say it looked like a “banana” is kind. But in the end, the good outweighed the bad: the landing at Clavius and the entire “Jupiter and Beyond the Infinite” sequences were absolutely spectacular. I was engulfed, or rather "enveloped" by the huge images on screen and the terrific soundtrack. Because this film has influenced me in many ways, I would definitely make the trip to the Dome if it plays there again.

JSA

Thanks, Rizzo...I think.

Regarding the recent discussion about image distortion... Isn't the distortion a result of the high projection angle more so than the curved screen?

Yes.

If the projection angle was lowered or only the top of the screen was used the picture would be much improved. The lack of light and cross reflections would probably remain though.

The Dome is considered a "historical landmark" by the city so I believe a renovation to put in a mezzanine-level booth isn't legally allowed, even if Pacific wanted to spend the money to do it (this is the reason that the seats are still crappy). And if they could, they wouldn't because 90% or more of the patrons only care about "BIG SCREEN!!" and not about the improvement in quality it would bring from a lower projector and shrinking the screen for digital and 35mm.

I'VE GOT MINE!!!! WOOO-HOOOO!!!

I have the greatest enthusiasm and confidence in the mission.

JSA

Rizzo,

You had mentioned some time ago that the Dome was no longer setup for reel-to-reel operation, thus effectively eliminating the possibility of screening quality 70 MM prints. Has the situation changed?

JSA

Thanks Rizzo. Sounds like it's going to be a good show. My only request is that please allow a reasonable break time during the intermission!

JSA

Rizzo: Is there any way for us who are Cinema Treasures regulars who will be attending "2001" to meet you before the show so we can touch bases and whatnot? I'll be there with 15 other members of my movie club(s) and we'll be having dinner at the Arclight Cafe at 6:30 PM.

Let us know.

It's nice to see "2001" screening at the Dome. Would it have killed Archlight and AFI to extend it for a weekend? It is the 40th anniversary afterall. They do have 12 other screens to showcase all the other crap. They seem to forget that the Dome is a palace that desrves to host a little royalty beyond one-night stays. The last "classic" to have an extended run(a weekend or more) was "Alien" in 2003. That's five years ago. Prior to 2002 when it was just the Dome screen, at least a dozen classic films had extended runs every year.I'm talking week-long festivals that coexisted with current studio bookings. And they were always packed. In a span of one year, I saw Apocalypse Now, River Kwai and Close Encounters. You've never seen any of those films until you've seen them at the Dome. It's sad that today's generation can't experience classic films on its concave screen beyond one night. I don't know about you but given the choice of screening "Star Wars," "Raiders of the Lost Ark" or "Lawrence of Arabia" on my 65" TV or on the Dome screen, the Dome wins every time. Archlight prides itself on being the movie lover's choice. It would be nice if they actually showed movies we love.

I agree with Chris: Rizzo, I would like to thank you for aswering my goofy questions and keeping us informed.

Another factoid: This is the first time in decades that "2001" will screen in 70 MM at two Cinerama theatres (i.e. the Dome and Seattle) during the same week. JSA

I'm pleased to say I just got my ticket and although in the center I am near the back. Tickets really are almost gone.

The comments about only a single screening are valid. Read one of my comments from 2002 where I mention THE WILD BUNCH played in 70mm for 6 weeks at the Dome BEFORE it was renovated.

The "2001" screening is sold out! JSA

In case anyone gives a darn...The Dome's got "RAMBO" starting 1/25/08.

I'm just glad they're giving Rambo the night off on the 30th.

JSA... My understanding is that the screening of "2001" in Seattle will be on the standard flat screen - though it WILL be a 70mm print.

Yes, that's true. The Seattle standard screen has a slight curve though. Many years ago, I saw a 70 MM presentation of 2001 in a large flat screen and it looked great, so no doubt that the Seattle shows will be fine. I was planning to make the trip there until the Dome announcement. I'll definitely make the trip north when they pull out the large Cinerama screen.

And come to think of it, since the print at the Dome is going to be run in a platter, maybe a 70 MM screening of "2001" at the Ziegfeld is not out of the realm of possibility...

JSA

The AFI people said tonight (as they introduced "Dr. Strangelove" - which played in one of the large Arclight auds) that they print they've got for "2001" is supposedly better than the one they were gonna originally show.

Rizzo, care to share some details?

I'm wondering if this is the same 70mm print the AFI Silver had last Feb '07. It had an annoying tapping sound starting with the scene with Bowman rescuing Poole. You can read my experience at the AFI Silver's page. I don't know how to do the html thingy, yet.

Maybe Seattle got the print that was originally set for the Dome...

JSA

At night:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDomeJan29200801.jpg

2001: All in all, after braving the LA freeway system, it was a good time last night! The Dome was packed. The movie started about 15 minutes late, and yes, overture and intermission were observed accordingly. For some reason, the picture did not seem as distorted (ie the "banana" effect) as the last time I saw it there in the early 90's. However, the clicking noise due to the bad track was annoying. As mentioned a few postings above, it occured only during the first half. The second part of the film was much better in sound, and with less visible scratches. The Star Gate sequence looked AWESOME in that giant screen!

Truly, I appreciate "2001" more and more as the years go by. Seen from this vantage point in time, it's hard to believe that a major studio trusted a director's vision for a film that transcends its medium.

My thanks to the guys at the booth for putting a good show, and hopefully we will see more 70 MM in the future!

JSA

I concur with what JSA said...especially about that clicking noise! Also, the post-Intermission framing was off for the first 5-10 minutes but they fixed it as best they could. The bottom left & right corners weren't keystoned properly (probably due to the screen design) but I probably wouldn't have noticed it if it wasn't for you die-hard cinephiles at Cinema Treasures (and CinemaTour, too!) who examine every aspect of film presentation with a fine toothed comb.

:o)

The film started late because there was still a mob at the snack bar. Not a problem holding the show as it would not delay a later screening. Seeing original costumes and other items used in the movie was also cool. I began to wonder if the portion shown after intermission was originally from a rectified print, or perhaps portions of it. In some places it seemed to fit the curved screen perfectly and was originally shown in single strip Cinerama when first released as stated in the end credits. I must also agree I found the left channel clicks annoying especially since they were brought to everyone's attention during the film's intro. In any event, I haven't enjoyed this film so much since I saw it first run at the old Hollywood Pacific.

History tells us that when it comes to single-strip Cinerama, the source came from either Ultra-Panavision or Super Panavision. The Ultra-Panavision films (i.e. It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad World, Khartoum, etc.) received a rectification that consisted of a gradient squeeze. The experts point out to us that the Super Panavision/Cinerama films (2001, Grand Prix, Ice Station Zebra) did not receive any optical rectification. But I have to agree with the above post and also reiterate my earlier statement: the image fit much better along the curve this time. If I'm not mistaken, this print was struck in 2000. I’ve also wondered about years in the past when “2001” was re-issued at the D-150 theatres: Were there any rectified prints ever struck?

By the way, I can't get "The Blue Danube" off my head!

JSA

I drove up from San Diego to see 2001 and, the gaffes aside, I'd do it again.
The clicking was a bit annoying but I blame the print and not the theater.
If only the Dome could play some more 70mm movies (Patton, Dr Zhivago, Wild Bunch, Empire Strikes Back [yeah, I know]...) the world would be a better place.

Neeb, I am also hoping that they will as "2001" was a big success. The Dome sold out well in advance for a weeknight screening and they mentioned when introducing the film that people were turned away. From what I saw, they made a fortune at the snack bar also which we all know is where the real money is made. A D-150 print of "Patton" on that curved screen would be amazing.

"From what I saw, they made a fortune at the snack bar also which we all know is where the real money is made."

Yeah...and they almost screwed themselves out of a bigger fortune because they were TOTALLY UNPREPARED for the onslaught that hit the snack bar during Intermission. I was literally at the front of the line with a long trail behind me when they abruptly announced that the register I was in was closed. We had a fit and after a crapload of haggling, they quickly assembled a new register and a new line.

The killer of all that was their explanation of why they closed the register:

LOWLY CONCESSION WORKER: We didn't expect the snack bar to be crowded during intermission.

ME: It's a ***king sold out show! What did you think was gonna happen?

LOWLY CONCESSION WORKER: I'm sorry. We were unprepared for this.

It was a great show. I've seen 2001 four or five times over the last few years on "the big screen," but seeing it at the Dome in 70 was a treat. I would love to believe that this screening will inspire more like this one at the Dome. Dare to dream.

Makes you wonder what would have happened if they had run out of the "Gourmet" Hot Dogs. Good thing there's a Baja Fresh across the street...

Neeb, I agree with you, we are not blaming the theatre nor AFI for the condition of the print.

If the Cinerama Dome really wants to get serious about 70 MM again, they should reinstall the reel-to-reel capability. That's the only way to get those high quality prints, such as the restored "Patton" in 70 MM/DTS. There's also a brand new print of "Grand Prix" (another MGM Cinerama pic), and I understand there are (or are in development) new 70 MM prints of "West Side Story" and "Khartoum".

JSA

I came in from New Jersey to see "2001" in Cinerama and was glad I made the trip as soon as the first shot hit the screen.

Somehow the clicking in the first half was less annoying because the audience had been notified about it in advance by a woman from the AFI. And ultimately it didn't matter, when we were seeing all those spaceships entering the frame from out of our peripheral vision - there's nothing else like Cinerama.

Thanks, Mr. Rizzo. It was an unforgettable show.

Since this year marks the 45th anniversary of the opening of the CINERAMA DOME, I thought I’d make a series of postings to commemorate the occasion. I’ll kick this off with the 1960s roadshow era playdates. I’ll post the rest at a later date. Enjoy!


THE CINERAMA DOME
PART I: THE ROADSHOW ERA (1963-1971)

Compiled by Michael Coate

The following were all reserved-seat “roadshow” attractions and presented in 70-millimeter and six-track stereophonic sound.

11.07.1963 … IT’S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD (World Premiere, 67 weeks)

02.17.1965 … THE GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD (43 weeks)
12.16.1965 … BATTLE OF THE BULGE (World Premiere, 27 weeks)

07.23.1966 … KHARTOUM (24 weeks)
12.22.1966 … GRAND PRIX (44 weeks)

11.01.1967 … CAMELOT (51 weeks)

10.23.1968 … ICE STATION ZEBRA (World Premiere, 29 weeks)

05.14.1969 … KRAKATOA, EAST OF JAVA (American Premiere, 23 weeks)
10.22.1969 … PAINT YOUR WAGON (35 weeks)

06.23.1970 … DARLING LILI (World Premiere, 20 weeks)
11.10.1970 … SONG OF NORWAY (35 weeks)

THE CINERAMA DOME
PART II: THE LOS ANGELES COUNTY EXCLUSIVE ERA (1971-1982)

Compiled by Michael Coate


RE = Re-Issue/ Return Engagement
MO = Move-over (i.e. continuation of engagement from another theater)
GSP = Guaranteed-Seat Performance

Not included in this filmography are test screenings, sneak-preview screenings, midnight screenings, premieres and other private events. The dates represent the first day of commercial release and, where known, the presentation format has been provided. (No format notation implies a 35mm-monaural sound presentation.)

07.14.1971 … BLUE WATER, WHITE DEATH (13 weeks)
10.13.1971 … theater closed "for exciting rehabilitation" (1 week)
10.20.1971 … PLAY MISTY FOR ME (5 weeks)
11.24.1971 … THE SECRET ADVENTURES OF THE RAILWAY CHILDREN (3 weeks)
12.17.1971 … SOMETIMES A GREAT NOTION (12 weeks)

03.10.1972 … SILENT RUNNING (7 weeks)
04.28.1972 … THE GREAT NORTHFIELD MINNESOTA RAID (4 weeks)
05.24.1972 … THE WAR BETWEEN MEN AND WOMEN (5 weeks)
06.28.1972 … FRENZY (7 weeks)
08.16.1972 … DELIVERANCE (18 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
12.20.1972 … YOU’LL LIKE MY MOTHER (5 weeks)

01.22.1973 … theater closed (3 weeks)
02.16.1973 … THIS IS CINERAMA (RE, GSP, 13 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
05.18.1973 … THE DAY OF THE JACKAL (13 weeks)
08.15.1973 … MAURIE (6 weeks)
09.28.1973 … WINDJAMMER (RE, 3 weeks)
10.19.1973 … CHARLEY VARRICK (4 weeks)
11.16.1973 … THE DON IS DEAD (6 weeks)
12.25.1973 … THE STING (13 weeks)

03.27.1974 … MAME (13 weeks)
06.26.1974 … ZANDY’S BRIDE (4 weeks)
07.24.1974 … 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (RE, 5 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
08.28.1974 … RUN RUN, JOE! (3 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
09.20.1974 … JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR (RE, 4 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
10.18.1974 … AIRPORT 1975 (9 weeks)
12.19.1974 … THE LITTLE PRINCE (6 weeks)

01.29.1975 … REPORT TO THE COMMISSIONER ([/i]6 weeks[/i])
03.13.1975 … THE GREAT WALDO PEPPER ([/i]10 weeks[/i])
05.21.1975 … THE RETURN OF THE PINK PANTHER (5 weeks)
06.25.1975 … ROLLERBALL (19 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
11.06.1975 … PAPER TIGER (5 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
12.12.1975 … theater closed (1 week)
12.20.1975 … BARRY LYNDON (8 weeks)

02.11.1976 … BLAZING SADDLES (RE, 4 weeks)
03.10.1976 … 1776 (RE, 2 weeks)
03.26.1976 … AMERICAN GRAFFITI (RE, 2 weeks)
04.09.1976 … PHANTOM OF THE PARADISE (RE, 5 weeks, Stereo)
05.20.1976 … THAT’S ENTERTAINMENT, PART II (5 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
06.23.1976 … LOGAN’S RUN (6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.04.1976 … THE RETURN OF A MAN CALLED HORSE (9 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
10.06.1976 … WOODSTOCK (RE, 4 weeks, Stereo)
11.03.1976 … THAT’S ENTERTAINMENT, PART II (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Stereo)
11.12.1976 … ALL THIS AND WORLD WAR II (5 weeks, Stereo)
12.15.1976 … THE PINK PANTHER STRIKES AGAIN (11 weeks)

03.02.1977 … JAWS (RE, 3 weeks)
03.25.1977 … THE SLIPPER AND THE ROSE (8 weeks, Stereo)
05.20.1977 … FANTASIA (RE, 5 weeks, Stereo)
06.22.1977 … NEW YORK, NEW YORK (4 weeks)
07.20.1977 … 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (RE, 4 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
08.17.1977 … FANTASIA (RE, 5 weeks, Stereo)
09.23.1977 … TOMMY (RE, 4 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
10.21.1977 … THE CHICKEN CHRONICLES (4 weeks)
11.18.1977 … CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (4 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
12.14.1977 … SEMI-TOUGH (9 weeks)

02.15.1978 … ANNIE HALL (RE, 2 weeks)
03.03.1978 … SEXTETTE (4 weeks)
03.29.1978 … THE BIG SLEEP (5 weeks)
05.03.1978 … THE LAST WALTZ (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.14.1978 … THE BUDDY HOLLY STORY (5 weeks, Stereo)
07.19.1978 … REVENGE OF THE PINK PANTHER (5 weeks)
08.23.1978 … FANTASIA (RE, 5 weeks, Stereo)
09.29.1978 … BULLY (2 weeks)
10.12.1978 … THE LAST WALTZ (RE, 2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.26.1978 … THE WIZ (20 weeks, Dolby Stereo)

03.15.1979 … HAIR (14 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.22.1979 … THE MUPPET MOVIE (6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.02.1979 … THE KIDS ARE ALRIGHT (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
08.15.1979 … APOCALYPSE NOW (GSP, 13 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
11.16.1979 … FANTASIA (RE, 4 weeks, Stereo)
12.14.1979 … 1941 (9 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)

02.15.1980 … SATURN 3 (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.27.1980 … DON GIOVANNI (GSP, 2 weeks, Stereo)
04.11.1980 … THE BLACK HOLE / SLEEPING BEAUTY (RE, 5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
05.16.1980 … FAME (5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
06.20.1980 … THE BLUE LAGOON (6 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
08.01.1980 … RAISE THE TITANIC (12 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
10.24.1980 … GLORIA (4 weeks)
11.21.1980 … ALL THAT JAZZ (RE, 4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
12.19.1980 … THE JAZZ SINGER (8 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

02.13.1981 … THE EARTHLING (2 weeks)
02.27.1981 … GLORIA (RE, 1 week)
03.06.1981 … CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (RE, 3 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
03.27.1981 … PAUL McCARTNEY & WINGS: ROCKSHOW (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
04.17.1981 … LION OF THE DESERT (8 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.12.1981 … APOCALYPSE NOW (RE, 5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
07.17.1981 … ON ANY SUNDAY II (3 weeks)
08.07.1981 … HEAVY METAL (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
08.28.1981 … PRINCE OF THE CITY (5 weeks)
10.02.1981 … ZOOT SUIT (11 weeks, 70mm-Sensurround Plus)
12.16.1981 … GHOST STORY (8 weeks)

02.12.1982 … QUEST FOR FIRE (7 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
04.02.1982 … RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (MO, 10 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
06.11.1982 … E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
07.16.1982 … NAPOLEON (RE, GSP, 5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

Thanks, Michael, for another one of your excellent compilations. Only last week I was wondering what played the Dome in 1968 to keep "2001" out, and now thanks to you I know it was "Camelot". I never really liked that movie, but maybe if I'd seen it at the Dome I'd feel differently about it.

Of all the films on the above list I couldn't remember a film called "Maurie" and it played 6 weeks. At first I thought it was a mistake. Then I went to the IMDB and there it was.

TAGLINE: MAURIE is an unforgettable man. MAURIE is an unforgettable picture.

HA!

I never knew Windjammer had a re-release in 1973, was it in Cinerama?

THE CINERAMA DOME
PART III: THE MASS-MARKET, SATURATION-BOOKING ERA (1982-2000)

Compiled by Michael Coate


08.20.1982 … RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK (RE, 5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
09.24.1982 … YES, GEORGIO (2 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
10.08.1982 … SUPERMAN II (RE, 2 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
10.22.1982 … JINXED (2 weeks)
11.05.1982 … DAYS OF HEAVEN (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
11.12.1982 … POLTERGEIST (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
11.19.1982 … STILL OF THE NIGHT (4 weeks)
12.17.1982 … TRAIL OF THE PINK PANTHER (3 weeks)

01.07.1983 … ENIGMA (3 weeks)
01.28.1983 … WOODSTOCK (RE, 1 week, Stereo)
02.04.1983 … THE ENTITY (2 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
02.18.1983 … THE STING II (3 weeks)
03.11.1983 … TRENCHCOAT (2 weeks)
03.25.1983 … THE BLACK STALLION RETURNS (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
04.15.1983 … LONE WOLF McQUADE (2 weeks)
04.29.1983 … THE HUNGER (2 weeks)
05.13.1983 … BREATHLESS (3 weeks)
06.03.1983 … WARGAMES (9 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.05.1983 … THE STAR CHAMBER (3 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.26.1983 … FIRE AND ICE (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
09.16.1983 … MERRY CHRISTMAS, MR. LAWRENCE (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
09.30.1983 … BRAINSTORM (7 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
11.18.1983 … YENTL (16 weeks, Dolby Stereo)

03.09.1984 … THE HOTEL NEW HAMPSHIRE (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.30.1984 … SPLASH (MO, 5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.04.1984 … THE BOUNTY (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.01.1984 … STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK (6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
07.13.1984 … THE LAST STARFIGHTER (4 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.10.1984 … RED DAWN (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
09.21.1984 … ALL OF ME (2 weeks)
10.05.1984 … TEACHERS (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.26.1984 … AMERICAN DREAMER (3 weeks)
11.16.1984 … NIGHT OF THE COMET (3 weeks)
12.07.1984 … 2010 (9 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

02.08.1985 … MASS APPEAL (2 weeks)
02.22.1985 … INTO THE NIGHT (2 weeks)
03.08.1985 … MASK (8 weeks)
05.03.1985 … GOTCHA (4 weeks)
05.31.1985 … FLETCH (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
07.03.1985 … BACK TO THE FUTURE (14 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
10.11.1985 … REMO WILLIAMS: THE ADVENTURE BEGINS… (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
11.08.1985 … BRING ON THE NIGHT (6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
12.18.1985 … OUT OF AFRICA (13 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

03.21.1986 … JUST BETWEEN FRIENDS (4 weeks)
04.18.1986 … ABSOLUTE BEGINNERS (3 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
05.09.1986 … SHORT CIRCUIT (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.18.1986 … LEGAL EAGLES (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
07.18.1986 … PIRATES (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
08.01.1986 … HOWARD THE DUCK (3 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.22.1986 … TOUCH AND GO (2 weeks)
09.05.1986 … TOP GUN (MO, 5 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
10.08.1986 … PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED (7 weeks)
11.26.1986 … STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME (9 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)

01.30.1987 … OUTRAGEOUS FORTUNE (8 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.27.1987 … BLIND DATE (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.08.1987 … GARDENS OF STONE (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.03.1987 … THE UNTOUCHABLES (9 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.05.1987 … STAKEOUT (7 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
09.25.1987 … BEST SELLER (4 weeks)
10.23.1987 … SUSPECT (9 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
12.25.1987 … GOOD MORNING, VIETNAM (12 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

03.18.1988 … D.O.A. (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
04.15.1988 … TOKYO POP (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
04.29.1988 … SUNSET (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.20.1988 … CALL ME (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
06.03.1988 … DECLINE OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION PART II: THE METAL YEARS (3 weeks, Ultra Stereo)
06.22.1988 … WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT (19 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
11.03.1988 … Pacific’s Cinerama Dome 25th Anniversary Retrospective** (2 weeks)
11.18.1988 … OLIVER & COMPANY (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
12.09.1988 … MISSISSIPPI BURNING (12 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)

03.03.1989 … NEW YORK STORIES (7 weeks)
04.21.1989 … RED SCORPION (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.05.1989 … GONE WITH THE WIND (RE, 2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.19.1989 … THE WIZARD OF OZ (RE, 2 weeks)
06.02.1989 … DEAD POETS SOCIETY (8 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
07.28.1989 … TURNER & HOOCH (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
08.18.1989 … BATMAN (MO, 6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
09.29.1989 … WEST SIDE STORY (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Stereo)
10.06.1989 … AN INNOCENT MAN (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.20.1989 … GROSS ANATOMY (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
11.15.1989 … THE LITTLE MERMAID (4 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
12.13.1989 … BLAZE (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)

01.19.1990 … FOR ALL MANKIND (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
02.02.1990 … STELLA (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.01.1990 … XX Years Of Zoetrope**
03.02.1990 … THE HUNT FOR RED OCTOBER (11 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
05.16.1990 … THE TEN COMMANDMENTS (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
05.24.1990 … See The Future Back To Back To Back**
05.25.1990 … BACK TO THE FUTURE PART III (4 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
06.22.1990 … ROBOCOP 2 (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
07.18.1990 … ARACHNOPHOBIA (8 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
09.14.1990 … BEN-HUR (RE, 3 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
10.05.1990 … FANTASIA (RE, 4 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR Fantasound)
11.02.1990 … JACOB’S LADDER (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
11.21.1990 … THREE MEN AND A LITTLE LADY (7 weeks, Dolby Stereo)

01.11.1991 … WARLOCK (1 week, Dolby Stereo)
01.18.1991 … WHITE FANG (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.01.1991 … THE DOORS (8 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
04.26.1991 … OSCAR (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.17.1991 … WHAT ABOUT BOB? (7 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
07.03.1991 … TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY (14 weeks, 70mm-Cinema Digital Sound)
10.11.1991 … SHATTERED (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
11.01.1991 … BILLY BATHGATE (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
11.27.1991 … MY GIRL (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
12.11.1991 … HOOK (8 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)

02.07.1992 … MEDICINE MAN (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.06.1992 … GLADIATOR (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
03.20.1992 … FINAL APPROACH (2 weeks, Cinema Digital Sound)
04.03.1992 … THUNDERHEART (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
04.17.1992 … CITY OF JOY (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.15.1992 … Exclusive 7 Day 70mm Film Festival**
05.22.1992 … FAR AND AWAY (6 weeks, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
07.01.1992 … A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
08.14.1992 … DIGGSTOWN (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
08.28.1992 … HONEYMOON IN VEGAS (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.02.1992 … HERO (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
11.04.1992 … The All-Time Classics Retrospective** (5 weeks)
12.11.1992 … A FEW GOOD MEN (9 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)

02.12.1993 … GROUNDHOG DAY (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
03.19.1993 … 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Stereo)
03.26.1993 … MARRIED TO IT (1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
04.02.1993 … ALADDIN (MO, 3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.23.1993 … INDIAN SUMMER (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.14.1993 … LOST IN YONKERS (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
06.09.1993 … WHAT’S LOVE GOT TO DO WITH IT (1 week, Dolby Digital)
06.18.1993 … LAST ACTION HERO (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.23.1993 … POETIC JUSTICE (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
08.13.1993 … CLIFFHANGER (MO, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
08.20.1993 … EL CID (RE, 2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
09.03.1993 … BOXING HELENA (2 weeks, Ultra Stereo)
09.17.1993 … THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (6 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
10.29.1993 … FATAL INSTINCT (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
11.12.1993 … MY LIFE (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
12.10.1993 … GERONIMO: AN AMERICAN LEGEND (4 weeks, SDDS-8)

01.07.1994 … SHADOWLANDS (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
02.04.1994 … I’LL DO ANYTHING (3 weeks, Dolby Stereo SR)
02.25.1994 … THE AGE OF INNOCENCE (RE, 1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
03.04.1994 … CHINA MOON (1 week, Dolby Stereo)
03.11.1994 … GUARDING TESS (4 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
04.08.1994 … LEPRECHAUN 2 (1 week, Ultra Stereo)
04.15.1994 … D2: THE MIGHTY DUCKS (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
04.22.1994 … BAD GIRLS (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.06.1994 … CLEAN SLATE (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
05.20.1994 … Columbia Classics Festival** (4 weeks)
06.17.1994 … WOLF (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.22.1994 … NORTH (2 weeks, SDDS)
08.05.1994 … WYATT EARP / MAVERICK (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital/Dolby Stereo SR)
08.12.1994 … LITTLE BUDDHA (MO, 1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
08.19.1994 … BLANKMAN (2 weeks, SDDS-8)
09.02.1994 … A SIMPLE TWIST OF FATE (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
09.16.1994 … CLEAR AND PRESENT DANGER (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.23.1994 … THE SHAWSHANK REDEMPTION (5 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.28.1994 … SILENT FALL (2 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
11.11.1994 … THE SANTA CLAUSE (6 weeks, Dolby Digital)
12.25.1994 … LITTLE WOMEN (3 weeks, SDDS)

01.13.1995 … LEGENDS OF THE FALL (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
02.10.1995 … THE QUICK AND THE DEAD (3 weeks, SDDS-8)
03.03.1995 … THE WILD BUNCH (RE, 5 weeks, 70mm-Stereo)
04.07.1995 … BAD BOYS (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
05.12.1995 … CRIMSON TIDE (8 weeks, Dolby Digital)
07.07.1995 … FIRST KNIGHT (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
08.04.1995 … APOLLO 13 (MO, 3 weeks, DTS)
08.25.1995 … DESPERADO (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
09.29.1995 … DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS (3 weeks, SDDS-8)
10.20.1995 … NOW AND THEN (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.10.1995 … 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Stereo)
11.17.1995 … THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT (5 weeks, SDDS)
12.22.1995 … DRACULA: DEAD AND LOVING IT (2 weeks, SDDS-8)

01.05.1996 … GOLDENEYE (MO, 2 weeks, DTS)
01.19.1996 … FROM DUSK TILL DAWN (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
02.16.1996 … CITY HALL (3 weeks, SDDS)
03.08.1996 … HEAVY METAL (RE, 1 week, SDDS-8)
03.15.1996 … TWO MUCH (1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
03.22.1996 … MR. HOLLAND’S OPUS (MO, 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.03.1996 … A THIN LINE BETWEEN LOVE & HATE (2 weeks, SDDS)
04.19.1996 … MRS. WINTERBOURNE (2 weeks, SDDS-8)
05.03.1996 … TAXI DRIVER (RE, 1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
05.10.1996 … ORIGINAL GANGSTAS (2 weeks, DTS)
05.24.1996 … APOCALYPSE NOW (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
05.31.1996 … THE ARRIVAL (2 weeks, SDDS)
06.14.1996 … THE CABLE GUY (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.17.1996 … MULTIPLICITY (2 weeks, SDDS-8)
08.02.1996 … MATILDA (1 week, SDDS-8)
08.09.1996 … JACK (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.30.1996 … FIRST KID (2 weeks, SDDS)
09.13.1996 … FEELING MINNESOTA (2 weeks, SDDS)
09.27.1996 … GIANT (RE, 3 weeks, Dolby Stereo)
10.16.1996 … GET ON THE BUS (2 weeks, SDDS)
11.01.1996 … THE FIRST WIVES CLUB (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
11.08.1996 … RANSOM (7 weeks, SDDS)
12.25.1996 … EVITA (9 weeks, Dolby Digital)

02.28.1997 … DONNIE BRASCO (4 weeks, SDDS)
03.26.1997 … THE DEVIL’S OWN (4 weeks, SDDS)
04.25.1997 … ROMY AND MICHELE’S HIGH SCHOOL REUNION (2 weeks, SDDS)
05.09.1997 … THE FIFTH ELEMENT (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
06.06.1997 … CON AIR (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.02.1997 … MEN IN BLACK (7 weeks, SDDS-8)
08.22.1997 … G.I. JANE (5 weeks, SDDS)
09.26.1997 … THE ASSIGNMENT (2 weeks, SDDS-8)
10.10.1997 … SEVEN YEARS IN TIBET (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
11.07.1997 … STARSHIP TROOPERS (5 weeks, SDDS-8)
12.10.1997 … AMISTAD (6 weeks, SDDS)

01.23.1998 … SPICE WORLD (2 weeks, SDDS)
02.06.1998 … THE REPLACEMENT KILLERS (3 weeks, SDDS-8)
02.27.1998 … DARK CITY (3 weeks, SDDS)
03.20.1998 … MR. NICE GUY (2 weeks, SDDS)
04.03.1998 … LOST IN SPACE (5 weeks, SDDS)
05.08.1998 … WOO (2 weeks, SDDS)
05.20.1998 … GODZILLA (7 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.10.1998 … SMALL SOLDIERS (4 weeks, SDDS)
08.05.1998 … THE PARENT TRAP (MO, 2 weeks, SDDS)
08.21.1998 … DANCE WITH ME (3 weeks, SDDS)
09.11.1998 … SIMON BIRCH (3 weeks, SDDS)
10.02.1998 … ANTZ (4 weeks, SDDS)
10.30.1998 … VAMPIRES (3 weeks, SDDS)
11.20.1998 … THE RUGRATS MOVIE (5 weeks, Dolby Digital)
12.25.1998 … STEPMOM (4 weeks, SDDS)

01.22.1999 … GLORIA (2 weeks, SDDS)
02.05.1999 … BLADE RUNNER (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
02.12.1999 … The Columbia Pictures 75th Anniversary Film Festival** (2 weeks)
02.26.1999 … EIGHT MILLIMETER (3 weeks, SDDS)
03.19.1999 … TRUE CRIME (3 weeks, SDDS)
04.09.1999 … TWIN DRAGONS (2 weeks, SDDS)
04.23.1999 … PUSHING TIN (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.12.1999 … TRIPPIN’ (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.28.1999 … THE THIRTEENTH FLOOR (3 weeks, SDDS)
06.18.1999 … THE THIRTEENTH FLOOR / THE MATRIX (MO, 2 weeks, SDDS)
06.30.1999 … WILD WILD WEST (4 weeks, SDDS)
07.28.1999 … DEEP BLUE SEA (4 weeks, SDDS)
08.27.1999 … THE ASTRONAUT’S WIFE (3 weeks, SDDS)
09.17.1999 … BLUE STREAK (4 weeks, SDDS)
10.15.1999 … FIGHT CLUB (4 weeks, SDDS)
11.12.1999 … THE MESSENGER: THE STORY OF JOAN OF ARC (4 weeks, SDDS)
12.10.1999 … DEUCE BIGALOW: MALE GIGOLO (2 weeks, SDDS)
12.25.1999 … GALAXY QUEST (4 weeks, SDDS)

01.21.2000 … PLAY IT TO THE BONE (1 week, SDDS)
01.28.2000 … GALAXY QUEST (RE, 1 week, SDDS)
02.04.2000 … AMERICAN BEAUTY (MO, 2 weeks, SDDS)
02.18.2000 … HANGING UP (3 weeks, SDDS)
03.10.2000 … AMERICAN BEAUTY (RE, 1 week, SDDS)
03.17.2000 … FINAL DESTINATION (2 weeks, SDDS)
03.31.2000 … THE ROAD TO EL DORADO (3 weeks, SDDS)
04.21.2000 … LOVE & BASKETBALL (2 weeks, SDDS)
05.05.2000 … GLADIATOR (8 weeks, SDDS)
06.28.2000 … THE PATRIOT (4 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.28.2000 … Celebration Weekend**
07.31.2000 … theater closed for renovation (86 weeks)

** The titles shown during special events marked with a double asterisk will be listed in a separate post.

"Part IV: The ArcLight Era" will appear in a future posting.

Up until the early 80's the Dome played many pictures in the Southern California market Exclusive before opening citywide. One reason the Dome did not change earlier and play day and date with Bevely Hills or Westwood. Was the Director of Operations for the company Harold Citron, that if the studios wanted the Dome for their films it would have to play exclusive at the Dome for a said amount of weeks before the citywide engagements.

Did anyone attend the January 28 presentation of 'El Cid' - I gather it wasn't in the Dome. Was this a 35mm print or HiDef Digital projection - the latter was shown the same night at the AFI's Silver Theatre - and it was from what I read a terrible presentation.

The guy I sat next to in the front row for "2001" saw "El Cid" that night. It was in one of the other Arclight theaters, and he said it was a knockout. The movie looked beautiful, and the children of Samuel Bronston and Anthony Mann were on hand too, to speak about the movie.

THE CINERAMA DOME
PART III 1/2 : THE FESTIVALS

Compiled By Michael Coate



11.03.1988 … Pacific’s Cinerama Dome 25th Anniversary Retrospective

(Titles marked with * were shown in 70mm)

11.03 …
IT’S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD

11.04 … Science Fiction Day
STAR TREK III: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCK
STAR TREK IV: THE VOYAGE HOME*
2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY*

11.05 … Steven Spielberg Day
1941
JAWS
BACK TO THE FUTURE*
RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND

11.06 …
THIS IS CINERAMA*

11.07 … 25th Anniversary Day!
IT’S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD

11.08 …
GOOD MORNING, VIETNAM*
APOCALYPSE NOW*
WOODSTOCK

11.09 … Broadway Musical Day
CAMELOT
JESUS CHRIST SUPERSTAR

11.10 … Stanley Kubrick Day
2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY*
BARRY LYNDON

11.11 … Francis Ford Coppola Day
SLEEPING BEAUTY
PEGGY SUE GOT MARRIED
NAPOLEON
APOCALYPSE NOW*

11.12 … Academy Award Evening
WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT*
SLEEPING BEAUTY
THE STING
OUT OF AFRICA
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND

11.13 …
FAME*
ZOOT SUIT

11.14 … Comedy Day
SPLASH
OUTRAGEOUS FORTUNE
BLAZING SADDLES
AMERICAN GRAFFITI

11.15 … High Adventure Day
THE UNTOUCHABLES
TOP GUN*
DELIVERANCE

11.16 … Great Musicals Day
YENTL
ALL THAT JAZZ
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
TOMMY

11.17 …
THIS IS CINERAMA*
IT’S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD

--------------------------------------------------

03.01.1990 … XX Years Of Zoetrope
APOCALYPSE NOW (70mm-Dolby Stereo)
ONE FROM THE HEART (70mm-Dolby Stereo)

--------------------------------------------------

05.24.1990 … See The Future Back To Back To Back
BACK TO THE FUTURE (Dolby Stereo)
BACK TO THE FUTURE PART II (70mm-Dolby Stereo)
BACK TO THE FUTURE PART III (70mm-Dolby Stereo)

---------------------------------------------------

05.15.1992 … Exclusive 7 Day 70mm Film Festival
2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (05.15-16)
WEST SIDE STORY (05.17-18)
OKLAHOMA! (05.19-21)

------------------------------------------------------

11.04.1992 … The All-Time Classics Retrospective
APOCALYPSE NOW (11.04-17; 70mm-Dolby Stereo)
GONE WITH THE WIND (11.18-24)
THE WIZARD OF OZ (11.25-12.01)
CASABLANCA (12.02-05)
CITIZEN KANE (12.06-10)

-----------------------------------------------------

05.20.1994 … Columbia Classics Festival
THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)
THE GUNS OF NAVARONE (1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)
TOMMY (1 week, Dolby Stereo SR)

----------------------------------------------------

02.12.1999 … The Columbia Pictures 75th Anniversary Film Festival
LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (02.12-13, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)
DR. STRANGELOVE (02.14-15)
EASY RIDER (02.14-15, SDDS)
IT HAPPENED ONE NIGHT (02.16)
MR. SMITH GOES TO WASHINGTON (02.16)
THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI (02.17, Dolby Stereo SR)
GUESS WHO’S COMING TO DINNER (02.18)
TOOTSIE (02.18)
CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND (02.19-21, Director’s Cut, DTS)
FROM HERE TO ETERNITY (02.22-23)
ON THE WATERFRONT (02.22-23)
TAXI DRIVER (02.24-25, Dolby Stereo SR)

-------------------------------------------------

07.28.2000 … Celebration Weekend
TERMINATOR 2: JUDGMENT DAY (07.28, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)
LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (07.29-30, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)
BEN-HUR (07.29-30, Dolby Stereo)

Thank you Michael, this brings a few fun memories. One thing that I liked was the flyers or mini-programs that were handed out to the patrons, specially during the retrospectives and special screenings. A big thrill for me was "The Guns Of Navarone".

Bill: I'm glad that you made the "pilgrimage" to see 2001!

JSA

JSA: I'm glad too! The only downside: any other theatrical movies I see will seem puny and insignificant for the next few weeks.

But Bill did the guy who saw 'El Cid' say it was a 35mm print or a DLP projection - the latter was presented as such for the AFI/Silver Theatre showing which proved to be disasterous.

Thanks for answering that, Rizzo. The guy didn't mention the digital projection, but he couldn't get over the sight of thousands of extras (I think he said it was the Spanish Army) thundering across the screen.

Since I just watched 'Richard Pryor, Live on the Sunset Strip' I thought I'd point out that the Dome has a quick cameo in the opening seconds.
'Ghost Story' is on the marquee.

Quoting "RobertR": I never knew Windjammer had a re-release in 1973, was it in Cinerama?

It may have been more appropriate to claim that "jam" was re-released, because apparently the "Wind" and "mer" panels were not shown! :-)

Michael Coate-that's funny, do you really think they had the nerve to just put "jam" on that big screen? Perhaps they had a 70 or 35/scope version as with of HTWWW roughly 1/3 left pannel, full center pannel, 1/3 right pannel, and cut off a lot of the top and bottom? THANKS for all your work putting together all the films that have played the Dome!

"Ladies and Gentlmen, this is CINERAMA!" Lowell Thomas September 30, 1952

New Theater Editing Policy
mispellings
panel

Re "Windjammer"...

I'm not certain what exactly was shown. Eyewitness recollections of what was shown have varied. I know that by its final week, newspaper promotion included a "Not Shown In Original Format" type blurb.

I'm aware of some re-issue screenings as early as 1971 in other parts of the country. Stuart Galbraith's book on Detroit movie theaters, for instance, claims it was shown there in 70mm. (But that book has a number of crazy claims; "El Cid" in 3-strip Cinerama, for example.) And I know of a source in Canada claiming a 70mm "composite" print was once available. Whatever was shown appears to have been a pale imitation of the original version.

My guess is "This Is Cinerama". I'll make sure to be there. I've already seen "HTWWW" here (see my $0.02 on that one somewhere around the middle of this page).

A BETTER question, Rizzo:

Were y'all encouraged enough by those 2001 numbers to get more 70MM titles in the Dome in the near future? I'd rather see "Patton" or "Lawrence" or "West Side Story" than "The Ruins" or "Vantage Point"!

When Arclight opened there was lots of buzz about how expensive it was. Now it's a real bargain. I had a little time on my hands and broke my own rule by attempting to see a film at the local Regal crappyplex. Arriving at 5:10 for a 5:45 show I expected the matinee price. To my surprise, I was informed that the matinee price ends at 5:30 and that will be $10.50 please. The non-matinee price for "2001" was only $1.50 more! It was thanks but no thanks and I left. No wonder Regal just reported a quarterly loss. The local CP is 14 screens and the worst here is better than the best there.

BTW, while someone's pal may have been thrilled at the sight of all those El Cid extras, I'm afraid this transfer is very sub-par - the color is off and looks nothing like it did when originally shown, and the lack of detail is bothersome - contrast is also not up to par - all viewable on the DVD.

Well please give us as much notice as possible, please Rizzo. Some of us would be making a pilgramage out for this. Seeing Three Strip Cinerama would allow me to knock something else off my Bucket List.

Hi Rizzo:

I'm the patron saint of Clearview's Ziegfeld-NYC's premiere showcase. Glad to meet ya. My dream is to see HTWWW at the Dome. Are we on the same page? I've been researching Warners approaching DVD restoration release!! Please advise, I have to make my plane reservations.

Here is a June 1976 ad from the LA Times:
http://tinyurl.com/2t8xkc

Logan's Run was released on June 23, 1976.

Part IV: The ArcLight Era

Compiled by Michael Coate

Here are the bookings for the DOME upon the re-opening as the ArcLight Cinemas multiplex through the end of 2003.

03.22.2002 … E.T. THE EXTRA-TERRESTRIAL (RE, 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.05.2002 … AMADEUS (RE, "Director's Cut," 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.19.2002 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (MO, 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.03.2002 … SPIDER-MAN (3 weeks, SDDS-8)
05.24.2002 … SPIRIT: STALLION OF THE CIMARRON (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
06.07.2002 … DIVINE SECRETS OF THE YA-YA SISTERHOOD (1 week, Dolby Digital)
06.14.2002 … THE BOURNE IDENTITY (1 week, Dolby Digital)
06.21.2002 … MINORITY REPORT (5 weeks, Dolby Digital)
07.26.2002 … AUSTIN POWERS IN GOLDMEMBER (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.09.2002 … XXX (6 weeks, Dolby Digital)
09.20.2002 … BALLISTIC: ECKS VS. SEVER (1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.25.2002 … LAWRENCE OF ARABIA (RE, 1 week, 70mm-Dolby Stereo SR)
10.04.2002 … THIS IS CINERAMA (RE, 2 weeks, Cinerama)
10.18.2002 … THE RING (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.01.2002 … I SPY (1 week, Dolby Digital)
11.08.2002 … 8 MILE (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.22.2002 … DIE ANOTHER DAY (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)
12.18.2002 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS (8 weeks, Dolby Digital)

02.14.2003 … The Cinerama Dome's "Best Of" Showcase (1 week)
02.21.2003 … GODS AND GENERALS (1 week, Dolby Digital)
02.28.2003 … GANGS OF NEW YORK (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
03.07.2003 … TEARS OF THE SUN (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
03.20.2003 … GANGS OF NEW YORK (RE, 1 day, Dolby Digital)
03.21.2003 … CHICAGO (RE, 1 day, Dolby Digital)
03.22.2003 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS (RE, 1 day, Dolby Digital)
03.23.2003 … CHICAGO (RE, 3 days, Dolby Digital)
03.28.2003 … BASIC (1 week, Dolby Digital)
04.04.2003 … A MAN APART (1 week, Dolby Digital)
04.11.2003 … ANGER MANAGEMENT (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.25.2003 … IDENTITY (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.23.2003 … BRUCE ALMIGHTY (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
06.13.2003 … HOLLYWOOD HOMICIDE (1 week, Dolby Digital)
06.20.2003 … HULK (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
07.02.2003 … LEGALLY BLONDE 2: RED, WHITE & BLONDE (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
07.18.2003 … WHALE RIDER (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
07.25.2003 … SEABISCUIT (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.15.2003 … FREDDY VS. JASON (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.29.2003 … JEEPERS CREEPERS 2 (1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.05.2003 … THE ORDER (1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.12.2003 … HOW THE WEST WAS WON (RE, 2 weeks, Cinerama)
09.26.2003 … SCARFACE (RE/MO, 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
10.10.2003 … INTOLERABLE CRUELTY (1 week, Dolby Digital)
10.17.2003 … IT'S A MAD MAD MAD MAD WORLD (RE, 1 week, 70mm-DTS)
10.24.2003 … MYSTIC RIVER (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
10.29.2003 … ALIEN (RE, "The Director's Cut," 2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.14.2003 … MASTER AND COMMANDER: THE FAR SIDE OF THE WORLD (1 week, Dolby Digital)
11.21.2003 … THE CAT IN THE HAT (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
12.05.2003 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING (RE, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
12.12.2003 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS (RE, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
12.17.2003 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE RETURN OF THE KING (8 weeks, Dolby Digital)

For those readers interested in these playdate/booking history lists, I should mention that in addition to the DOME and NATIONAL lists, I’ve also posted playdate listings for other Los Angeles area theaters including the AVCO (Screen #1, 1972-1993) and the VILLAGE (1980s & 1990s). I also recently posted one for the CINE CAPRI in Phoenix, AZ.

I drove by the dome a few days ago, for the first time since they built all the retail around it. Quite a difference heading down Sunset from the west. When the dome was surrounded by parking lots, the first glimpse was striking. Now you have to wait until the middle of the block to see the theater. Too bad.

Two things come to mind when going over the Arclight Era list. One, what was screened during the "best of" showcase week (2/14/03)? The second, wasn't the "Amadeus" re-issue a full digital presentation?

JSA

1) "Best Of" Showcase

02.14.2003 … CHICAGO
02.15.2003 … SPIRITED AWAY / CHICAGO
02.16.2003 … SPIRITED AWAY / THE PIANIST
02.17.2003 … THE LORD OF THE RINGS: THE TWO TOWERS
02.18.2003 … THE HOURS
02.19.2003 … FRIDA
02.20.2003 … CATCH ME IF YOU CAN

2) No. The Dome didn't get digital projection until 2005. (One of the ArcLight screens had digital projection prior to the Dome, though. Maybe that's what you're thinking of?)

That's part of it. I was also thinking that at the time (ie 2003) the film was being advertised as "digitally restored", but probably for DVD release (?).

Anyway, as always, thanks for your response!

JSA

Why isn't a WIDESCREEN WEEKEND done here each year as is done in Great Britain? Just think, a whole weekend with, 3-strip CINERAMA and 70mm "CINERAMA", 3-strip CINEMIRACLE, 3-strip KINOPANORAMA, 70mm TODD-AO etc.! Everyone should bug the heck out of the Gods in charge of the Dome. To see what we are missing see: http://www.in70mm.com/widescreen_weekend/2008/index.htm

"Ladies and Gentlemen, This is CINERAMA!" Lowell Thomas September 30, 1952

An annual WIDESCREEN FESTIVAL at the Cinerama Dome sounds like a terrific idea. I'm surprised that no one's thought of it before. The only worry I would have about this is the fact that the people who own the Dome don't seem to understand how to run it. I've been to the Cinerama theatre in Bradford England and the people there love, understand and respect widescreen cinema. They know what to show on the huge deeply curved screen and also what to present in a smaller format. Standard 35mm prints were never meant to be blownup to Cineramic dimensions. You can stay at home and watch grainy, distored feature films on any old second hand run-down TV.

Thanks Michael

Prior to its renovation in 2000, the Dome had many widescreen festivals( See Michael Coate's comments earlier this year). Why they can't plan new ones is anyone's guess. I know Pacific likes to use the Dome for the week's major releases, but committing a week or even a few weekends a year for classic screenings wouldn't kill them. They do have 11 other screens to work with. Schedule them in mid-winter or early fall when new studio programming is light. They didn't seem to have a problem when it was just the Dome by itself.

Part IV: The ArcLight Era (continued)

02.13.2004 … 50 FIRST DATES (2 weeks, SDDS)
02.25.2004 … THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
03.19.2004 … DAWN OF THE DEAD (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.02.2004 … WALKING TALL (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.16.2004 … KILL BILL VOL. 2 (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.07.2004 … VAN HELSING (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
05.19.2004 … SHREK 2 (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)
06.18.2004 … THE TERMINAL (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
06.30.2004 … SPIDER-MAN 2 (3 weeks, SDDS-8)
07.23.2004 … THE BOURNE SUPREMACY (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.06.2004 … COLLATERAL (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)
09.03.2004 … HERO (MO, 3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
09.24.2004 … THE FORGOTTEN (1 week, SDDS)
10.01.2004 … SHARK TALE (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
10.22.2004 … THE GRUDGE (1 week, SDDS)
10.29.2004 … RAY (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.10.2004 … THE POLAR EXPRESS (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
11.24.2004 … ALEXANDER (1 week, Dolby Digital)
12.03.2004 … HOUSE OF FLYING DAGGERS (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
12.22.2004 … THE PHANTOM OF THE OPERA (4 weeks, Dolby Digital)

01.19.2005 … ASSAULT ON PRECINCT 13 (1 week, Dolby Digital)
01.28.2005 … HIDE AND SEEK (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
02.11.2005 … HITCH (3 weeks, SDDS)
03.04.2005 … THE JACKET (1 week, Dolby Digital)
03.11.2005 … THE PASSION OF THE CHRIST (RE, "Recut," 1 week, Dolby Digital)
03.18.2005 … THE RING TWO (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.01.2005 … SIN CITY (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.15.2005 … THE AMITYVILLE HORROR (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
04.29.2005 … THE INTERPRETER (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
05.06.2005 … HOUSE OF WAX (1 week, Dolby Digital)
05.13.2005 … UNLEASHED (1 week, Dolby Digital)
05.19.2005 … STAR WARS: EPISODE III REVENGE OF THE SITH (7 weeks, DLP)
07.08.2005 … FANTASTIC FOUR (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
07.22.2005 … THE ISLAND (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
08.12.2005 … THE SKELETON KEY (1 week, Dolby Digital)
08.19.2005 … THE 40 YEAR-OLD VIRGIN (1 week, Dolby Digital)
08.26.2005 … THE BROTHERS GRIMM (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
09.09.2005 … THE 40 YEAR-OLD VIRGIN (RE/MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.16.2005 … JUST LIKE HEAVEN (1 week, Dolby Digital)
09.23.2005 … FLIGHTPLAN (2 weeks, Dolby Digital)
10.07.2005 … WALLACE & GROMIT: THE CURSE OF THE WERE-RABBIT (3 weeks, Dolby Digital)
10.28.2005 … HOW THE WEST WAS WON (RE, 1 week, Cinerama)
11.04.2005 … SAW II (MO, 1 week, Dolby Digital)
11.11.2005 … ZATHURA (2 weeks, SDDS-8)
11.23.2005 … RENT (3 weeks, SDDS)
12.14.2005 … KING KONG (5 weeks, Dolby Digital)

Science Fiction Giant Arthur C. Clarke, author of "2001: A Space Odyssey" and co-writer of the screenplay for the film, passed away today.


JSA

A very sad day for science fiction fans everywhere. Rest in peace, Sir Arthur, and thank you for "2001".

This is a recent photo.

Love the recent photo of the dome, but surely they could program something that would take advantage of the huge curved screen. A booking of Run Fat Boy Run is just a big waste of this unique resource.

I guess Rizzo hasn't been here to share THE BIG NEWS yet...

News!? What news?

Must be 3-strip Cinerama, right? Can my budget bear two trips from NJ to the Dome in one year? ...

Naah...not THAT big...

is it something about Indy 4?

well ... ?!? don't leave us hanging here ???

Well? what then.

Hurry before all the planes are taken out of comission....

Earlier post by Rizzo:

I don't know of any Arclight sponsored 70mm events coming up, but we are working with AFI in getting more of their 100s in 70mm especially after the huge success of 2001.
posted by Rizzo on Feb 12, 2008 at 9:35pm

Is it something to do with this?

I wanted to give Rizzo the chance to respond but since he hasn't yet...

According to him, in a comment thread regarding "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" in the News section, Arclight/The Dome's booked it. It's a shocker to me because I was certain that Grauman's Chinese would get it.

Told y'all the news wasn't THAT big...

OK thanks, Chris. Maybe there'll be a reason to make a trip to the Dome for Cinerama in 2009.

Indy IV really shouldn't be a shocker since Lucasfilm's Revenge of the Sith bypassed the Chinese and opened at the Dome in 2005.

I've only seen one movie at the Chinese, "School of Rock", which doesn't show the theater and screen off to its very best advantage, but I'd say the Dome has the better screen between the two. It's that curve - some people say it's a liability but I think it's amazing. It's the best place to show "Indiana Jones".

Sigh....all that build up for something I've known for months (and I thought others knew). I was hoping 70mm news.

Thanks, Rizzo. It's a comforting feeling to know that someone who cares about Cinerama as much as you do is on the case!

I thought Spielberg already announced that there would be no digital prints AT ALL for Indy 4. Let me do the research...

Looks like that was just a RUMOR as of February 2008:

http://www.joblo.com/index.php?id=19949

Got another question for you Rizzo: Are y'all getting "Iron Man" at the Dome? I'm asking because I run a (almost) 600 member film club in town that gets together every week to catch the latest flicks all over SoCal. Our group is planning to catch "Iron Man" on opening night. I ASSUMED Grauman's would be showing it...but after the Indy 4 news, I'm wondering if it'll be at Arclight Hollywood/The Dome instead.

I wonder if there were any big arguments between Lucas and Spielberg over digital projection? They're on completely opposite ends of the spectrum on that issue.

Iron Man has been confirmed for Arclight.

Bill: I don’t think that there was any argument at all between Lucas and Spielberg relative to film vs. digital, at least concerning Indy 4. Spielberg chose film for creative reasons, to evoke the same look and feel as the previous pictures. And in addition to film, “traditional” (i.e. non-CGI) special effects and stunts were used as much as possible. It seems to me that Lucas would embrace that approach as well, regardless of his interest in digital formats.

JSA

The Dome will be getting Iron Man AND Indy 4? That's pretty disappointing as I was looking forward to seeing them at Grauman's where there's actually light on the screeen.

There's always the two largest Arclight houses, which I actually tend to prefer to Grauman's most of the time. Much shorter throw to the screen (and not nearly as many annoying customers).

But no 2k DLP or cranked sound. Also no architexture, no curtains.... damn you Paramount. Don't make me have to go to Westwood Village.

If I'm in LA in May I'll be at the Village to watch me some good old fashioned film. If I am in Seattle, hopefully Indy at the Cinerama. If they do strike a 70mm print, I will be at that theatre...Just wish I could have seen it at The National.

Actually, Arclight has 7 new NEC 2Ks.
http://www.dcinematoday.com/dc/PR.aspx?newsID=1047

Architechture and curtains? I only care about the best viewing environment that makes me forget about everything around me. I'll never understand the appeal of "palaces" over better viewing quality, other than nostalgic reasons. To each his own, I guess.

Some people want both, Mr. Randell and there's no reason they shouldn't have it. Yes, curtains - it's not nostalgia, it's showmanship. Are you young? Because the only people who seem to use the word nostalgia in a pejorative way are young people. And if you're not young, well then I'm baffled by your comments. I think most of the people who bother to come here and post ad nauseum in the Cinerama Dome thread are film lovers and people who prefer the best possible viewing experience. That said, I have never thought the Dome was the best possible viewing experience for anything, due to the lack of light on the screen. In its heyday, the Chinese was something special, as was the Egyptian, and the Pantages. I haven't been to the Village in some time, but they have curtains and it was always lovely there to see a film. For me, there's nothing worse than walking into a movie theater and seeing the screen revealed. It's stupid and boring and there's no magic. If that's what you prefer, bravo. The ONLY place I go see movies is the DGA - beautiful theater, curtains, the best projection in town. End of story.

I actually agree with most of that. Curtains are nice and would be better but it's not a huge thing for me. The Dome is definitely not one of my faves either, unless their showing 70mm or Cinerama.

I'm not saying the Arclight houses are perfect, but outside of some of the screening houses in town (such as the DGA) they're the best houses to me because the projection and sound are great, I don't have to fight for a good seat (which are the most comfortable to me), and I never feel as immersed in the film as anywhere else I've been. I appreciate the Chinese and still go there occasionally but usually only for "event" movies.

Of course, all of this is changing since Arclight is making the move to digital which I'm not really a fan of yet.

I have no interest in digital projection. The thought of it nauseates me. So, call me an old fogey, but I want film. Period. In our DGA screenings, they ONLY show film - that's why I refuse to go to theaters anymore, because I know I'll get the best film presentation at the DGA. Youngsters seem to take a shine to digital projection because there's no dirt or scratches, but, you know, I'll put up with that.

I guess I'm in the middle: I want the big theater with the curtains (hopefully working) AND the 2k/4k DLP. Unless the movie used film all the way thru post and didn't utilize a DI then there is no reason to view the film version except for comparison purposes. I much rather see it in a format that is closer to the source. Plus the sound (24-bit lossless?) beats the crap out of low bitrate Dolby Digital.

As for Arclight getting the NEC projectors when should that happen? The NECs at Grauman's and the Village are pretty nice. The Dome's IMO looks like crap but it's mostly because of the screen and it's problems.

Rizzo is Dave Pepper still at the Dome?

Rizzo, Thanks
He been with Pacific for a long time. He was a technician with them when I was at their Picwood Theatre.

so NEC units can playback 4K files - correct? From the literature I've seen on the systems that's my understanding.

I thought the NECs were just brighter 2k units.

I suppose they might be playable on the projectors, but the projector would have to "downgrade" it to 2K. Just speculation on my part.

Also, last I had heard the only public theater in town with a 4K is Mark Cuban's new Landmark. Which was why Blade Runner: Final Cut played there since they mastered it in 4K.

BLADE RUNNER and DR. STRANGELOVE were both projected in 4K on Landmark's Sony system.

BLADE RUNNER also played later in its run at Mann's Chinese 6 complex for a week or so in "Digital Projection". Any ideas what they have there?

Lucas builds up my dreams only to then taint the end result somehow every time.

The Dome is 4k capable... or at least was two years ago. The Da Vinci Code was shown in 4k at the Dome.

I saw "Da Vinci Code" at the Dome, and remember the presentation being advertised as 2K & Dolby Digital.

JSA

Sorry, my mistake. It was the AMC Century 15 that showed Da Vinca in 4K.

Rizzo, are y'all doing any upgrades or fine tuning of sound/picture equipment at The Dome before Iron Man opens? Me and 30 other members of my film club are going to the Friday 5/2 11:45 PM show and, since many of them have never been to The Dome, I hope the presentation will truly knock their socks off!

Hi Rizzo:

Any chance for "How the West Was Won ' to coincide with Warner's summer DVD release? I'm new here, so you may have addressed this before. I introduce some of the classic screenings at the Ziegfeld.

Thanks

Gary

fyi everyone. indiana jones 4 tickets just went on sale this morning!

I got mine. 5/23 11:40 PM show.

Will it be film or digital?

the amc near me in rockaway is getting film prints for both films by the studio. Like transformers last year, these reels must be unlocked using a special code for projectionists to put into the projector.

I hope the film prints for Ironman and Indy hold true because I have seats for both (Row C for the 8PM and 12:01 Ironmans on Thursday and Row C for the 12:01 and 8:30PM Indys on opening day), but I've seen Mission Impossible 3, Blades of Glory, and (I think) Transformers digitally projected in the Dome, so I wonder if this is a new agreement. In fact the only film print I've seen recently was the single midnight Simpsons show that ran the Thursday night prior.

If you are getting a film print the only code is the combo for the lock on the film cans. So what Justin posted about "these reels must be unlocked using a special code for projectionists to put into the projector", it's just a combo lock on the film cans. If you get a digital print then there is a code for the system.

So no digital showings of Iron Man or Indy 4 in the other theaters either? What happened to those new NEC projectors? Are they just going to sit there all summer long?

The only place to see either film properly is in Westwood, again. Nit thrilled about it either as Indy 4 should've been a lock for Grauman's.

I'm pretty sure the Village will be playing both Iron Man and Indy 4 on their DLP. Should look and sound fantastic.

wait I'm confused did Paramount change their minds and are releasing Indy 4 in DLP.

Isn't "Iron Man" booked into the Avco, not the Village?

anyone who wants to view footage of the re-premiere of It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World can view it at [url=http://youtube.com/results?search_query=roger+antoniotti&search_t
ype=] it is in three parts

this is a better way to get to the footage of the re-premiere of It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World
Part 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FSY47UEvOuc

Part 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zCsS-IqJoXY&feature=related

Part 3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D_qkoJA0SYw&feature=related

//Isn't "Iron Man" booked into the Avco, not the Village?

You're right. The Harold and Kumar flick will still be playing there on Friday. Really bad booking by Paramount.

You know, I don't mean to offend, but this is really irritating - this is supposed to be a board about the Cinerama Dome, and so much of it is about these new films and where they're doing this and where they're doing that - and unfortunately all these pointless posts come to my mailbox and take up space until I can delete them.

Here's an idea - why doesn't someone start a separate message board for digital projection and what's showing where and leave this one to posts about the Cinerama Dome and its history.

End of mini-rant. Flame away.

Well, I agree 50-50. On one hand, I don't particularly care if "Iron Man" or whatever will play at the Avco or the Village. That topic belongs elsewhere. But on the other hand, digital projection, regardless of how we feel on the issue, has been part of the Dome's history for some time now, and will play an even bigger part in its future. So I feel any discussion pertaining to digital projection as related to the Dome is appropriate.

JSA

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/wingcr1.htm

Rizzo,

I do not imply that this thread should be used exclusively for historical purpose. I value your contributions and comments, and always look forward to know what's going on with the theatre. My point is that I would not like to see this thread turn into like some of the others in this site, where they have become a depository of high school reunion messages and other topics that have nothing to do with the theater itself. If any offense was taken by you or any of the other contributors to this thread, I sincerely apologize.

JSA

Rizzo, you are our unofficial "inside man" at Arclight/The Dome. Screw the haters! We need you!

I always figured as long as we're talking about movies here, past present or future, it's fair game. I know what JSA means about some of the other pages getting clogged with hundreds of posts about the old neighborhood, etc., but not necessarily about going to the movies in that neighborhood. The 2nd most posted-about theater on Cinema Treasures, the Ridgewood in Queens NY, is totally undeserving of that high rank if you deleted all the non-movie-related posts from its page.

So, Rizzo, please stay. You've NEVER gone off-topic as far as I can see!

Yo, Rizzo! Y'all did a helluva job with "Iron Man!" Sound/Picture were pitch perfect. My film club members had a blast. We can't wait for Indy!

So, unless there is something I missed, Ironman in the Dome definitely appeared to be digital projection. I saw both the 8PM and the midnight on Thursday and I noticed nothing to indicate film. There were no changeover markers anywhere through the film nor were there any print defects or dirt visible.

BTW, the midnight Dome show was outstanding. During the Arclight's usual intro to the film, Jon Favreau came running out to thank everyone for coming and apologizing to the audience (originally the midnight show was the first show until they later added an 8PM show, effectively screwing those who wanted to see it first and rushed to buy those midnight tickets). As atonement, he brought out Robert Downey, Jr to a standing ovation. RDJ thanked everyone as well, commenting that he could still remember when you could smoke pot in the Dome and not get in trouble for it. It was a great show and the midnight audience was waayy more pumped up for the show than they were at 8.

But it definitely seemed like digital projection.

Hi - I have tickets for Indy at the Dome in Row EE, near the center. I'm a little worried because back when Episode 3 was there, I sat in the 2nd section on the floor, maybe row JJ or so. There was a head blocking part of my view the whole time. It really bummed me out, and I couldn't really focus on the movie. Since then I've pretty much always sat in the first or second row, so I'm not sure what the view is like from Row EE with a full house. Any opinions on Row EE being better than Row JJ in terms of less chance of a blocked view? I realize a really tall person may sit in front of me, but if an average-height person does? I'm thinking standing in line at the Village may be better than having a reserved seat with a possible a blocked view at the Dome. Any opinions would be appreciated.

So no digital showings in any of the regular theaters I guess. Bummer. I'd even settle for watching it in 1k. What happened to those older DLPs?

French Kitty, Iron Man isn't playing at the Village. It's at the AVCO though. Yuck.

Rizzo, no one was asking you to stay away or not talk about the Dome - in fact, they should do a separate thing for the multiplex part of the Arclight. But if you scroll up you'll see a lot of stuff that isn't pertinent and it's not just this theater, but a lot of them. There's nothing wrong with a messageboard, but I don't think Cinema Treasures created this site to act as a typical messageboard. No one is a "hater." But a lot of us are fans of Golden Age cinemas and have no interest whatsoever about what is showing where in digital projection.

Hi Kram Sacul. Thanks for the reply, but I have tix for Indy, not Iron Man.

Just to throw my two cents in here: anything related to the Cinerama Dome and/or Arclight Cinemas, past or present, is fair game. I love hearing about its past as well as its present and future. As someone who enjoys the Dome (and will be attending two shows in the Dome this month), I love hearing about what's going on. Thanks Rizzo and everyone for keeping these theaters alive through your hard work, your wallets, and your memories.

Ross: can you check out what happened to the Ziegfeld's page? It's been dead for a week. I sent an e-mail through the proper channels but got no response. Thanks!

Yikes -- this is the first I'm hearing about it. We'll look into it. Thanks for letting me know.

I absolutely loved the 70MM curved screen format of the 1960's. You people in L.A. are sooooooo lucky. I'm jealous!!

http://www.in70mm.com/index.htm

Went to a showing of Iron Man in theater 10. Was dreading seeing it on film but it ended up being digital. Bravo for getting that sorted out. The bad part is that the picture quality throughout was unnaturally soft, like the image was purposely unfocused. I hope it's not stuck like that. I rather see a sharp detailed picture with occasional jaggies than a mushy image.

Besides the Dome none of the Arclight theaters have decent bass do they? Sounded pretty weak.

Re-premiere of It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World at the Cinerama Dome twenty years ago. Lots of familiar faces.

Part 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=FSY47UEvOuc

Part 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=zCsS-IqJoXY&feature=related

Part 3
http://youtube.com/watch?v=D_qkoJA0SYw&feature=related

You must have caught them on a bad night, Mark. I've seen plenty of stuff in the regular Arclight theatres and the bass was excellent - most notablym the score in "There Will Be Blood" was PUMPIN in there!

Currently, I am visiting LA after 7 years of absence. (I am from Japan, and I used to live here for 11 years.) I just saw 'Iron Man" at the Dome, and I am very happy to know that the the theater is back with much better pic & sound quality. (When I left L.A., the Dome was still in renovation.) I live in a city called Osaka in Japan, and we used have a Cinerama theater called OS Cinerama. It was actually a sister theater to Cinerama Dome, and the interior was exactly same. Everytime I visit the Dome, it reminds me of the days I enjoyed many of 70mm films at OS Cinerama. I am really glad that Cinerama Dome still exists and gives us the most ideal presentation of the movies. By the way, I have tried to get a ticket for the very first show of Indy 4 online, however the the particular show had been sold-out instantly. But when I bitched about it to a box office lady in person yesterday, she said there are still some tickets left. Then she helped me to get a great seat for the very first midnight show of Indy 4. Thanks to the friendly lady at the box office! On the other hand, I was not happy at all that the gift shop doesn't carry any Cinerama-related souvenirs any more. There used to be key-chains, photo-frames, baseball caps, stickers, and all. I really wish that they will start selling those again. I would like to take something from the Dome home.

Lakeman, there is no entry for the OS Cinerama in Osaka. Maybe you could make one?

One question I'd really like to know is...why doesn't the Arclight advertise what's playing specifically in the dome opposed to bunching all the show-times together? Now, as far as multiplexes go I like the arclight, and I can live with the fact the the old beloved cineramadome (with it's more attractive marquee and sign display in the old days when the entrance was in the front, like the Chinese,..which naturally made more sense) became the pricey Arclight, that's life. But the two things that really bother me are; the assigned seating, which just doesn't work far as i'm concerned, they should have eliminated that long ago, and bunching the showtimes together with no idea what's playing in what theater.

I just don't know what to do with a comment like "I dreaded seeing it on film." It just makes me want to vomit on the ground, and perhaps the poster who said it will some day realize how inane that statement is.

who said that? it wasn't me, what post are you referring to?
Btw, just about all the screens have excellent sound and good picture, and as a sound designer/mixer i can tell you the best equipped screens at this theatre have the best sound i've heard anywhere, at least since the old days at the Plitt in Century City with their Klipsch speaker system

Wasn't talking about sound, and wasn't referring to your post, obviously. A simple scroll upwards to kram sacul's post will show you what I WAS referring to. Why you would think I was referring to your post when you hadn't said the line I quoted is anyone's guess. :)

Instead of directing your anger at some trivial post, you should direct it at the fact that the Arclight doesn't advertise what's specifically playing in the Dome ! That would make much more sense, oh and at that silly assigned seating business!

I have no anger. My comment was directed at a post I don't consider trivial at all - some guy saying something that I consider completely ignorant and typical of what goes on in the world today.

I have no love for much of anything the Arclight does these days.

ahh, the guy who'd rather see digital presentation than 35mm? Well, hey as a film purist i'm with you there, I endlessly complain about the loss of 70mm, audiences these days don't realize just how much better 70 was but the cost differences just couldn't justify "progress" in the name of technology and mindless automation. Don't worry, we're still a few years away from seeing everything as a pixilated i-pod flash clip but it ain't that far off. It's all over anyway, so i pretty much stopped caring accepting the end of the world, the days when films were actually good and genuine cinemas & movie palaces existed, when films were an event, when things had more character, and the experience was gratifying, meaningful, before over-inflated ticket prices & parking enforcement drones, before everything became a target audience market niche, a comic book/videogame, when there was real life and possibilities, when everyone didn't have that glazed empty dead look in their eyes, and, oh well you get the idea, those days are gone.

The Arclight tells you which film is playing in the Dome in their LA Times ad and on their website (Dome showtimes are in bold).

Moviefone also has the Dome feature indicated.

i've been reading some of the above posts about design flaws of the dome, the warped screen distorting the image, i guess it's always been that way though i don't recall it being a huge problem or distraction, I probably haven't seen anough scope films there to pay enough attention. Though i do vagely recall someone commenting on how warped the german plane in Raiders of the Lost Ark was when it played there in '81. (whats the advantage of a curved screen anyway?) And then there is the dark and soft image issue on the screen, yea I seem to recall this was a problem in recent years, have they fixed or improved that? Haven't seen anything there in quite some time. I thought the arclight was all about bringing picture brightness up to the highest standards, but it sounds like the main dome has posed a problem with this, mostly because of bad corporate (save money) decisions. This is really unfortunate, and all too typical

I think only the front rows get the advantage of the curved screen, as the image fills more of their field of vision. As you move farther back, the effect is lost. The last feature I saw at the Dome was Iron Man, and the image was neither dark nor soft. I noticed that the AMPAS logo on the trailers was warped, but I didn't notice any distortion during the feature. I was sitting in about the middle of the house.

In my opinion, there is no point in showing a 35mm scope print on a screen designed for huge 70mm presentation. It's what's wrong with every movie theater today - there is almost no difference in screen sizes. The height of 1:85 is not the height of 2:35, so just opening the masking doesn't quite do it. There is no showmanship anymore. I'll take curtains, the DGA, the Chinese, the El Capitan, any of those places where they have some idea of what the moviegoing experience should be like. The one thing it should NOT be like is sitting in your living room watching your big screen TV.

I agree with that, these big screens were meant for 70..no doubt about it! Though someone correct me if i'm wrong, is there any difference in the actual ratio of the presentation, whether it be 1:85, 2:35 or 2:40 whether it's in 35 or 70? Cause i don't think there is, 70 mainly gives you a higher resolution, sharper, brighter image, and of course mag sound in the old days. Though i'm not sure about this, especially for some of the old fashioned mega-wide scopes ala Vistavision, Ultra or Super Panavision 65mm, Todd AO, etc someone with better knowledge fill me in

Of course there are different ratios for different types of 70mm. The most common is 2:20 - there have been a handful of 1:85 ratio films in 70mm, and then, of course, there's Ultra Panavision 70, whose negative ratio is 2:76 (I just saw Khartoum at the Egyptian and they did their best to preserve the 2:76 ratio, but their screen is just too small to have that work).

yea i was there for that Khartoom screening. But let's take the two common ratio's for most hollywood studio films, 1:85 and 2:35, is there a difference in ratio presentation whether it's shown in 35 or 70? Most films are shot in 35, so most were blow-ups, so i would guess not. I mean for example the big difference between seeing Raiders or Temple of Doom in 70 was a brighter, sharper, more stable image and of course the sound, right?

You can find an excellent summary and comparison of the various aspect ratios using both 35mm anamorphic and 70mm processes at this page of the Widescreen Museum website:

http://www.widescreenmuseum.com/widescreen/aspectratio.htm

If 35mm scope was blown up to 70mm, yes, as far as I know there would be some cropping involved.

technical question - how were 35mm prints actually blown up for their 70mm incarnations? Is it somewhat akin to the new trend of films being DMR'd to IMAX/70mm? Is the intermediate negative sourced? I know that for the recent engagments of 'Iron Man' and 'Jumper' on DC's Uptown's curved screens, the image wasn't distorted, it was the near decolorization of the 35mm prints that were the issue.

i just looked online - in between midnight and 1:01am tonight - Indy 4 is playing in 12 out of the 15 auditoriums. is that a record?

no that's just excessive.

How's Indy doing at the Dome? I'll be there with the kids Sunday!

JSA

So 35MM film but no 70MM for "Indy 4" after all. 1 out of 2 ain't bad, I guess. I'm going to the 11:40 PM show with 30 members of my film club on Friday night. Hope it's worth it.

And to the poster who lauded the El Capitan for it's showmanship - I was just there for the first time in 7 years for "Narnia - Prince Caspian" last Friday. All the showmanship in the world won't compensate for that tiny, shoeboxy screen they use! I've seen bigger screens in megaplexes! I'll take The Dome/Arclight anyplace anytime anywhere!

Saw Indy at the Dome last night, presentation was fine, image was sharp and bright, sound excellent, it did look like the edges were cropped pretty badly for the trailers, particularly the bottom as the titles hit the edges, but the movie itself seemed ok. The 'warping' from the curved screen isn't bad at all, i still like this theatre and give it a 9, it always brings back memories of a more exciting time visiting the cinermadome, though we certainly don't live in exciting times anymore, at least for cinema. Reality has plenty of all the wrong kinds of excitement we need

That was me, and the El Capitan was in a list of other theaters where I feel showmanship is still present. I honestly have only been to the El Capitan twice - had a good time both times, but have no memory of the screen size at all. Why on Earth would it be a small screen. When the theater was the Paramount it had a HUGE screen - saw The Music Man there, and Dr. Zhivago, and Doctor Doolittle and many, many other films.

Chris, it has been awhile since I've been to the restored El Capitan (different than the covered up decor of the theater then called Paramount) but the screen was anything but tiny or shoeboxy. Can you please estimate how many feet wide you perceive the screen is, for a scope film?
In my opinion, "tiny" is less than 20 feet wide, "medium" starts at 25 feet, "large" at 30 or 35 feet, "huge" at 50 feet, and "enormous" at 60 feet.

the El Capitan screen is not very big as it is on the stage. The largest screen holder in California is at the Chinese and the screen holder is 120 feet. The stage at the Chinese was ripped out to accommodate this large screen holder. The masking at the Chinese opens to 65 feet for 35mm scope the largest picture able to be projected without burning the film. It opens further for digital presentations.

To show the 2:35 "Narnia" at El Cap, it looked like they had to lower both the top and bottom masks in order to present a 2:35 image. That screen is obviously made for 1:85 Disney cartoons - not widescreen flicks. Nuff about that...

I saw Indy 4 on Friday at 11:40 PM. Great sound & picture - HORRIBLE MOVIE ENDING!

haineshisway,

We're not comparing pristine special 35mm prints to mediocre 1k digital nowadays.

Re: El Capitan's screen. Yes, it's not very big. 40ft?

I really don't care what you're comparing a pristine to 35mm print - the film always looks better to me. It's really that simple. You like digital projection - great.

As to lowering the masking - you people do understand that that was always the norm, don't you? I:85 was one ratio, and when it changed to scope the masking opened on the sides and the top masking came down - that is how it was until heaven knows when. Now there's no difference in the height - they simply open the sides and it's not right, IMO. At the DGA, 1:85 is 1:85 and 2:35 is something wholly other, as it should be.

Just FYI good discussion starting up on Grauman's Chinese page RE how Arclight has started to get all the good bookings lately:

http://cinematreasures.org/theater/1/

Last comment from me:

It wasn't like that for the first couple years that the Arclight was open, but these days the Arclight is THE place in LA to see a film. Whenever I go you see celebrities and industry people who would really rather not deal with all the tourists on Hollywood Boulevard. My feeling is studios really want their films at the Arclight for the prestige factor. Its sad because the Chinese puts on a good show. A few years ago the Chinese and even Chinese 6 were getting films like Lord of the Rings: FOTR, Black Hawk Down, Star Wars Ep 1 and 2 and Insomnia. All of those would certainly play at the Arclight if released today.

I've noticed as well. I've heard rumblings of The Dark Knight being possibly being booked at Arclight. That would be a big deal because I *believe* every Batman movie since 1989 has played at the Chinese.

As has every Indiana Jones flick. Since Warner Bros. (Batman) and Paramount (Indiana Jones) jointly own Mann theatres, does their ownership have any affect that Mann has on bookings? It seems like it used to be that Mann would get all the decent Warner and Paramount bookings in Hollywood and Westwood. But even in Westwood, Iron Man ended up at the AMC Avco!!

I know that the company that owns the Hollywood & Highland complex recently bought the Chinese theater, but Mann (WB & Par owned) is still the contracted management. I had thought that wouldn't affect bookings but it looks like it might have.

is it just me or does it seem like the number of digitally projected engagements has dropped recently, or maybe they just aren't advertising it as much? At one point it seemed like every big film opened in nothing but digital presentation at all the major theaters. Has it dropped or increased, or are they just waiting for some kind of new overhaul of projection systems or something? Also, what are the typical quality stands of digital, i thought they stadardized it to 4k, it this not true? And have you heard IMAX is going to start digital presentation late this year or early next! They just don't want to spend the bucks on 70mm prints anymore, this is really sad. Talk about the downfall of cinema.
I think everyone is just in a muted state of downtrodden uncertainty about what the future holds, nobody knows anything, it's a total state of unknowing and blank cynisism. Like when Johnny Depp/Hunter Thompson in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas wanders into a cloud of dust mumbling "..what now..?"

I wouldn't say that DP has dropped. Maybe in your market it has but in the DC area, I'd say they've increased with the increasing number of DP installations. The theaters that do have it are showing DP movies and it seems its all Narnia, as of now and I surmise that it was supposed to be the sure thing. I was disappointed we didn't get Indy in DP but it seems that most of the all DP venues got it. I'd surmise that a big chain like Regal is putting at least one DP install in each plex but they don't do much in promoting it as of yet.

Saw Indy yesterday afternoon. Despite our terrible seats, we had a great time. Some image distortion, specially during the opening sequences, but the sound was terrific. I didn't think that the ending was that bad, but I understand why some fans would hate it, and that's ok. It could have been worse.

The trailer for Dark Knight was shown in all its glory, and that probably will fuel speculation that it will land at the Dome...

JSA

IMO, the surround sound in the Dome isn't very good. The dynamics and bass are awesome of course, but the domed ceiling and circular auditorium shape cause sound reflections that smear the multichannel sound imagery. Surround sound image is not very precise at all. It even causes sounds to come from where they're not supposed to.

I saw Desperado in the Dome, before the Arclighting. There's a scene where a fight stops, it goes quiet and then someone starts slowly clapping. The sound of the clapping began at the left of the screen, traveled back around the room and ended at the right side of the screen, very precise. It's one of the best examples of surround sound mixing that I've ever heard.

Did they redo the sound system during the renovation? I guess it's possible they screwed something up. The thing is (it seems to me) that most sound mixes don't make very aggressive use of the surrounds, so it's hard to tell how good they really are.

It depends a lot on where you sit as well. I think it's a lot harder to hear the surrounds when you sit on the ground floor.

Misc. Arclight photos:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightMay28200802CT.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightJune07200803CT.jpg
Cinema 3:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema3May30200801.jpg
Cinema 5:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema5June07200801CT.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema5June7200805CT.jpg
Cinema 10:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema10Feb25200802CT.jpg
Cinema 13:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema13Apr25200803CT.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/ArclightCinema13Apr25200806CT.jpg

Thanks, Hollywood, for the photos of the non-Dome auditoriums. I briefly walked into a few of them once, but visiting from the East Coast, mostly wanted to see movies in the historic theaters. 2nd photo at Cinema 5,and Cinema 10 photo are especially interesting. It isn't often multiplex photos are posted online, so this is a nice contribution to this site.

Not to be judgmental but the screens don't look as large as I'd imagined given all the hoopla about how great the place is with its state-of-the-art presentation that exceed THX standards. The newer AMCs seem to have taller and wider screens. On the other hand, the seating arrangement seems to give ample room for even the largest of moviegoers with what seems like ample foot room to stretch. Along with the Dome, I'd definitely would want to watch a movie there the next time I'm in LA. :)

presentation standards are much better than any AMC but yea i agree some of their screens could be bigger, one thing i gotta say really irks me about both Arclights especially Sherman Oaks is their "tiny screens" which is typical for most multiplexes but i think it's an outrage for this theater at the prices they charge and the quality standards they boast. It seems the last 3 or 4 times i went to the Sherman Oaks (or Hollywood) Arclight, whatever film it was i had a tiny shred of interest in seeing was always playing in one of those TINY houses, y'know the one's all the way at the end of the hall hidden in the far corner. Now i realize they expect to run films that aren't going to draw big crowds/business and can't justify playing them in the larger houses but frankly every release is like that now after opening weekend and i think it's a jip to pay that kind of money after making the special trip to a theater like that (hoping for a better presentation) then get stuck in a tiny theatre! And that goes for playing new releases on multiple screens, nobody wants to see a big new film in the tiny house just because it falls into the time schedule they chose, I saw Rambo on one those tiny screens and I was furious!

"The newer AMCs seem to have taller and wider screens..."

...with TOP & BOTTOM MASKING that causes those screens to SHRINK RIGHT BEFORE YOUR VERY EYES whenever a 2:35 film is projected on them. Yuk!

So, let me get this straight - via the photos posted above - the 1:85 screen masking opens up for 2:35 but the top and bottom masking remains the same??? Sorry, doesn't compute.

No, instead of the screen getting wider, masks narrow the screen from the top and the bottom. So with a 2.35 movie, you're getting the smallest possible screen area.

Yes, that's correct. The height stays the same, the width is what changes. Two of the Arclight screens have top masking only though, which also are the two I refuse to see anything in.

Don, it may be like that in some theaters but ideally masking should make the screen bigger for wider films. That's the reason 2.35 movies are shot that way, so it's HUGE! Theaters that don't use side masking (unless for design constraints in Arclight's case) don't understand much or anything at all about presentation.

The height stays the same and the side masking opens to create 2:35 - only 2:35 does not have the same height as 1:85, so I don't know what you're actually seeing in those theater, but it seems bogus to me, like most of today's moviegoing.

In the old days, even in my neighborhood theater that had the best scope screen (the Stadium - a GREAT theater), you'd have 1:85, then the curtains would close and as they were closing you could already see the side maskings opening wide and the top masking coming down, and when the curtains reopened, voila, you had scope, which was NOT the 1:85 height with the side masking opened.

haineshisway, perhaps you aren't understanding the concept of aspect ratios. 1.85:1 means the width is 1.85 times the height. Or for every 1 foot high the screen is, it is 1.85 feet long.

Width:Height
1.85:1
2.35:1

The height (1) stays the same; the width gets bigger (1.85 to 2.35). A theater could decide to use top masking and side masking for scope but the screen would be smaller. Maybe that's what is required in narrower houses or something, I'm not sure.

I'm just telling you the way it used to work - I went to the movies four times a week all throughout the late 1950s - the side masking opened wide and the TOP MASKING came down to form what we know and love as a scope image. The HEIGHT most certainly did NOT stay where it was for 1:85 EVER, not in any theater that was equipped to show scope properly.

And I'm talking about the big theaters, too - the Paramount, the Pantages, wherever - the top masking always came down as the screen got wider on the sides. This is not guessing - I watched it happen every day, and ultimately watched a projectionist do it from the booth.

I'm not saying that's not the way it was. It isn't the BEST way to do it. One person saying the screens are too small and another saying they *should* be smaller for wider films.

Why would you want the screen to get smaller for a movie, say like The Dark Knight?

as long as the screen is as wide as it possibly can be given the room... if the height of the ceiling dictates that a 1.85 can indeed fit given that width, even though it's then technically a larger screen than films shown in 2.35 in the same room i prefer that. people talk as if 2.35 movies are somewhat better than 1.85 films - in the 50's this would be a valid argument, but nowadays it's simply an artistic choice. let me put it this way, if you were going to see a film in 1.85, walked into an auditorium with a small screen, but saw that it could have been larger but was kept small so that it wouldn't eclipse 2.35 films... wouldn't you be disappointed?

haineshisway is right! Scope is not what it used to be, another aspect of the downfall of cinema into homogenization, in an age where we don't even have projectionists anymore! Just character-less boxes run by character-less automation in character-less shopping complexes full of more character-less businesses and stores and people selling characterless junk all the while you get monitered by security camera's and blank glazed faces. it's over

haineshisway: The reason the top masking came down AND the screen widened at your old theatre was simply the constraints of that particular theatre's design and adaption to 2.35 Scope films. Because that particular theatre, or others, presented the films that way, does not mean it was the INTENTION of the filmmakers. I know the Royal theatre does this with their masking simply because they kept the screen under the old proscenium. A 1.85 screen shape will fill the proscenium top to bottom, but not quite side to side. For 2.35 scope they can widen to the edges of the proscenium but have to lower the top masking to create the more rectangular shape. In other words, I think they are doing they best they can with what they've got. For a lot of older theatres with the screen either under the proscenium or moved in front of it to allow it to get much wider, I think this is a lot of the times the case.

However, I think the INTENTION of the studios and the filmmakers was to have the image keep the same height but get WIDER, creating a more open, panoramic look that replicates more closely a person's true field of vision. There would be no purpose for the image to get a little wider, but a little lower at the same time. That is counterproductive and merely a flaw or drawback in a particular theatre's design.

I, and many others here, feel that a properly designed theatre for scope pictures only has the screen open wider to accommodate scope films. Such examples would be the Village and National (RIP) in Westwood (L.A.), Grauman's Chinese, the Cinerama Dome, Seattle Cinerama and MOST of the auditoriums at the Hollywood Arclight.

Many of us here (and I kow Chris Utley is one) have a particular dislike for theatres designed from the ground up with top-down only masking only. Such examples would be the AMC Century 15 and Pacific's Grove in Los Angeles. The reasons for such poor design might be several, but I feel it is doe to: poor design, cheap design, a lack of respect to the film-makers wishes, and most of all, the theatre chains idea of "lets blow them with the most crazy-huge screen possible!" The problem is with most stadium designed theatres the screen wall ends up being a square shape because of how tall the auditoriums are. This means that the biggest screen they fit in the place is largest when at a 1.85 ratio. Many of these screens are just too big. Watch any non-scope 1.85 feature at the large houses at the Century 15 and The Grove and you have to sit at least two-thirds the way back just to not be overwhelmed or get sick. Then the theatres have a big dramatic let down: You are watching the preshow "entertainment", then some previews in 1.85 when suddenly the screen shrinks vertically but keeps a common width for your showing of "The Dark Night". Think of it like watch a DVD on your old school TV. For 1.85 the letterboxing has narrow strips at the top and bottom. For a 2.35 scope film, which is meant to have more grandeur, the black bands at top and bottom get bigger, creating a narrow band for the image. Would you want the same effect in a movie theatre?

Most of the Arclight Hollywood's auditoriums have side masking that open wider for scope films (as the movie gods intended) because they designed the auditoriums wider. In the bigger auditoriums the screens are still pretty big for 1.85 and they position the seats far enough away so those sitting near the front don't get overwhelmed and still have all the picture in their field of vision.

I have not been to the Arclight Sherman Oaks, but since it is a conversion of a regular old Pacific Stadium theatre, something tells me there is top-down masking everywhere, which to me seems like Arclight on the cheap and goes against their presentation principles.

I am no expert, but this is my view of things. I'll shut up now.

you make a good point Mark. I think you're right in that stadium seating has caused top masking - my question for everyone (and perhaps this is off topic)... how big is too big? personally, i really like how large the amc 15 screens are, though for instance IMAX screens are governed by the same principle ("lets blow them away with the most crazy-huge screen possible"). i don't think amc means any disrespect towards filmmakers in the same way that the arclight uses top masking in their smaller two auditoriums. perhaps it's merely trying to give the customers something as far from their tv as possible?

I beleive when the top and bottom masking moves its called a 'common width' screen, and when the right and left masking moves its called a 'common height' screen?

Another reason for a theater having common width screens might be so they can advertise everything playing as being presented on a 'giant wall to wall screen'.

Don't all the screens at Arclight Hollywood carry THX certification? I thought that one of the requirements of THX certfication is a common height screen, where the masking adjusts on the sides rather top or bottom?

quote Mark Campbell: "The reason the top masking came down AND the screen widened at your old theatre was simply the constraints of that particular theatre's design and adaption to 2.35 Scope films. Because that particular theatre, or others, presented the films that way, does not mean it was the INTENTION of the filmmakers. I know the Royal theatre does this with their masking simply because they kept the screen under the old proscenium. A 1.85 screen shape will fill the proscenium top to bottom, but not quite side to side. For 2.35 scope they can widen to the edges of the proscenium but have to lower the top masking to create the more rectangular shape. In other words, I think they are doing they best they can with what they've got. For a lot of older theatres with the screen either under the proscenium or moved in front of it to allow it to get much wider, I think this is a lot of the times the case.

However, I think the INTENTION of the studios and the filmmakers was to have the image keep the same height but get WIDER, creating a more open, panoramic look that replicates more closely a person's true field of vision. There would be no purpose for the image to get a little wider, but a little lower at the same time. That is counterproductive and merely a flaw or drawback in a particular theatre's design."

yeah. In order to properly convert his famous movie palaces to widescreen Sid Grauman ripped out the prosceniums at his Egyptian and Chinese theaters in Hollywood. On their pages here at Cinematreasures, there are links to old photos of what those auditoriums originally looked like when he built them in the 1920's.

Mark, thank you for saying what I was trying to say. I hadn't thought of the fact that those classic theatres were built before CinemaScope.

segask, I don't think THX standards have anything to do with the picture, only acoustics and other audio "standards," etc. And yes, all Arclight Hollywood houses are THX-certified.

I don't know what the Village does NOW and I don't really care - but, for example, when, as a child, I saw The High And The Mighty and The Tender Trap there, the side masking opened and the top masking came down to create a really wide picture that was not, I repeat NOT, the same shape as 1:85 at ALL. It's what every theater in LA did back then. I really can't have this conversation with people who only know from now because of their age. I'm just telling you the way it was and the way I grew up watching Cinemascope, then Panavision or any scope process - all the way up to the advent of the multiplex, which is when everything began to change. I don't want to walk into a theater and see a film in 1:85 that fills the entire screen IF the alternative is that for scope all the do is lower the masking - please. You think that's what the filmmakers intended? It is to laugh. I just know the way it was - I can't speak to the unspeakable things they do now.

haines, the top and bottom were not supposed to change, only the sides. Thats why it was called widescreen. Those old theaters you're talking about that were originally built for 1.33 or 1.85 to 1 were doing what they could to accomodate the new wider screens. A few, like the Chinese, and later, the Egyptian, actually ripped out their prosceniums to accomodate a screen that was truly wider and at least as tall as their original 1.33 or 1.85 screens.

The whole idea of widescreen was to have a new screen that was at least as tall as the existing 1.85 or 1.33 screen, but wider.

I understand that that is what you think or have read somewhere, but I'm telling you the reality of it. And when the Egyptian and the Chinese installed their new screens after ripping out the prosceniums do you think that the top masking did not come down for scope? Because I, who was there, am here to tell you it did. The screen was NOT as high as 1:85 EVER in those theaters. Cinemascope was a whole different shape. Whatever was supposed to happen must not have happened, because I have an impeccable memory for all things LA and its movie theaters, and I spent my entire childhood going from one movie palace to the next and I was, in fact, fascinated by the moving masking and, as I posted above, I once wandered into a projection booth and the projectionist showed me how it worked. I'm not makin' it up, I didn't read it on some site, I was THERE.

We aren't questioning your memory, haines. Whatever masking is used in any theatre, the 2.35 scope shape is 2.35:1. The difference is the SCREEN SIZE. You can't change the SHAPE. What WE are talking about is the proper presentation in a theatre built after the scope format came around. Those old theatres weren't built for scope so they had to sacrifice the screen at the top and widen the side masking to make the 2.35:1 rectangle. In a theatre such as Arclight, they've made the houses (most) wider, put in the largest screen they can fit in the room, and then have the side masking move in and out to match whatever shape the format is in.

The BEST presentation in an ideal house will use side masking because you get to use ALL of the screen for scope films which tend to be shot that way to feel larger and match more closely to a person's natural wide field of vision.

all we have nowadays is 1.85 and 2.35.

Haines, did you get to see some of those old movies back in the '50's that had a 2.6 aspect ratio? Was it just for those really wide formats like CinemaScope or CineMiracle that the top masking had to adjust downwards?

Yes, the masking always came down as the screen widened for the original 2:55 Cinemascope and then the 2:35 scope a few years later. CineMiracle was a Cinerama knockoff and something wholly other. I happened to be at a memorial service tonight at The Music Box on Hollywood Blvd., which used to be the Pix, where I saw many movies. I hadn't been in there since they renovated it as a legit house. As I looked at the proscenium I realized there was no way they could have showed scope in that theater with that proscenium. Then I saw what they'd done - they simply put a much larger screen in FRONT of the proscenium, completely covering the original proscenium so that you couldn't even see it anymore. Then there were curtains in front of the screen.

There's a theater at Arclight that has top masking? It must be one of the smaller ones.

Guys there seems to be a "disconnect" going on here. Haineshisway is agreeing with you that a scope film should simply have the side masking open up for a proper presentation. But he's also telling you the fact of the matter was that many classic movie palaces weren't able to accomodate the full width of scope without unfortunately reducing the height of the screen (while yes, opening up side masking as well). As a little kid in the sixties, I was very much aware of which classic theatres in my area used constant height for scope and which ones used constant width (or the masking on both top and sides that Haineshisway has mentioned). Guess which theatres I preferred?

I have a question about the Dome. My favorite deeply curved screen theatre had the same height screen for scope and flat. I loved it when all the trailers were flat, the curtains would close then reopen all the way for the Panavision feature film. The only difference here was for 70mm presentation. In that case the curtains and masking opened all the way like a scope film, but top masking suddenly went up too, to accomodate the 2.21 to 1 image. Does the Dome screen also increase it's height for 70mm and the occasional presentation of a Cinerama film like "How The West Was Won"?

Yes. I was there once when they opened the masking up in plain view as a demonstration for the audience. First 1.85, then 2.35, then the top up further for 2.2 70MM, then wider still for 3-Strip Cinerama (accompanied by several gasps from the audience!)

I missed it the last time it played at the Dome, but wasn't a "non-standard" (for lack of a better term) masking used for "It's a Mad Mad... World"? Also, has anyone heard mumblings about the Dome showing a restored IAMMMMW this fall?

JSA

I've heard "How The West Was Won."

They've shown Mad Mad Mad World in 70 (restored) and How the West was One in multi-projection at the dome before already

So, with all this talk about constant height, that means that Cinerama was exactly the same height as !:85 and 2:35. I think we all know that is a load of hooey, don't we?

The Dome is featured in the Photo Gallery on the Fans of Showmanship website (membership required). Included on the Dome's page are numerous images, both contemporary and vintage, including shots of some of the theater's personnel and its projection equipment.

haineshisway... You seem confused (or enjoy trolling). No one is claiming Cinerama presentations had the same presentation size (heightwise) as standard 1.85:1 and 2.35:1 presentations. And no one is questioning your memory. What informed folks *are* claiming is that the proper presentation of standard 35mm formats is that the screen height, in any given auditorium, ought to be the same so that any aspect ratio differences are noticed only in the horizontal plane. If the height is shortened for a scope presentation, then that is a compromise and a showmanship violation.

Well, then eighty percent of the theaters in LA in the 50s, 60s, and 70s compromised and had showmanship violations. And it's good that you don't question my memory. I'm just saying, everyone here is saying that the height is the .1 of 2:35.1 and that that is a constant. And I'm saying, okay, by that logic that means that 1:85 should have the same height as 1:33. No? Isn't that what everyone is saying, that the height remains constant? If you think I'm a troll, my friend, you obviously have no idea what a troll is - but then a lot of people posting here don't have a lot of experience of actually having attended the movie palaces and nabes of the 50s, 60s, and 70s.

"Well, then eighty percent of the theaters in LA in the 50s, 60s, and 70s compromised and had showmanship violations."

That is exactly correct, as has already been stated. Those theatres were built before there was anything wider than 1.85 (or smaller if even older), so compromises would have to be made.

"I'm just saying, everyone here is saying that the height is the .1 of 2:35.1 and that that is a constant. And I'm saying, okay, by that logic that means that 1:85 should have the same height as 1:33. No? Isn't that what everyone is saying, that the height remains constant?"

Again, yes. Now, theatres you may have visited may have changed the height for other formats such as 1.37, but again in an ideal theatre the side masking only would come in to make the screen 1.37 sized. Arclight has three theatres that are capable of projecting 1.37, 1.66, 1.85, and 2.35 films and all three use side masking only and look great.

"And it's good that you don't question my memory."
"but then a lot of people posting here don't have a lot of experience of actually having attended the movie palaces and nabes of the 50s, 60s, and 70s."
"I really can't have this conversation with people who only know from now because of their age."

And yes, you've been acting like an ageist troll. It's the arrogance that is off-putting. Just would appreciate it if we weren't all talked DOWN to in every other post like we don't know anything.


In relation to this topic, using side masking only keeps the light level pretty close to being the same when switching from 1.85 and 2.35. Because of the 1.85 aperture plate blocking the top and bottom of the frame less light goes on screen. When you switch to 2.35 and use side masking the screen gets larger so you would think you would need to increase the light level since you have more surface area to fill. But actually since a 2.35 aperture plate is wide open, more light goes through the frame. So in the end, the light spread on screen is usually no more than one footlambert above or below what it ideally should be when switching between the two formats used today.

haines said quote: "The height stays the same and the side masking opens to create 2:35 - only 2:35 does not have the same height as 1:85, so I don't know what you're actually seeing in those theater, but it seems bogus to me, like most of today's moviegoing."

haines said quote: "... I'm just saying, everyone here is saying that the height is the .1 of 2:35.1 and that that is a constant. And I'm saying, okay, by that logic that means that 1:85 should have the same height as 1:33. No? Isn't that what everyone is saying, that the height remains constant? ..."

haines said quote: "So, let me get this straight - via the photos posted above - the 1:85 screen masking opens up for 2:35 but the top and bottom masking remains the same??? Sorry, doesn't compute. "




It sounds like you don't know how aspect ratio is computed. Aspect ratio is width divided by height.

For example, if the screen is 10 feet high then,

for a 1.33 to 1 aspect ratio the screen is 13.3 feet wide.
for a 1.85 to 1 aspect ratio the screen is 18.5 feet wide.
for a 2.35 to 1 aspect ratio the screen is 23.5 feet wide.

etc.

Thus, if the screen is 10 feet high and 18.5 feet wide you can change it to a 2.35 to 1 aspect ratio by leaving the top and bottom masking right where they are and moving the left masking 2.5 feet to the left and the right masking 2.5 feet to the right.

I am sorry - ageist troll notwithstanding, but you people were not around in the 50s and 60s and if you were you would know how incorrect you are. What you are saying may be true in today's cinemas, but no theater that formerly showed 1:33 in the 50s, showed 1:85 with the same height as the 1:33 screen. It's exactly as I say, whether it was the Lido Theater, the Stadium, the Village, the Chinese, the Vogue, the Wiltern - I went to all of them and I'm just telling you how it was. While you may be right technically, it's not the way it was back then - for whatever reasons. So, Mr. Randell, how old are you? Did you attend films in your home town in the 50s and 60s, YES OR NO?

I don't think anyone has accused you of of mis-remembering or even lying about the way the old movie palaces, which were originally built when films were shot and presented in a 1.33:1 ratio, had to lower the top masking in order to show the new widescreen formats that came along in the '50's.

When you tell us that those old movie theaters lowered the top masking for the widescreen formats we believe you. We are not accusing you of lying or remembering wrong.

We are simply saying that the ideal way for a screen to switch from 1.85 to 2.35 is to keep the height the same and move the left and right masking outwards. All we are saying is that back in the '50's those old movie palaces lowered the top masking not because it was the best way, but because their grand old stages and prosceniums were originally designed for a 1.33:1 ratio and they were forced to compromise.

I think we've all probably said all we have to say, no? I guess I'm saying that the Village, for example, had a very wide proscenium (and still does) and still did what I'm saying it did. And I understand what you're saying for today's cinemas, but because of the way I have viewed movies my entire life, it doesn't seem right to me. To me there is little difference between 1:85 and scope in the multiplexes I've had the misfortune to see films in.

jesus christ you guys are still arguing about screen ratio's?
this has got to be the most epic discussion about screen ratio's i've ever seen

Well the SMPTE standard for scope presentation is 2.39:1, not 2.35:1 .

charity premiere of 1974's MAME:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/hwdMAMEdomeCT.jpg
the show begins:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/hwdCineramaDomeCT4.jpg

Haines,
You also have to take into account (which I haven't seen you really do yet) that most films in the early 50s were still shot and exhibited in @ a 1.37:1 ratio. So while people keep drawing comparisons to theaters going from 1.85 to 2.35, the reality of the day was that theaters (all of them) had to be able to go from 1.37 to 2.35, which very well could have been accomplished by altering the top/bottom masking to something closer to 1.85 while opening the sides to achieve the 2.35. You also have to remember that the 50s and 60s were also a hodgepodge of ratios and formats as studios and theaters all worked to find things that worked well (as new theaters were built in the 60s and 70s -like The National and Cinerama Dome- they were built to accommodate the width of 1.85 to 2.35). Here are the 10 best cinematography Oscar noms for 1955 and their ratios:
On the Waterfront 1.85
The Country Girl 1.37
Executive Suite 1.66
Rogue Cop 1.75
Sabrina 1.37
Three Coins in a Fountain 2.55
The Egyptian 2.55
Rear Window 1.66
Seven Brides for Seven Brothers 1.85 AND 2.55
The Silver Chalice 2.55
That's 5 different ways to show 10 different films. I'm not saying you're wrong about your experiences, but that perhaps there is more to be considered.

I was reading the AMC Empire 25 page here at cinematreasures. Cheers to AMC for spending all that money and going to all that trouble to move the old palace 200 feet down the street and saving it from a wrecking ball. Jeers to AMC for then turning the old palace into a popcorn lobby. It should've been the largest auditorium.

I think that was the right idea for the wrong theater. A grand old palace like that deserved to be the biggest auditorium instead of a popcorn lobby.

The Dome on the other hand could've been turned into the lobby for the Arclight complex. I don't know why Pacific/Arclight needed such a huge lobby, but the lobby they built for Arclight Hollywood is like an airport, LOL. They should've used the Dome for that. Then the space where that huge airport like lobby is now could've been a 1000 seat first class theater with a large properly curved (the technique is raytracing I believe?) screen that doesn't wash itself out and distort the picture, stadium seating, and that awesome sound system in a THX designed auditorium that doesn't have a stupid domed ceiling that bounces the sound image all over the place.

Segask, are you stating that if you were the "powers that be", you would have sacrificed what is now one of the three theaters on Earth capable of playing three strip Cinerama for a lobby? Are you sure you are interested in theater preservation? Saying that you would turn the Dome into a lobby demonstrates the same kind of mentality that is causing us to lose the very thing we are here to preserve.

I did not like AMC's decision to turn the Empire into a ticket lobby. By the way, they do not sell popcorn there (at least not on my last visit. Did the Times Square Cafe open in the former balcony of the theater?

The point of what "should've" been is moot. We are living in a day and age where theaters are not run by showmen, but by corporations. It is the way of the present movie exhibiting world, as sad as that is.

I want to thank you for the heads up as I have not been to LA to visit either The Dome or the rest of the Arclight complex. You compare the lobby to an airport; I shall now ensure that I arrive at least 45 minutes early so I can get to my gate, I mean, theater.

I was one of many who wrote letters to help save the Dome. As to the Empire, it functions as a Grand Lobby, too, for the megaplex.

DavidM, Yes they did open a cafe in the former balcony of the Empire. But it only lasted a year or so.

As a first-time visitor to the main Arclight complex in February, this New Jersey guy was very impressed with the large lobby/cafe/store area, and especially with the grand staircase leading up to the theaters. However, two nights before I'd made my 5th visit to the Dome to see Cinerama ("2001" - not 3-strip but it's still Cinerama to me) and all I can say is I'm very grateful the Dome is still standing, against all the odds, and long may it continue to stand.

IMHO, a lobby would be a more appropriate use of the Dome. As long as it has that overly wide, overly curved screen, the Dome has no business being a firstrun movie house, IMO. It should be a Cinerama museum and it could simultaneously double as the ticket lobby. The cafe or the gift shop/bookstore could be in the balcony maybe. Maybe one or two weeks a year all that would be cleared out and seats put in for an annual Cinerama Festival. They could show that small handful of films that were ever made for a Cinerama screen.

Why can't they do it like the Cinerama in Seattle? From what I've read, the Seattle theater has a proper screen for 1.85 and 2.39 films, and once a year they spend a whole day putting up a Cinerama screen for a yearly Cinerama festival. Then when the festival is over they take down the Cinerama screen and first run movies are shown on a properly sized and curved 1.85/2.39 screen.

Segask, in regard to your thoughts on the use for the Dome, I couldn't agree with you less. I am quite happy that the Dome is here to stay as I have not seen three strip Cinerama, yet. I hope to see it in LA, Seattle or Bradford, England sometime in the near future.

In regard to Seattle, I do not believe that they have a yearly Cinerama festival. I check in with them occasionally to see if they are showing anything in "three strip". I am always told that nothing is planned.

I'll gladly use some frequent flier miles to make the trip.

The Dome should be a lobby instead of a working auditorium???

I just threw up in my mouth...

Arclight lobby:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/Arclight001.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/Arclight002.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/Arclight003.jpg

do you guys agree that the Cinerama screen should only be used for films that were shot for Cinerama, and that for first run movies a screen with the proper dimensions and curvature should be used instead?

Or maybe it should be flat actually, since the projection booth is up high above the balcony we get the smiley banana effect on a curved screen. I guess, as long as the booth is above the balcony, for best possible image quality a flat screen is necessary.

A flat screen was brought in for the premiere of "Evita" and it looked terrible. The smile effect can only be diminished by using less of the screen for anything other than 70mm and Cinerama (which won't be done because crowds are more impressed with the size of the screen than they are displeased with the slight curved image at the corners).

So, under J.Randell's proposal, perhaps bringing in the wings to roughly 75-80 feet wide would do the trick. It could work. You'd still have the opulence of a ginormous screen minus the distortion issues that have the purists amongst us crying FOUL.

Rizzo, y'all willing to give this a try?

Recently saw Indy 4 at the Seattle Cinerama. The flatter screen with a milder curve was still huge and impressive. Even seemed larger than the pre-remodel screen when I used to see 70mm there. I have not seen 3-Strip at the Seattle Cinerama , only the Dome. I am also sure what the screen they use for 70mm in Seattle. The masking seemed opened all the way to the ceiling, so with more height available I am guessing slightly less width for 2.2:1.

Masking the bottom of the screen and bringing in the side masking would be a big improvement. The smiley effect would be minimized, the cross reflections would be reduced, and the cropping of the bottom of the frame would be gone.

It is obvious that segask does not know his history as he stated "yeah. In order to properly convert his famous movie palaces to widescreen Sid Grauman ripped out the prosceniums at his Egyptian and Chinese theaters in Hollywood." Sid Grauman died in 1950 before the advent of widescreen! The proscenium was not taken out of the Chinese until the installation of Cinemiracle for Windjammer in the late 50's early 60's. The Egyptian was modified for D-150 again well after the start of widescreen and long after Sid's death. Another fact is that Sid Grauman never owned the Chinese outright and lost everything in the stock market crash of '29.

:)

thanks for the corrections Roger.

So the proscenium at the Chinese wasn't removed until Windjammer? I thought it would've been done for the The Robe in 1953.

The proscenium at the Chinese was not removed until Cinemiracle was installed for Windjammer. Two support columns had to be removed one to the right and the other to the left of where the stage once was and a shearing wall was installed. Those columns are visible in early pictures and in the movie Singing In the Rain. The ceiling dropped several inches when the supports were removed. The original CinemaScope picture was not very large as it was limited by the width of the stage. For the Cinemamiracle installation a 120 foot screen holder was constructed and the projection booth was moved to the lower level in the back of the auditorium because Cinemiracle required a zero degree projection angle. There was a brass plaque in the forecourt dating the Cinemiracle installation. The Cinemiracle booth has since been removed and the projection booth was rebuilt in its original location. This was done during the last major restoration. The organ was also removed at some point probably during the Cinemamiracle retrofit but I'm not sure when the organ was removed. The organ music used to come from the main chandelier as it was ducted to come from there.

Getting back on topic, has anyone heard of any Cinerama/70MM plans at The Dome to offset the September/October dry season at the movies?

I've heard that it's either going to be "How the West Was Won" or "It's a Mad,... World". Check towards the bottom of this link:

http://www.in70mm.com/library/process/dts/index.htm

There are new 70 mm prints of "Grand Prix" and "Khartoum", two single-lens Cinerama productions that had Dome engagements in the 60's. In addition there's a new 70 mm/DTS "West Side Story" print. Any of those would look spectacular in that screen.

JSA

that in70mm.com list is incomplete, they've shown some 70 prints recently at the Aero theatre, a stunning new print of "Star", which had the best colors and clarity i've ever seen in my life. But really there are only a small handful of 70 prints out there in circulation, and these L.A. theatres keep showing the same 3 or 4 films over and over. Why does Oslo, Norway keep getting all the cool stuff?

The dome decorated for Hancock:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDomeJuly062008CT.jpg

Nice decoration...TERRIBLE MOVIE!

Didn't they have Cinerama Theatres in the South?
I read somewhere that one Atlanta theatre had that Cinerama process.

I been to the one that was in Los Angeles/Hollywood years ago back in 1977 when they screened "Star Wars"
in 70mm-6 track Dobly Stereo.

I don't know the exact number of Cinerama theaters that were located in the South, but here are two examples for Atlanta:

http://cinematreasures.org/theater/10331/

http://cinematreasures.org/theater/4784/

Here's a list of all Cinerama theaters in the USA and around the world, courtesy of Roland Lataille's excellent Cinerama website:

http://cinerama.topcities.com/ctcineramatheatres.htm

You can find the Cinerama locations here.

http://cinerama.topcities.com/ctcineramatheatres.htm

Atlanta had at least one other Cinerama house, listed on CT as the Georgia Twin:
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/11568/

Also, this site has fairly comprehensive listing of Cinerama theaers world-wide which shows a number of other Cinerama houses in the southern states:
http://cinerama.topcities.com/ctcineramatheatres.htm

Not only do great minds think alike - they apparently all know where the Cinerama information is on the net and appear to make comments right around the same time!

Roland should be very proud of his Cinerama site - it's the best one out there and all the Cinerama fans know it well!

Roland's site is a good site for Cinerama and D-150 info and plus the films too.

Dark Knight at the Cinerama Dome:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/DomeDKJuly222008CT.jpg

The Arclight and the Dome sound like cool movie theatres--perfect for some of those great old classic films, too. Sure wish we had something like that here in the Boston area, although we do have IMAX. Not sure if it's the same, though. Regarding the question I was going to ask about films such as West Side Story being shown in such a theatre (or theatres), that's been answered already. Wish it would come here again, and that we had a big theatre like that that ran older classic films.

Whoever tweaked the sound in theater 10 upstairs deserves a raise. The bass sounded deep and powerful for The Dark Knight.

They're showing "South Pacific" on 8/19. In the Dome. And it's not an AFI sponsored event. Rizzo, are y'all finally taking our advice?

http://tinyurl.com/58xgp4

A step in the right direction. No word on format. Although I don't count SP as one of my favorites, the recent 70 mm DTS print is good. I wonder if they have re-installed the equipment for reel-to-reel.
Or, could this be a digital presentation?

JSA

I've heard digital on "South Pacific." Also, "2001" 70mm again and.....Cinerama: "How The West Was Won."

Any word on "This Is Cinerama" popping up again? I've never seen it, believe it or not.

Is it for sure digital on South Pacific? I have no reason to see it if it is, but I'd love to see the 70mm print - and why would they show digital if they have the 70mm print.

If the Dome does not run reel-to-reel anymore, it's highly unlikely that we will see a high quality, pristine 70 mm print. It's a shame, considering the number of 70 mm titles that have been restored in recent years. So it looks like the only viable options under those conditions for South Pacific are 35 mm (on a platter, assuming that a screenable 35 mm print exists) or digital. And with those choices, my guess is that they will opt for digital.
JSA

thank god we still have the Egyptian and Aero running prestine 70 prints (on rare occasions) which may not happen again, or for a long time knowing how cautious and penny pinching the cinematheque is getting. Understandably when few people show up to see a beautiful new 70 print of "Star" or "Khartoum". (God knows why they chose such a dull film like "Khartoum" to do a restoration on)
Though I thought the platter system could run 70, i even remember back in the mid 80's when the platter took over and projectionists were being eliminated we were running 70 prints on platters, usually tearing them to shreads. I guess thats why

Damon it's about the cost to replace a new 70MM print which is much different from those 70MM release prints that you had over at Mann Theatres in Westwood. The studios only make a select number of those restored 70MM prints. Why those large number release prints from the studios had large print runs from the labs and the cost was less.

I was in Auditorium #3 (on the bottom level) on Saturday night 8/9/08 for (the VERY OVERRATED!) "Pineapple Express" in digital projection. The sound was decidedly "off" - the subwoofers had no juice, you could hardly hear anything coming from the surrounds during the "action" sequences and it wasn't nearly as crisp as anything else I'd ever seen at Arclight. And the cherry on top of this fruitcake: midway through the movie, the film STOPPED! No sound, no picture, no nothing for about 30 seconds and then the film came back on again.

Rizzo, care to explain?

So to add a twist to the South Pacific event at the Dome later this month, the in70 mm site has now added SP to the list of coming 70 mm screenings. Keep the fingers crossed: maybe it will be "film" after all...

Here's the link: http://www.in70mm.com/now_showing/index.htm

JSA

I called and asked and was informed SP is D5 digital tape.

The digital projection at Arclight has been disappointing nowadays. The 1.2k DLP presentations years ago were actually better. Iron Man a few months ago looked out of focus AND the sound was just plain weak. In the same theater last week The Dark Knight in puny Dolby Digital rocked the house. What's up with that?

Has anyone heard of any plans to show How The West Was Won here on or before its Blu-Ray release date?

They just announced a showing of HTWWW for Sunday, Sept. 7th.

"2001" will play in 70mm Single strip Cinerama 9/5 and "How the West Was Won" in 3-strip Cinerama will play two days later. Does not say how many showings. Carroll Baker and Russ Tamblyn will be at the HTWWW showing and DVDs and soundtreacks will be given away at both. Tickets are not on sale yet. Being billed as Arclight's first Cinerama showcase. As with "South Pacific" I will be there!

Tickets are now on sale for "2001" and "HTWWW".

I wonder if anyone from Arclight would be kind enough to update us in matters such as what's on the booths, sound system, etc.

JSA

I Got my tickets to HTWWW flying into Hollywood for the day
and going home to Sacramento later in the evening, this is a event not to be missed can anyone can give me how the seating is loges vs the main floor ?

Having seen HTWWW at the Dome a few years ago, I can only say it was way too dim and just didn't have the power it should have. Nothing like when it was originally shown at the Warner Cinerama on Hollywood Blvd.

I've been told that the reason South Pacific will be digital is because Fox won't let them platter the film. Bravo, Dome - get it together or stop the pretense.

bkress, whenever I go to the Dome I try to sit at the front of the loge as the main floor is a little too close for me. This was perfect for HTWWW when I saw it.

The Dome sounds like a beautiful theatre. The film "How the West was Won" was another cool film, which I saw when it first came out, as was "2001: A Space Odyssey", which I also saw when it was quit new. Have a great time. If I lived in that area, I'd make sure I was there for both of them, and for "West Side Story" at the Castro Theatre, too.

Forgive an old man but I am confused, does the original Dome not run reel-to-reel anymore? I understand the reasons for platters at the Arclight but does the original Dome run on a platter? please say it isn't so

Vito,

I hope it's not true either. But it was posted here a few months ago by an Arclight employee that the Dome no longer ran reel-to-reel. He also mentioned that the "2001" screening earlier this year was run on a platter. Although it was not a bad show, the print was not exactly in mint condition. (You can see all our comments on the show in this thread from Jan 31.) The thing is that this person is no longer a CT member, has not posted in a while, and most, if not all of his comments have been removed. So we don't really know the whole story of what's going on at the booth these days.

JSA

Thanks you JSA, I sure would love an update on what's going on in the booth at the Dome. Am I to understand that South Pacific
will be/has been shown at the Dome Digial and not 70mm? That would be a shame cause I am sure most of the folks going to that screening would prefer to see the film in 70mm.

As much as I like 'South Pacific' (the songs in particular) - I saw a great stage production of it here in DC at Arena Stage - the film isn't as bad as I'm making it out to be, but the color scheme really irked me. I'm surprised Fox hasn't restored the Roadshow version for this presentation, that'd be the version I like to see on the big screen.

I know Fox had down some 4K restoration/transfers of 'The Sound of Music' early on, I'm expecting the eventual bluray to look great. I hope the recently struck 70mm print of 'West Side Story' makes it to cities on the East Coast.

That person that made those comments about the Dome's booth operations most likely made those comments without asking his boss if he could. Some theatre chains have problems with employees using and making comments about operations on the internet. The last time I ran the Dome they still had two Century JJ 70/35mm projectors and two Christie AW-3 platters for the main house. Now they have Kinoton FP75 projectors. Most likely they replaced the second film projector with a Digital projector like the El Capitan did.

The last time I was in the Dome's projection booth was two years ago. At the time, they were using a single film projector with a platter . The booth also was equipped with a DLP projector. Photos from that visit were posted on the Fans of Showmanship website (registration required to access images).

Thank you Michael and to all who have responded to my question.
I have registered to join the Showmanship group and look forward to participatingin it.
Hearing of the demise of basically all reel-to-reel projection sadens me, however it'a a new world. To think, back in my day
we had as many as three projectors (and a few with four)in the booth We also had two projectionists on duty for 70mm,3-D,and studio previews and as many as 5 with Cinerama.
My, my how times have changed. I suppose the Dome and Arklight utilise one man two run both buildings. Thats how it was in Hawaii at Waikiki 1-2-3 after I retired.

I would venture a guess the platter doesn't have to be such a bad thing if they were specially designed to handle the film better and much more carefully (ala the IMAX or SHOWSCAN systems) instead of the designs they took for mass manufacturing.
Also apparently they have been experimenting with a new 10k "ultra definition" system at the egyptian which take's 70mm negatives and transfers them to a new digital format, supposed to look better than Showscan or Imax. I don't know much about it other than vague reports from the inside, it's supposed to be mindblowing. Anyone know anything about this?

Just saw the screening of 'South Pacific' at the Cinerama Dome. I am in town for awhile from NYC and I was amazed at this theater that I have waited so long to visit. It really is a bit of a mind blower. The film was introduced by none other than Mitzi Gaynor herself. It was great to see this legend in person, and the print was one of the cleanest I have ever seen. Absolutely crystal clear, colorful, and resonant. I was also in awe of the size of the screen image. The only setback to the whole night was the curvature of the image on the screen. It didn't 100% fill the screen leaving the areas in the lower left and right noticeably empty. I was really glad to see this film in this theater, but it was a bit of a shame that the perspective of the image was a bit off. I'm not an expert by any means, but I do have a tad of projection booth experience. I'm guessing that this question may have been answered earlier in this thread, but I'm too lazy to backtrack. Were any of these prints designed to fill that screen? Was there ever a lens designed to take standard prints and project them so it could fill the screen? It was a bit distracting. Unfortunately I will be back on the east coast when the screening of '2001' takes place. I'd be interested to see if the same problem exists with that print.

If they used a film print (35mm or 70MM) it would have filled the screen, but in an earlier post said they were going to show the film in a Digital video format. And yes to both of your questions on prints and lens to fill that screen. Fox has restored many of their shot in 65MM features, but they will not let theatres that are not equipped to run in a change-over projection format book these prints. In many cases their are very used or really faded prints still available to book. "2001" being available from Warner Bros. can be plattered for the shows. So this is the case you have back in New York with the Ziegfeld Theatre in Midtown.

I was also there and if I remember right Gaynor herself announced this was the West Coast premiere of a new D5 presentation of the film. I think it was digital. It certainly looked digital as it was actually too perfect and just didn't feel like a film presentation. There was no intermission. As a side note, along with Gaynor there were supposed to be "special guests". If so, they were not introduced to the audience. However, Gaynor herself was delightful and even showed up with a broken foot. What a trooper.

I have read that the Cinerama screen at the Dome is 126 degrees of an arc, while the Cinerama process was shot with a 146 degree field of view. If that is the case, how does the Dome setup deal with the difference ? Is there cropping ? I have seen Cinerama presentations at both the Dome, and in Seattle. I could be mistaken, but it was my impression that Seattle was more like the original Cinerama experience that I remember. In any case, I have my ticket for Sept. 7th. See you there !

The D5 was shown over a year ago at the old Warner's Cinerama (Pacific's) on Hollywood Blvd. I was there - hardly the premiere.

However, wouldn't a Warner Pacific showing be an industry screening closed to the public, thus making the Cinerama Dome showing the proper West Coast premiere for the public?

Before the upgrade in the booth a few years ago at the Dome. On the projectionists control panel there was masking setting buttons for the masking stops on the screen. There was Flat (1.85), Scope (2.40), 70MM (Spherical), 70MM (Widescreen) and Cinerama. Up until the 70's the Cinerama masking setting button was still wired and could be used (carbon arc lamphouses still in the booth). But after that time and the xenon lamphouses were added to the booth. They only used the masking up to the 70MM (widescreen) setting. There was still more screen hidden behind the main curtains.

The D5 Digital format is Panasonic's Professional Digital playback deck format. HD-Cam and HD-Cam SR is Sony's Professional Digital playback deck formats.

A second late screening of "2001" has been added. In addition, the first 2 Godfather flicks will play the Dome for a week in what sounds like digital presentations.

I presume that the Godfather films presented will be the recent restoration effort by Robert Harris, in collaboration with Gordon Willis. If so, I'm giving digital a chance: truly an offer you can't refuse!
JSA

Dave Strohmaier ("The Cinerama Adventure") posted a neat flyer for the upcoming Cinerama showings of "HTWWW" and "2001" at the Dome on the "In 70mm" website:
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2008/cinerama_dome/images/2001-htwww-web.jpg

It's nice to see the Arclight actually giving The Godfather/The Godfather Part II a one-week run at the Dome. Too bad they couldn't have done the same with 2001 and How the West Was Won. Even a weekend for each would have been sufficient.

It looks like Warner Home Video will be giving away to the first 100 Ticket Holders in line, copies in Blu-ray of "2001" and "How The West Was Won" for the upcoming screenings.

HTWWW is sold out. WARNING: The Los Angeles Triathalon is running that morning and street closures will be in effect until noon. Check the route and allow plenty of time.

The 8:00 PM "2001" show is sold out as well!
JSA

I attended the 8pm "2001" and Sunday's screening of "HTWWW".

"2001": As announced before the screening, the print was struck 7 years ago and is showing signs of wear. It certainly is with sprocket damage and emulsion scratches throughout. Still, it did not have the annoying sound problem that the print shown in January had and was impressive. Many people in the audience were seeing it in a theater for the first time. While I was fortunate enough to score one of the Blu-ray discs of the film they had to take addresses for them to be mailed later.

"HTWWW": This could have (and has been) done much better. First, if you are going to have a special show and it is sold out you do NOT wait until 30 minutes before showtime to open the doors. That simply is not long enough especially when you are giving something away. Some people in line were doing a rain dance. This time they actually had the discs on hand so 100 lucky people got pre-release copies. I didn't because that damn Triathalon held me up too long. Carroll Baker did not show and her non-appearance was not explained. However, Russ Tamblyn spoke to the audience and introduced his family which included Amber and a former member of the Standells. He said they were seeing Cinerama for the first time. Gregory Peck's widow was also there with other family. One of the stuntmen, who doubled for Debbie Reynolds, was also introduced. I apologize that his name escapes me. Stanley Livingston was also present. Unfortunately, especially for those seeing this for the first time, there was a sound problem that was in the form of a loud squeaking and distortion of sound. It was intermittent but once it started (about the time Baker meets Stewart for the first time) it never stopped. I heard there was an attempt to fix it but it came back. I honestly thought I might see the breakdown reel any minute. Visually, the film looked great. Several people around me said they would seek refunds. As for me, I consider myself extremely fortunate to be able to experience Cinerama and have attended every engagement. I enjoyed the experience sound trouble or not but it must have given the projectionists (including Strohmaier in the Able booth as usual) a stroke. I don't know if it was caused by the soundtrack or the equipment but it was really too bad. As nothing was said about it in advance I assume it was completely unexpected. Still, a unique experience!

I wish I could work up enthusiasm for seeing three-panel Cinerama at the Dome, but they have never had a proper Cinerama screen to project on (louvered) and the image is just too damn dim for it to have the effect it had in true Cinerama theaters. Remember, the Dome was not designed to show true three-panel Cinerama, and a few years ago when they renovated, they should have installed the proper louvered screen - THEN you'd be seeing Cinerama the way it should be seen.

I attended the last engagement of HTWWW and there was none of the audio issues. I noticed in the Arclight ad in the LA Times that Tropic Thunder showed in the dome after HTWWW in digital. I think they should have had HTWWW be the only film in the dome that day, do a run through in the morning, work out the kinks, and then play it later in the afternoon or evening for an audience. Its not every day you get to run 3-strip Cinerama and perhaps they should have been more prepared.

I was also at the HTWWW show and, unfortunately, I walked out about an hour in. The soundtrack mishap was really so annoying and distracting that I couldn't sit through it. It was exciting to be able to see the film in this format, but the whole thing was just really poorly executed (including starting the show 45-minutes late).

And could they have found worse seats for the special guests? Putting Russ Tamblyn and his family on the floor way over to the side seemed wrong.

Bruce when the Dome originally opened it was designed to handle 3 panel Cinerama and the new Super Cinerama presentaions. The theatre did have three booths. The Able and Charlie booths were covered by drapes.
For those with Blu-ray players the film is presented in two formats to see. First version is what they call a SmileBox version which gives the viewer a somewhat and bigger letterbox of what the Cinerama theatre type screen viewing. And a regular letterbox matted at 2.89:1 aspect ratio. Plus that Wonderful Doc. "Cinerama Adaventure". The transfers look GREAT on both. The regular DVD edition is three discs with the film on 2 discs (only the regular letterbox version) and the doc on the last disc (with the special SmileBox presentation).

It wouldn't surprise me to learn Tamblyn requested seats close to the exit so they could make a fast getaway. He announced they had to leave immediately after (the late starting time may have contributed) and he was bothered by authograph hounds during intermission and into the second half even though he was in the middle of an aisle. I was just across the aisle from them and as soon as the end credits hit the whole group took off like a bat out of hell and were gone before the lights came up.

William, I remember now the drapes covering the other booths, so I was wrong about that part, but not wrong about the fact that they never had the louvered screen, which is the only way to get enough light on the side panels.

As the Director of Sight and Sound for Pacific Theatres, I am respomsible for the Cinerama presenations at the Dome. FYI we did
run the entire film earlier in the week, as well as a short section Sunday morning. We also had outside technican to EQ the auditorium
Friday morning for the magnetic soundtracks for 2001 and HTWWW.
I am personally enbarrassed by the sound problem, but it was not due
to lack of concern.
The Cinerama Dome did have a louvered screen when it opened in 1963
and it was replaced once before we went to a solid sheetin the mid 1970's. Interestingly, the LA review of Its A Mad Mad Mad Mad World
mentions the cross light reflection.

Pictureville Cinema at the National Media Museum, Bradford, UK shows 'This is Cinerama' in 3-strip Cinerama from 3 booths and onto a louvered screen on the first Saturday of each month at 1.30pm. Other Cinerama, (plus CineMiracle and Kinopanorama), films are regularly shown during Bradford Film Festival which is held at this cinema every March. Pictureville is able to show any film format and sound process and next door is the IMAX 3D cinema.

I think it would be very interesting to those who were there to know what caused the problem. Stuff happens. I certainly hope this in no way discourages future screenings.

J. Sittig, thanks for the info. I do know that when they finally showed three panel Cinerama there, it was not a louvered screen. But that explains why Mad World looked so good there.

J. Sittig,
I appreciate your response and, regarding the sound issue, somethings things just happen. The problem with these kinds of problems is that you can't just stop and then start all over again (lest you risk some serious wrath). I certain appreciate the effort you guys put into the show, and I wouldn't hesitate to attend another show in the future (This is Cinerama- please). I was sitting there during the overture staring up at the ceiling thinking how lucky I am to live in an area where this stuff is commonplace. I'm glad to see you guys finally putting the Dome to some good use (I was also there for the Wednesday showing of The Fly). Despite what some people think, The Dome is one of the few true Cinema Treasures left and I'm always happy to walk up that hallway and enter that auditorium (but more so when the film isn't something like Scary Movie 17 or Jeepers Creepers 6).

My last film in the Dome was "Rambo". The CG expoding disembowelments looked great on the giant curved screen! I saw "Diving Bell & the Butterfly" on the same day. Probably the only person on earth who can say that.

To manwithnoname,

I was one of the autograph hounds "bothering" Russ Tamblyn during intermission of "How the West Was Won." Mr. Tamblyn was perfectly gracious about giving autographs to my friend and me. He was not bothered in the least.

couchcritic

I got Russ Tamblyn's autograph at a sci-fi/horror convention a few years ago and he was extremely nice, talking with me about Cinerama and "The Haunting", etc. He also posed for a picture with me.

Under the title "How the West was Shown", the in70mm site has posted a short article and some pictures from this weekend's Cinerama events at the Dome:

http://www.in70mm.com/news/2008/3_strip_west/index.htm

Why did the recent screening of South Pacific have the Intermission (and therefore Entr'acte) missing? A friend who attended stated the restless nature of the audience, coming in and out of the auditorium - particularly in the second half of the film - ruined the experience.

Probably because it was not the roadshow version. The DVD has both versions.

Tickets go on sale Sep. 17 for AFI NIGHT AT THE MOVIES. The Oct. 1 event is scheduled to feature the following films with celebrity introductions:

THE MAN WHO WOULD BE KING (presented by Sean Connery)
AMERICAN BEAUTY (Annette Bening)
ETERNAL SUNSHINE OF THE SPOTLESS MIND (Jim Carrey)
THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT MARY (Cameron Diaz)
THE SILENCE OF THE LAMBS (Jodie Foster)
TOOTSIE (Dustin Hoffman)
THE APARTMENT (Shirley MacLaine)
THE JERK (Steve Martin)
WEST SIDE STORY (Rita Moreno)
AUSTIN POWERS: INTERNATIONAL MAN OF MYSTERY (Mike Myers)
THE MATRIX (Keannu Reeves)
GLORY (Denzel Washington)

It was the roadshow version - and the intermission and entr'acte was gone because they couldn't fit them on the D-5, which is what they showed. Same thing happened when they did the screening at the Pacific's a few years ago, and that was explained to us by the fellow who did the restoration.

The roadshow version on the DVD (according to the case) is nearly 3 hours and it just wasn't that long of a presentation at the Dome. However, if the info came from the person who actually did the restoration I will accept that and stand corrected.

Well the restored 70 MM print of South Pacific that was shown at the Egyptian about two years ago was not the roadshow version. However, they did screen a faded roadshow print during the same weekend. According to the IMBD, the roadshow version is 171 min, while the other runs for 157 min.

JSA

I'm sorry, I think I got confused - the D-5 is not the roadshow version - it's the 157 minute version, but the DVD of it does have the intermission and exit music - the D5 doesn't. Sorry for the the confusion - it was the initial post about why the intermission wasn't there that confused me.

AFI Night At The Movies is sold out. I didn't get a ticket. It's just as well...this year's lineup wasn't too appealing to me. At least "West Side Story" isn't in the Dome!

Yes, last year's lineup was great. You can't get much better than "Spartacus"!

I saw WSS at the Dome many years ago. It was absolutely wonderful, the 6-track sound was terrific. Can't wait to see the new 70 MM print!

Will shoot for Godfather II this weekend...

JSA

I'd bet that The Man Who Would Be King with Sean Connery introducing would have been great. Imagine, the original James Bond in person!

45 years ago today.
From MAD World to MADagascar, the Cinerama Dome celebrates its 45th
Anniversary, November 7, 2008. From the roadshow generation to digital screen presentation, and a few face lifts along the way, it's still "the only theatre of it's kind in the world!"

I posted this ad two years ago, but here it is again in honor of the anniversary. As Mr. Sittig said, and as it says in this ad, it's still the only one of its kind:

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y231/billhuelbig/dome.jpg

I just bought tickets to see Nixon/Frost tomorrow night. The last movie I saw at the Cinerama Dome was "Arachnophobia", so it's been a while.

According to their official website, the upcoming releases scheduled to open at the Arclight include:

- Bedtime Stories
- Last Chance Harvey
- Marley & Me
- The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
- Doubt
- Gran Torino
- Revolutionary Road
- Seven Pounds
- The remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still
- The Spirit
- The Wrestler

Also, for future reference, the link for all upcoming releases at the Arclight:

https://www.arclightcinemas.com/ArcLight/faces/ComingSoon.jsp?movieType=ComingSoon

Here are some photos from last night. Coincidentally, the Cinerama Dome was seen in the Frost/Nixon movie.
http://tinyurl.com/5nhn5e
http://tinyurl.com/5qva96
http://tinyurl.com/67huz9
http://tinyurl.com/5ugut9
http://tinyurl.com/5jh6nh
http://tinyurl.com/6p9fwx
http://tinyurl.com/5qznlq
http://tinyurl.com/6r3lux
http://tinyurl.com/5l4hw8
http://tinyurl.com/5uuarh

Undated photo:
http://tinyurl.com/6haupn

How about some "good" and "varied" indoor pics of the Cinerama theater, itself? :)

I tried to take some interior photos in the dome before the movie started, but it was too dark. Besides, the Arclight ushers are very involved in having phones turned off and the rest. No argument from me there.

Well now we know what movie bcareful saw them prepping to shoot at the Dome from his September 19th post of 2007...
Frost/Nixon

Executive producer of "Slipper & the Rose" was David Frost.

In the most bizarre booking I've seen in a long time, the Dome is showing "Slumdog Millionaire" along with "My Bloody Valentine"...

JSA

from what I can tell from the website, it's a one time showing of the non-3D version but with a Q&A with the director and writer.

Well that's what I thought Friday, but both films have been advertised since then daily.
JSA

If I came to that My Bloody Valentine Q&A, I'd them the director and writer than the directing and writing sucked.

Honestly, I believe that Paul Verhoeven should have directed the film.

In another brillant job of programming by our friends at Arclight, the day after its Best Picture Oscar Nomination was announced, they moved "Slumdog Millionaire" out of the Dome and put "Underworld - Rise Of The Lycans" in its place. BARF!

Somebody heard my complaint..."Slumdog Millionaire" is back in The Dome starting this Friday (1/30). WOO-HOO!!!

Here is a letter from an unhappy Arclight customer back in May 2002, via the LA Times:

I have swallowed--hook, line and sinker--the idea of Arclight Cinemas. I bought into the $14 tickets. I joined the membership club even before I set foot into the theater. I first went to Arclight to see "My Big Fat Greek Wedding," and I loved every minute of the experience: the sound, the seats, the lack of advertisements, the picture. Going to the movies is a redefined experience.

Then comes the first blockbuster of the summer, "Spider-Man." I cannot wait to see this at Arclight, and this time I want to see it at the Dome--the refurbished Cinerama Dome. According to the Arclight Web site, it has even more added features than the multiplex auditoriums. I sold my friends on the idea of $14 tickets by reciting news articles and the Web site.

I loved telling them that the theaters "exceed THX standards" with their state-of-the-art "Kinoton projectors, JBL speakers and Dolby and SDDS sound systems." Some of them asked me if I was a spokesman for Arclight. I bought the tickets online; a bunch of tickets had already been sold, so I had to take seats in the back of the theater, Row Z.

Everything I had bought into, and therefore sold my friends on as well, was false for Row Z. It seems that the moviegoing experience described doesn't fully apply to the last five or so rows in the Cinerama Dome. Imagine the dome and a circle's perimeter. The last couple of rows are outside this perimeter, underneath the projection booth. This makes most of the features of the Arclight movie experience moot.

All of the speakers (and even the projectors) are way in front of you. I could hear the people around me eating their caramel popcorn and the girls talking about Tobey Maguire's abs better than I could hear the film. Here's a little more sensory overload. Imagine this space (outside the perimeter) with a short ceiling and walls on three sides, jammed with five rows of people. The warmth of body heat was unbearable for the first hour, not to mention the combination of popcorn, chocolate, hot-dog and other less pleasant smells.

I have had better theater experiences at the Bose store in the mall--and those were free.

It's his fault for buying tickets so darn late. Row Z??? Sheesh!

Here are some photos from the LA Library, circa 1980s:
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics34/00036935.jpg
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics34/00036937.jpg

Is the screen currently installed as large as the one depicted in Ken Mc's pic? If so, it doesn't seem as curved as our Uptown but it seems wider though. I say this because if you sit at a certain spot, at the Uptown, and I don't mean in the front row, you've got an almost perfect screen periphery.

I've been to the Dome a few times. It is similiar in terms of screen to the Washington D.C. Uptown. LA also has huge screens, though not curved, at Village (Westwood Village) and Grauman's Chinese.

Any chance we'll get a 50th anniversary screening of Ben-Hur at the Dome this year? C'mon, Arclight, step up and give one of the truly great films in the history of cinema the anniversary party it deserves. And at least an extended weekend-long run would be nice. These one-night weekday screenings don't help your members living in OC. You did if for the Godfather last year, you can do it for Ben-Hur.

They had a 40th anniversary screening of "2001" last year (two of them, actually) so the chances for "Ben-Hur" could be good.

That would be very neat. I saw “Ben-Hur” in 70 MM at the Dome sometime in the early 90’s, and it was spectacular. However, since the Dome apparently no longer runs reel-to-reel, chances are practically zero for a 70 MM engagement. My understanding is that only one or two 70 MM prints of the film are in existence. A 50 year anniversary engagement would probably have to be a 35 MM presentation, and in so-so condition. I don’t know of any efforts to create a digital transfer. “Ben-Hur” would be on my top 5 list for a full restoration. Hopefully it will happen soon…

JSA

Here is a photo of the Cinerama Dome I took last week.

I see they are about to screen "2001" and "Lawrence of Arabia" and neither one is in the Dome! What a waste when they know they could sell out that house with either film.

was just perusing Michael Coate's list above, some reason I could have swore "Alien" played at the dome (in 70mm) in '79, before or after Apocalypse but i guess not. Where did Alien open, the Egyptian? Some surprising 70mm engagements like "The Muppet Movie" and "Run, Run Joe!" (1974) a film i'd never even HEARD of before, strange that the TV movie "Run Joe Run" (Burt Reynolds) came out the same year. "The Earthling" (1981) there's a forgotten film, as well as "Bully" (1978) "Sextette" (1978) "Maurie" (1973) "You'll Like My Mother" (1972) and "Zandy's Bride" (1974) And nobody ever believes me when i mention "Zoot Suit" as the last Sunsurround presentation (and 70mm too!?) How did THAT film justify that kind of presentation??
Sure wish i'd seen Quest for Fire (in 70) there, probably no prints on the planet left of that

Possible reason of why Run, Run Joe ran (and in 70mm): Pacific Theatres distributed the film in a likely attempt to follow in National General's (and later the United Artists Theatre Circut's two label, UFDC and Taurus) footsteps. Not surprisingly, it didn't work.

Damon, Yes "Alien" opened the Egyptian Theatre in 70MM and they also had it running all night with a special display in the front of the theatre. The "Zoot Suit" presentation was in 70MM Sensurround-Plus.

IMDB doesn't seem to list a "Run,Run Joe" but there was a Saturday morning kids show called "Run,Joe,Run!" about a fugitive dog.

It ran on NBC for two seasons,1974-'76.

Was this movie released undder another name?

Well there's a Burt Reynolds film called "Run, Simon, Run" on IMDB.

The film in Michael's list above "Run Run Joe" was also known as "Arrivano Joe e Margherito"(1974) with Keith Carradine & Tom Skerritt. It's fun he has it listed above as a 70MM, but not on his former site that showed in 70MM in Los Angeles.

oh thats right, Run Simon Run (1974) was the one i was thinking of not Run Joe Run (ugh) I think it was an ABC movie of the week, Run Joe Run was the kids show from oddly enough the SAME YEAR!
I still can't imagine how Zoot Suit got a 70mm Sensurround presentation.

Someone needs to track down that 70 print of the Muppet Movie and show it, whooo..!

I imagine that Zoot Suit got a 70mm release since it was a musical (many musicals of the era got 70mm) and Universal was hoping for a big hit in the vein of films such as Fame (even though the failures of Sgt. Pepper, The Wiz and Xanadu should have taught them). The reviews were decent but the film failed and didn't manage much of a release.

However, Universal finally did get a hit musical in The Best Little Whorehouse In Texas a year later (which interestingly enough did not get a 70mm release).

I'd love to see a 70mm print of 'The Muppet Movie' the 35mm print I saw last year at the AFI Silver was a cropped grainey looking one.

I think I saw Zoot Suit at the Rivoli, not sure if they ran it in 70mm.

Michael list on in 70MM in NYC shows that it did not play in 70MM in NYC.

Saw WATCHMEN here last night in theater 10. Surprisingly digital projection AND sound were top notch. I guess there's no need to go to the Village in Westwood anymore

Kram, thanks for helping put another nail in the coffin of one of the last great single screeners. Your comment runs counter to the spirit of this website. The Arclight is great and all, but there are many other great reasons to visit the Village and I would encourage everyone who hasn't been there to do so.

I think the Village in Westwood has the best overall presentation quality of the few remaining first run movie palaces in southern CA. And at 1300+ seats I believe it also has the largest seating capacity of any first run movie auditorium in So Cal.

On the cinematreasures page for the Village they are saying that Mann will likely not renew the leases on the Village and Bruin when they expire in a couple of years.

The date given for this photo is June of 1981.

Premiere night, 1965, from the LAPL:
http://jpg3.lapl.org/pics28/00063855.jpg

I apologize for offending the Village. It is indeed one of the best remaining single screen palaces and deserves a visit every once in a while when something worth seeing is playing on it's screen.

A first: Arclight AND Chinese both booking Terminator Salvation.

Star Trek will still be playing in The Dome this weekend. Its much better reviewed and critically acclaimed than the big Memorial Day openers, but from a business standpoint why keep it in the biggest auditorium? Terminator Salvation and Night at The Museum 2 will probably gross twice as much this weekend.

I would have guessed that Night At The Museum would be in the Dome but they probably don't want to compete with theatres running it in IMAX.

but Star Trek was also in IMAX.

oh wait a minute. Maybe that's the answer. NATM 2 will push Star Trek off all the IMAX screens this weekend. Star Trek geeks who would have been willing to go across town to see it on an IMAX screen somewhere this weekend could still go to the Dome and see it on the big Cinerama screen instead.

I saw Star Trek at the Dome on Friday.
I've also seen it on IMAX.

The Dome was Better.

Anybody seen Transformers 2 at the Dome yet?

I hope they're showing it on their 2k DLP rather than projecting a blurry washed out print like the one I saw in theater #3. Why wasn't it digital?

I saw it (1st show midnight Tuesday the 23rd)...
It was digital and it was LOOOONNGGG.
Looked great (except the subtitles at the bottom were either a) almost cut off in the center or b) showcased the geometry problems with the screen where the text appeared straight instead of following the curve of the screen).

It looked great, though, and it sounded amazing (one of the best I've heard in there). Michael Bay was there to introduce the show.

On Monday August 24, ArcLight Hollywood will have one showing of Stanley Kramer's "IT'S A MAD, MAD MAD, MAD WORLD" in 70mm Ultra Panavison in the theatre that premiered that film 46 years ago, The Cinerama Dome. Tickets are now on sale at the theatre boxoffice or on line at arclightcinemas.com

Good to see IAMMMMW back at the Dome again. I've already seen it there and had an awesome time. I'm holding my breath for "This Is Cinerama" since I haven't seen that yet.

"Lawrence" would be nice for the September downtime, too.

Renewing link.

According to the site, "Mad World" runs 192 minutes. Is this right? The last 70mm screening it was the 161 minute version with intermission police calls.

Well, I believe that the 192 min. version is the so-called "uncut" roadshow version. If so, then is this a restored version? Or a work in progress? Or a faded/scratched print?

I was left with the impression that reel-to-reel presentations at the Dome were a thing of the past, thus effectively killing the possibility of screening quality 70 MM prints...

Anyway, did not mean to sound negative: I'll be there regardless!

JSA

The projection equipment is there for film presentations in 35mm, 70mm or 3-strip Cinerama. Digital is simply the presentation used most of the time.

The print we are playing on August 24 is 177 minutes including the 15 minute police call intermission. Its the same version we played in October 2003. MGM screened the print last week and found it to be in "fabulous" condition. We are playing it with original sound mix of 5 stage channels and mono surround (although its DTS now instead of mag) and using an Ultra Panavision lens courtesy of Panavision Inc.
There is also a very good chance of playing This Is Cinerama and How The West Was Won right after labor day in three-strip Cinerama and
one 70mm (magenta prints)double feature of THE GOLDEN HEAD and HOLIDAY IN SPAIN. Confirmed information will be available around August 15.

I was there in 2003 and have my tickets for this time.

Here is a 1980 photo from the LAPL:
http://jpg2.lapl.org/pics50/00059853.jpg

J.Sittig:Thanks for the information. Hopefully 3-strip Cinerama will return to the Dome!

Manwithnoname: Yes, I'm aware that the Dome is capable to show 70 MM format. But there is a difference in quality between the prints that the studios will allow to be presented in a platter vs reel to reel. From my understanding the "2001" print shown last year at the Dome was run in a platter. Not a bad show, (actually a terrific show) but nevertheless there were some visible and audible issues. In contrast, the 70 MM "2001" print screened at the Academy a few months later was in pristine condition.

JSA

JSA: Yes, that's correct. "2001" (I was there too and getting that free Blu-Ray resulted in investing in a player) and it was a platter presentation. I understand that platters are very hard on 70mm prints. You did say reel to reel and could very well be correct. Thanks!

Whenever I look at the old shots of the Dome I am reminded of how much more impressive the theater was without all of that other crap around it. Anyway, thankfully it's still here at all.

Ya know....it would be neat if they had something like the Dome or the Arclight here in the Boston area. One thing that's occurring more and more to me is that part of the reason that so many movie palace theatres have closed is that in the last few administrations, funding for the Arts, in general, has been decimated considerably (as have other things), helping to go towards our invasion of foreign countries with impunity. It's quite sad, indeed.

The in70mm site has posted the dates of Sep 8 & 10 for the Cinerama presentations of "How the West was Won" & "This is Cinerama".

JSA

Hi, JSA. Thanks for the info.

Do you have a direct link to the in70mm.com webiste? I'm not seeing it. Thanks.

It is: http://www.in70mm.com/now_showing/index.htm

Thanks for the link, CWalczak. Here's wishing that there was a theatre here in the Boston area that could/would show 70mm Classic films. I'd go in a heartbeat, if you all know what I mean! :)

The schedule and ticket purchase links for the Cinerama showings on Sept. 8, 9, and 10 are now on the Arclight website. Click on the link in the lower left corner of the homepage that says "Arclight Presents".

there is a large screen 70mm theater in boston it is called the Wang Center now

and Davis Square is getting 70mm

Ooh...when and where? Just curious, Roger. Thanks for the info? Do you have any furthur details and/or updates on it? Just curious, because I'd LOVE to know about it. Are there any links?

I know the Wang Center Screen, Roger. The place is now called citicenter for performing arts, and they don't do movies there any more.

Here is a recent photo.

Thanks, Lost Memory.

This is in Boston? Or is it a theatre that has long since been closed/demolished. When was this photo taken? Just curious.

Thats a recent photo of this theater, the Arclight.

That's what I thought, Lost Memory.

I hope everyone who attended "Mad Mad World" last night had a wonderful time. Any reports from the front lines ... I mean, the front rows?

Glad everybody enjoyed the "Mad, Mad World" screening!

I was there and as usual it was a great show. Karen Kramer introduced the screening. Lots of empty seats, though. In another house was the premiere of "Extract" with many cast members/stars in attendance which was stealing the thunder.

Glad it was such a great show! Too bad that there were so many empty seats, though

I hope the Cinerama shows in September are better attended. I also hope we get some reports here on the various shows. I'm really curious about "The Golden Head", and why it never got a U.S. release.

Reminds me of Bette Davis as Baby Jane being delusional about her flop 1934 love story "The Longest Night": "It was the best thing I ever did. They never even released it in the United STATES!"

I will be seeing "The Golden Head" and will let you know. Last night, John Sittig said that shortly into the screening it will be easy to see why it was never released.

I attended last night's "Mad World" show, and had a wonderful time. First, many thanks to the crew at the Dome. The argument can be made that the film needs a proper restoration, but the fact is that the print looked and sounded terrific. Although there were empty seats, I thought it was a good turnout considering it was Monday night.

Mrs. Kramer shared two interesting anecdotes. First, how a bet between Stanley Kramer and a NYT film critic eventually resulted in IMMMMW. The critic bet Mr. Kramer that he could not direct a comedy. Second, during the initial roadshow engagements a lady had complained that she heard a man's voice inside the women's restroom, completely unaware that these were the infamous police calls!

JSA

That's funny. Thanks for the nighttime laughs, JSA.

"Last night, John Sittig said that shortly into the screening it will be easy to see why it was never released."

Now I'm more curious than ever. I never would've believed a Cinerama film would fall into the "so bad it's good" category (though some people do feel that way about "Krakatoa East of Java").

I too went to see the showing of It's a Mad Mad Mad Mad World and while I was impressed with the screen width I only heard three channels in the front left center and right. The left extra and right extra were silent.

Uh-oh! That doesn't sound so good.

cinerama camera:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome2.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome5.jpg

Thanks for the info, hollywood90038. Since I admittedly know nothing about cinematic cameras, let alone any type of movie projection(s), it's hard for me to interpret the pictures, however.

Hollywood90038: if these were taken yesterday, how was the rest of the show?

OK, here goes. I attended both "HTWWW" and the 70mm double feature yesterday. All involve deserve high praise for the 3-strip HTWWW show as it was flawless. Picture and sound were right on the entire time. The prints for "The Golden Head" and "Holiday in Spain" were as advertised...excellent condition but badly faded. I was particularly impressed with the sound quality of the "Head" print. Having said that, I can't understand why someone thought that little kid's flick that would appeal to indiscriminate pre-teens deserved the big picture treatment. It wasn't as bad as I expected but it was nothing special at all other than the rarity of the showing itself. The acting was generally poor and the large format made it easy to see that one of the main characters was a dubbed voice with the actress speaking something else. There was a musical number that was painful to sit through. The film provided a few surprises. One was watching George Sanders playing straight man to Buddy Hackett who was appearing in his 3rd "Cinerama" production. The film actually had an overture before what had to be the cheapest looking credits ever to grace a Cinerama release. The Internet Movie Database says the film was started in 3-strip but converted to 70mm and that some of the 3-strip footage was left in. I saw no scenes with join lines so I don't believe this. Hard to believe this was directed by the man who directed "Jailhouse Rock". I can say I saw a rare film but that's about it. I will leave comments on "Holiday in Spain" to others as I had to leave shortly after it started. I will be back tonight for "This is Cinerama".

Thank you, Manwithnoname, for making me feel like I attended the show myself. Looking forward to your next comment.

Was either show sold out, or at least close to it? Big crowds for Cinerama can only mean more Cinerama shows.

HTWWW was sparsely attended but it was 3:30pm on a Tuesday. Also remember it will show 3 more times. The 70mm show was much better attended and was obviously a group of film/Cinerama buffs. That was a one time only affair in the evening. According to Sittig we were the first paying audience to see the film in the U.S. and will no doubt be the last.

I'm hoping Cinerama in September will become an annual event. I was lucky enough to be able to attend last September, and even got a free Blu-Ray of "How the West Was Won" (which has since been screened more than any other movie in my collection).

Is this an annual event? One of my "bucket list" things is seeing Cinerama. Other than the mailing list ( which doesn't seem to give good updates) is there a way to get as much advance notice as possible to make plans ( airfares/hotel,tickets to the Craig Ferguson show) Thanks.

I generally hear about upcoming special presentations here on Cinema Treasures long before Arclight announces them. I am an Arclight member and get their email blasts too but if I waited for that in some cases I would not get good seats. I don't know about Ferguson but having recently attended the Tonight Show and soon to attend Leno you need to request tickets about 6-8 weeks in advance.

hdtv267 May I advise you that the National Media Museum Pictureville Cinema in Bradford UK shows 3-strip 'This is Cinerama' on the first Saturday of each month at 1.30pm. Every March during Bradford Film Festival, their Widescreen Weekend always includes various Cinerama movies, 3-strip and 70mm. Pictureville is equipped to show every film format ever produced. There is a 3D IMAX cinema in the museum. Find a penpal and accomodation costs will be negligible!

http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/
http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/

Todays screening of This Is Cinerama was far superior, in my eyes, than Tuesday's. The join lines were barely noticeable today and less blur when the image went from frame to frame. And Tuesday, only the cinerama camera was on display. Today, both display windows in the dome were Cinerama themed and inside Arclight, Cinerama merchandise is being soild. Plus, today the audience was given a tour of the dome's projection booth.

Good to hear they're selling Cinerama merchandise. Last January I asked about that in the Arclight store, but they had nothing. Things are looking up.

from 9/10/2009:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome7.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome10.jpg
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDome13.jpg

Last night's showing of "This Is Cinerama" also included a projection booth tour which is something that was done during the film's premiere showings in the 1950's. The display cases were changed while "The Golden Head" was showing Tuesday night. I think the Cinerama merchandise was brought in for this engagement only and some items I saw Tuesday were no longer on sale Wednesday.

Maybe they were selling Cinerama T-shirts. The one I got in Dayton OH is 13 years old, but no holes in it yet.

The big "A" outta fingers at Arclight:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/Arclight3.jpg

Definitely looks like a digit-al presentation. :-)

Pierre Cabrol, lead architect for the Cinerama Dome, died on Oct. 8 at age 84. Here's the obituary from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-pierre-cabrol1-2009nov01,0,5753525.story

JSA

Seat count above for this cinema says "unknown" If anybody looks for press releases and finds a total seat count when the Arclight opened, the webmasters can put such a seat count above.

Seating: 937 originally, 856 at present. Source

That's useful and interesting, but I asked for "total seat count" for the entire megaplex because the listing now if for the whole place, not only the original auditorium.

According to this link:

The Arclight has 14 screens, with 4000+ seats, on two different levels with each level serviced by its own concessions counter. The primary box office area is located on the ground floor of the theatre. The cinema also hosts a busy bar and café on the ground floor, for those customers who like to relax and enjoy a drink and/or a bite to eat, before going to see their movie of choice.

Anyone else notice a kind of machine noise coming from the left side exit in the Dome? I assume it's from the concession stand or some other place in the lobby. Even with the curtain drawn it's pretty distracting.

I've never noticed anything like that. Last time I was there was on Halloween for the 8:30 PM show of "This Is It." Only strange noises I heard that night was MJ's infamous "hee-hee's" and other vocal cadences along with catcalls from the audience.

from October:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/CineramaDomeOct20093.jpg

I was actually there for that show. I didn't hear any catcalls or noises. Must've been some idiots in the back. ;-)

Doris Roberts, the mom on Everyone Loves Raymond was there for that show oddly enough.

Mark: I must not have said "Damn!" or "Go on, Mike!" loud enough for you to here. Cause I know I was among the catcallers! :)

OOPS...that's "loud enough for you to HEAR!"

Arclight has initiated a new policy where signing in as a member and purchasing tickets online will save you $1.00 per ticket. However, they have also RAISED prices $1.00 per ticket. WHAT A BARGAIN!!

Apparently Avatar will be showing in 3-D in the Dome. I'm not sure how this could be close to being satisfactory as even regular 2-D projection is dim.

The Dome has been outfitted with a second 2k projector to increase brightness for 3D. It'll probably still look dim, though...

Here's a bit of a promotional video, posted to ArcLight's Facebook, on the update: http://www.facebook.com/video/video.php?v=1267333972533&ref=mf

Apparently the screen has also been upgraded for optimal brightness. Now if only they could fix the cross reflections and geometry distortions I would consider watching a movie in there again.

Don't worry, I'm sure if they fix the cross reflections and geometry distortions, you'll have no problem finding something else to complain out,

And for you to complain about me complaining. Nice to see you venture out of the usual forums. ;-)

Any reports from the Avatar 3D Dome screenings?

THE best place to see a movie in LA.

Hit the Thursday midnight and Avatar looked amazing. The screen was bright and colorful and the movie was beautiful to look at. They were using high tech electronic glasses, not the polarized plastic jobs you get at the El Capitan and everywhere else (I want to say they were 'XtenD 3D' but I don't think that is right). The 3D was extremely effective, even near the back of the auditorium. The geometry of the screen doesn't really change and there was one line of subtitles that was slightly cut off at the bottom of the screen (literally the word 'no'), but I can't say I ever found it distracting. It was a great presentation and Arclight really went out of their way to make it a great show. I was a little hesitant about how the 3D would look on that curved screen, but it looked great.