Egyptian Theatre

What a Beautiful Theater. Now this is how I would love to watch todays movies! The old with the new! Can't beat that, lets go to the Movies!

I attended the world premier of "Ben-Hur" at The Egyptian.

When the Egyptian open it seated 1771 people. During the 30's-late 40's, The Egyptian was operated by Fox West Coast Theatres. The theatre was reseated around 1947-48 , this reduced the seating to 1538 people. During the 40's to early 60's, this was MGM's showcase house in Hollywood. Also during that time the Egyptian theatre installed the TODD-AO film system. For the Roadshow opening of "OKLAHOMA". Other Roadshow films shown at the Egyptian were "Ben-Hur", "Mutiny on the Bounty", "My Fair Lady" (which ran for 2 years), "Funny Girl" (which was the last to run). In the late 60's the Egyptian installed a D150 film projection system for the opening of "Patton", But "Patton" opened over at the Pacific's Beverly Hill's theatre (which was the old Warner Beverly Hills). During the 60's, till the theatre closed it was run by United Artists theatres. During that time UA made a twin theatre out of a store just to the east side of the theatre. During the 70's-90's, the Egyptian was the showcase house for 20th Century Fox Pictures. Today American Cinematheque has returned the Egyptian back to the style and respect, these movie palaces should have in every city. No matter how big or how small. Now the next house to restore is the old Warner Theatre in Hollywood. If you loved what they did to the Egyptian, then the Warner/Pacific will blow you away. It been 24 years since the Pacific covered and redraped that house.

I suppose this is better than no Egyptian at all. They tore up the front of the house and made the auditorium much shorter to accommodate a larger lobby. Rather then renovate, they built a new theater within the old one. It's disappointing at best.

I saw many films at the Egyptian through the years. Im glad the theatre has been preserved but I am dissapointed in the renovation for the amount of money spent. The renovation at the Chinese is far superior. The best seat in the house is in the new balcony. I have been around the world and have seen restoration where new meets old done with more sensitivity and a lot less money. I am happy with the programming that has been brought to the Egyptian. Bruce

Due to significant damage from the1994 Northridge earthquake and vandalism, the auditorium of the Egyptiam required major rehabilitation. The steel structure now seen in the auditorium is required to reinforce the building structure. What was left of the original auditorium decor was saved and restored. The additions of the late 50's (in particular the marquee) were demolished and the courtyard restored. Perhaps not an accurate restoration of the original, but a successful renovation by the American Cinematheque of a neglected Hollywood movie palace.

The restoration of this theatre doesn't even come close to what this theatre looked like even in the 60's. The earthquake is no excuse on how this theatre looks today. The theatre looks the way it looks because American Cinematheque thought this would be hip and the cutting edge in cinema presentation and sound. They got what they wanted because the presentation and sound is excellent but the auditorium is boring. I believe 6 million was spent on both The Chinese restoration and The El Capitan. The Pantages cost between 10-12 million. The Downtown Orpheum according to sources cost around 4 million for its restoration. I have been told the Egyptian could be returned to its original state. I love the programing and I love what American Cinematheque stands for but I am not in love with the way the theatre looks it was a major letdown. brucec

cinematreasuresm is a very good website but among missing topics is a section on screen size! Where are the biggest size screens?

The 1922 Egyptian was Sid Grauman's first Hollywood venture outside of the downtown Los Angeles area. It was also the first major movie palace built in Hollywood, and signaled the begining of Hollywood Boulevard as a first-run rival to the downtown houses. When the theatre was announced in September 1920, it was described as Spanish inside and out, with red tile roof and archways. By the time final plans were drafted, an Egyptian craze had begun to sweep Los Angeles, and Grauman was only too happy to jump aboard. The completed theatre, opened on October 18, 1922 with Douglas Fairbanks picture "Robin Hood" and a stage prologue featuring many costumes from the movie. Grauman had already shown an interest in middle eastern themes with the imposing faux stone interior of the Million Dollar and the remodel of the Rialto in a Persian or Byzantine style. He was also planning the downtown Metropolitan Theatre at the same time the Egyptian was being built, and the Metropolitan was probably the most eclectic and stylized of his theatres. In comparison, the Egyptian is a much purer design, probably owing to the limitations of its name as well as the fact that the architect of his other three theatres, William Lee Woolett, was not chosen for the Egyptian. Instead, Grauman called upon the building firm of Meyer and Holler. They produced a design which was unprecedented for a major theatre. Instead of the usual practice of entering the lobby directly from the street under an overhanging marquee, the Egyptian had an open-air forecourt 160 feet long and 45 feet wide lined with shops on one side.
From there, patrons entered a foyer fronted by huge columns reminiscent of an Egyptian temple. The box office was located here, and patrons could purchase advance tickets for either of the two performances each day. All seats were reserved and could be purchased at the box office, by mail or at Baker Brothers downtown store. Grauman proved with this theatre that he could be successful with only two performances per day by charging the prices of legit theatres, offering a film and a stage show, and running a picture on an exlusive basis for many months. "Robin Hood" ran at the Egyptian from October 18, 1922 until the first week of April 1923.

The below description of the theatre, is what it looked like during the theatres golden era.
In keeping with the style of an Egyptian temple, the exterior was very imposing, with little ornamentation. The outside faux-stone wall were a warm, dusty pink, with a few hieroglyphic-style paintings. The interior of the auditorium was where Grauman let the Egyptian style run wild. Like the Chinese, when one enters the auditorium there seems to be a balcony overhead. However, it is only the old projection booth and private boxes, since the theatre never had a balcony. The ceiling of this under-balcony area is still decorated with some of the original stencil painting.

The walls of the auditorium were of the same faux-stone as the exterior, with bas-relief sculptures of Egyptian figures carved into the stone. Unfortunately, all of this detail has been covered over with sound absorbing tiles. The ceiling of the auditorium was atmosphic, meant to evoke the feeling of being in a temple courtyard at night. It is painted a deep blue, and if you look closely you can still see the gold stars painted on this fiels of blue. The real glory of the auditorium was the front proscenium area. The detail here began with elaborately painted columns rising from the orchestra pit. Between the two columns on each side of the pit was a large Sphinx figure on a pedestal. Above the columns were horizontal stepped beams rising toward the center of the proscenium, again with incredibly detailed hieroglyphic designs. This was further topped by the gold scarab and six golden swans which are still visible today. Unfortunately, except for the scarab and the sunburst above, all of the proscenium detailed was removed in 1969 when the proscenium was widened for the installation of a Dimension-150 screen.
Today, the ceiling sunburst is the most arresting detail in the auditorium. This cast plaster sunburst radiates out from the top of the proscenium, backlit by hidden bulbs which shine through the open grillwork. Like the Chinese, this pierced grill served not only as decoration, but also as the mouthpiece of the Wurlitzer. The pipes of the Wurlitzer pipe organ were housed in two large rooms located in the ceiling above the orchestra pit. These rooms opened onto the small attic area above the sunburst. The curved ceiling of this area directed the sound through the sunburst into the auditorium.
The long run policy continued at the Egyptian until July 1927, shortly after the opening of Grauman's Chinese Theatre a few blocks away. During the 30's-40's the theatre was operated by Fox West Coast Theatres. In 1949 the theatre was acquired by United Artists chain and was extensively remodeled. The entrance with a canopy that represented the Nile River and other alterations took place.
The theatre ran first run policy day-and-date with UA's downtown house. The long run policy was revived to some extent into the 70's when Roadshow pictures ran for many months at the Egyptian.
During the 1969 remodel, United Artists closed the theatre briefly, jackhammered out most of the proscenium, the orchestra pit and the stage floor in order to install a Dimension-150 screen equal in size to that of the Cinerama Dome and the Chinese. Much of the unique charm of the auditorium was lost in this insensitive remodel. The screen and speakers now extend nearly to the back wall of the stage, which originally was 30 feet deep and 75 feet from side to side. The D-150 screen was around 90 feet wide.

Wow! It would be nice to check out this! I love the Egyptian deco!

Box employees union is looking for info on roadshow movie houses of the 50's and 60's. If you can help, e-mail Barbara at
ialocal857@aol.com Thanks

What is the current screen size?
At 733 seats it's about the size of the auditorium at my high school.
This is a restored LA movie palace and one of the most famous? The American Cinemateque obviously doesn't know squat about film showmanship or 70mm film presentation. Does anybody? I always wanted to go there but now it seems as though it would be major disappointment.

The Egytian's makeover is not so much "restoration" as it is "adaptive reuse," and a very sensitive one at that. I don't believe anyone living in L.A., with knowledge of the available alternatives for this theatre, begrudge the American Cinemateque in any way. In fact, too many historic or preservation minded organizations in this country don't understand that in order to make their efforts viable, the end result must be monetarily feasible. Otherwise, these grand old dammes are left as show pieces only, a "museum piece" that just doesn't work or warrant the huge investment to save.

What the Cinemateque accomplished was actually quite remarkable, given the amount of money put into the project. Today, we have a major, seven-day-a-week, functioning theatre showcase, presenting restored and sometimes forgotten films.

I have to disagree with another, previous post here, that the Northridge quake had something to do with this re-do. The steel tubing now running the length of the walls, are to support rolling speaker panels to present film in surround.

EGYPTIAN THEATRE IN LOS ANGELES RISES FROM THE RUBBLE
http://www.nationaltrust.org/news/docs/20001018_award_egyptiantheatre.html

here's a new idea.................BE GRATEFUL......a long way from the commonsense and good manners of another decade.........perhaps all the moaners of this site might ask themselves:
'how much in cold hard cash did they contribute to what they are complaining about...... eh?

Well yes it's very nice that it exists at all but think of the potential. After all you can show these films in a cineplex and they would look the same. But to have the Egyption and simply convert it to a glorified screening room(which some of the comments make it seem like) is a reel waste. And Hollywood and LA with more money that God(put together) couldn't support a complete restoration for such a noble purpose? Maybe it has more to do with the egos of those involved including the archictects than with money.

The Egyptian Theatre may be seen as a glorified screening room to what it once looked like. But the real damage happened in 1969 when UA did the D-150 install to the theatre. They ripped out the Egyptian proscenium and installed a giant 90 foot screen. And another problem is when UA dropped the theatre, it sat empty. With homeless people and street kids living inside. UA dumpped this once great palace and left it to rot on Hollywood Blvd. If you see the Paramount movie "Jimmy Hollywood", you can see some of the theatre damage. And being from and living and working in Southern California area. You can't drop the earthquake idea from the restoration of the theatre. The theatre was built in 1921-22 and has since gone through many rumbles over the years. Since the theatre is made of brick. It may look solid, but the Egyptian did loss some bricks in the fly tower and side walls during the Northridge Earthquake 1994. An earthquake retro-fit can add 12-15 million on to your budget. It's not just the walls and roof of the building, it's also the new building codes and wiring too. The Art-Deco Warner Beverly Hills Theatre would still be standing and in use today. Because the building needed a earthquake retro-fit that the owners were not going to do in 1989. The theatre was razed.
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/504/

Im sorry but I am an avid film patron and saw many films at the Egyptian. Im glad its been saved and is being used. This is Hollywood and I hope in the future this theatre is restored. It doesn't look like a movie palace, or the deluxe roadshow house of the 1950's and the 1960's that it once was. Small towns around the US have restored there theatres that look a lot better than the Egyptian.If you want to see what a movie palace looks like go to the Pantages,Chinese and El Capitan. The film programing and picture and sound at the Egyptian are excellent. I guess I am spoiled because I was involved with one of the first authentic restoration of a movie palace the Paramount(3000seats) in Oakland back in 1972. I remember Francis Ford Coppola looking around the theatre in amazement. Im looking for the wow factor and the Egytian isn't it.brucec

Thank you Bruce.
The point I'm trying to make is that you give somebody Sid Grauman's Hollywood Egyption and they turn it into New York's Film Forum. If you don't see that there is something very wrong here you are simply not paying attention. And as for not having money for the Warner or Egyption if LA can find a mountain of money for a new concert hall(and LA needs a new concert hall like Bagdad needs an American Cinemateque) which is nothing but a major vanity production for the architect, the politicians and the LA rich it could have easily found the money to properly restore these two historic buidings. Let's face it, culturally we have nothing on the people who created these theaters.

What happened to the space next store where UA had the mini twin? I remember at the end UA ran this place so into the ground it was disgusting. I am just glad it is open and was not torn down. Alot was said about ripping out the arch to put in the d-150 screen. Couldent it have been re-created? More sense might have been to put in a huge 150 or Cinerama screen rather then the unimpressive one there now.

Most of the money for the new Disney concert hall came from Walt's widow. And that has been a long troubled trip from ground breaking to opening. There would be some problems with returning a large say D-150 type screen back into the theatre. Most of it would be space. The curved screen could not be flown into the fly tower of the theatre like a regular type screen, because to return the former D-150 screen was 90 feet wide.
I would have liked to see the Egyptian Theatre fully restored like it once was. American Cinemateque has done a fine job returning the theatre back from the dead. One of the things they wanted was to have two screening theatres at one location. Like the Motion Picture Academy in Beverly Hills and like the Director's Guild (which has three screening theatres). If they had not put in that second screening theatre (named after Steven Spielberg). They would have had more room to restore the main house. Every one has brought up good points on the restoration here. It's like the old theatre owner twinning his single screen theatre. So he could make more money at one location. American Cinemateque can offer a film maker two state of the art screening rooms for his or her films.

Thats why I brought up the former twin, couldent they have used that for 2 more screening rooms?

The former twin was originally a store that was converted into theatres. The last time I saw the twins, they were being used for plays or rock bands. The twin was the worst place to see a movie on Hollywood Blvd. They were just leased to UA, not owned. A few years before UA left the Egyptian Theatre. They had plans to turn the Egyptian Theatre and block area around it, into something like the Arc-Light, Chinese Theatres. They would have the large main theatre plus a modern 6-10 plex theatre location for new & move-over films and new stores and food on the site. But something went wrong with the city end and the plan was dropped and then the Northridge earthquake.

I just hope that one day LA and NY will have movie theaters based on the American Cinemateque which will be able to show the films from the silents to the roadshows in the environments they were originally shown(adaptive ingenuity will be of use here) with a smaller theater for the films from the '70's on(I can't picture Altman in a movie palace or roadshow type house..)
By the way apropos my comment about the Film Forum, they have the best programmer in the world, I only wish he had a theater to show the films in and not a screening room.

I had noticed that one person posting here is "paulb." That wouldn't by chance be Paul Balbirnie, manager of the Eqyptian Theater, would it? :)

No Meredith. It's me, the mysterious Paul brennan.

tee-hee... :)

This is a gem.
There is nothing like the Egyptian Theatre.
This goes back to the days when theaters were art forms!
It went through many changes over the years, and very few of them were good changes.
The Egyptian Theatre was neglected and changed for far too many years.
At one time,(even in the 1960's) it was too new to be treasured, and very recently was thought to be too old to be like it was.
Now, it is a part of the history of Hollywood that we want to keep!!
Thank you.
George Vreeland Hill
G

In the mid 1980s during a trip into Hollywood I saw "Back to the Future" at the Egyptian Theatre. The theater had seen better days by that point but features like the covered entry way still remained. The American Cinematheque has taken out the covered walkaway and restored the forecourt to its early grandeur. The auditorium is nice for screening films in spite of the now stark lobby.

Betwen 1938 and 1944 I saw just about every movie release on Hollywood Blvd. As a child gowing up I went to the movies every weekend and more during school vactions. I delivered the Hollywood Citizen News after School to get money for the movies. If the film
was released I saw it. My sister worked as a cashier and usher at the Vogue, Pantages and Apollo. The theaters were beond compare to any I ever been in and I still am a big movie goer. When I am on vacation there better be movie house. I am glad to see that someone
trying to do something to bring Hollywood back. Clean it up.

I know I most get over the fact that I am dissapointed in the renovation of the Egyptian. I have been a huge supporter in the revival of Hollywood Blvd. I first saw Hollywood Blvd in 1963 when the Blvd was lovely. I remember you could walk from The Chinese to the Pix and look at all the wonderful stores and restaurants and all the reserved seat attractions playing in the movie palaces along the Blvd. I watched the slow deterioration of the Blvd through the years. I remember a major revival of the Blvd in the 1980's only to have the Metro Red Line tear up the street and again the street went into decline. I supported going to the Egyptian at the time when the Fashionable thing to do was go to the Westside to see movies. I am happy that finally Hollywood Blvd is turning around but it still hasn't met critical mass yet. I think with the Egyptian and Hollywood and Highland it has helped Hollywood turn a corner on the one hand but on the other they still haven't gotten it right yet.The Arclight development on Sunset is a first class attempt to get it right,but the auditoriums are glorified screeing rooms with the exception of the Cinerama Dome.The Big success story happened in another part of Hollywood, Pacific's Grove. This complex actually captures the glamour of the Old Hollywood versus the glamour of the new Hollywood at the Arclight. The Grove is now one of the highest grossing Megaplex's in the country. I think a recent success story is The Pantages Theatre on Hollywood blvd. Disney pushed the Nederlander Organization to restores the house if they wanted The Lion King. The Pantages is now the Premiere broadway house in town. My hope before I leave this earth is to have Hollywood Blvd back where it was between the 1930's thru the early 1960's.I hope the Egyptian in time will be brought back to a point where the theatre is as magical as the picture on the screen. I make these comments because I love the history of the area and have great effection for what once was.brucec

I have one question why isn't there any mention of the monkey cages on the right hand side of the walk way up to the theater entrance also there was a wishing well at the end right of the door. They were
there late 1930's early 1940's

For those who love the Egyptian style, there are a number of theatres that have had that theme, and an entire special issue of "Marquee" magazine was devoted to them in their issue of: Vol. 29, #3; Third Qtr. 1997, and the issue features wonderful color covers of the EGYPTIANS in Milwaukee (in the form of a wonderful color painting by artist Mark Hylton of Columbus, OH) and Ogden Ut. The table of such themed theatres includes 45 examples of those now, or at one time, with us. An introduction and Prologue carry one to those ancient days, and individual articles on the Ogden and Hollywood help detail the existing examples. Many other photos are included.
PHOTOS AVAILABLE:
To obtain any available Back Issue of either "Marquee" or of its ANNUALS, simply go to the web site of the THEATRE HISTORICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA at:
www.HistoricTheatres.org
and notice on their first page the link "PUBLICATIONS: Back Issues List" and click on that and you will be taken to their listing where they also give ordering details. The "Marquee" magazine is 8-1/2x11 inches tall ('portrait') format, and the ANNUALS are also soft cover in the same size, but in the long ('landscape') format, and are anywhere from 26 to 40 pages. Should they indicate that a publication is Out Of Print, then it may still be possible to view it via Inter-Library Loan where you go to the librarian at any public or school library and ask them to locate which library has the item by using the Union List of Serials, and your library can then ask the other library to loan it to them for you to read or photocopy. [Photocopies of most THSA publications are available from University Microforms International (UMI), but their prices are exorbitant.]

Note: Most any photo in any of their publications may be had in large size by purchase; see their ARCHIVE link. You should realize that there was no color still photography in the 1920s, so few theatres were seen in color at that time except by means of hand tinted renderings or post cards, thus all the antique photos from the Society will be in black and white, but it is quite possible that the Society has later color images available; it is best to inquire of them.

Should you not be able to contact them via their web site, you may also contact their Executive Director via E-mail at: execdir@historictheatres.org
Or you may reach them via phone or snail mail at:
Theatre Historical Soc. of America
152 N. York, 2nd Floor York Theatre Bldg.
Elmhurst, ILL. 60126-2806 (they are about 15 miles west of Chicago)

Phone: 630-782-1800 or via FAX at: 630-782-1802 (Monday through Friday, 9AM--4PM, CT)

It should be mentioned also that the historic Pig & Whistle restaurant was reopened in the right hand retail space on the Blvd. (6712 Hollywood Blvd, a former pizzeria) The Egyptian courtyard can be seen to the left.
http://www.seeing-stars.com/ImagePages/PigNwhistlePhoto.shtml

Although only in name, it was a nice touch to bring back an old Hollywood landmark formerly located at 6301 Hollywood Blvd. (a picture of it appears in the book SEVERED by John Gilmore. An odd fact is that much of the original decor of this place was purchased by Micelli's and is now located in a space nearby .(Miceli's Italian Restaurant, 3653 Cahuenga Blvd W, Los Angeles)

I've been to a few screenings at the Egyptian. Considering how far gone the theater was, it's a miracle the Cinematheque saved it. The auditorium and lobby are a disappointment but the projection and sound is good. Definitely much better than a multiplex experience. The exterior and courtyard have been restored nicely and make the visit worthwihe. The El Capitan is much more impressive for interior decor but is missing its original proscenium columns ( lack of funds to recreate). Some nice landmarks on the otherwise run down and forgettable Hollywood Blvd.
I don't think it will ever thrive again unles major retailers take over more of the retail spaces. Go downtown to Broadway, it's much more interesting.

Just to answer some of the debate about how the Egyptian was redone:

If you restored the original proscenium, you would have an absurdly small screen. I'm both a lover of movie palaces and Egyptian architecture (both real and reel), and that proscenium was a beauty, but practicality is practicality.

If you brought back the auditorium sidewalls to their original look and texture, removing the new retractible structure built within, you would recreate the same problem that the Egyptian faced with the advent of talkies. As a room for amplified sound, it was lousy. No, I wasn't there back then, by I have read about the problems encountered with the auditorium every time a new innovation in presentation came along.

Although I applaud reuse of old theatres which bring them back to their aesthetic glory days with as little visible modernity as possible, it was evidenced to me that what American Cinematech did was a great technical solution. I would rather have seen the interior structural members painted in some sort of sandstone hue to blend nicely with the surviving historical elements, but that would be almost my only complaint--that, and the removal of the stained glass Egyptian panels in the lobby, and the heavy wood doors leading into the auditorium, which had striding figures on them and tall sceptre-like handles that made the act of opening the doors one of great moment.

Why can't they just make theatres like they used to?
(Actually this isn't just true of theatres: Old everything is better in quality and style such as office buildings, homes, clothing, etc.)
The egyptian still could have been restored exactly as it was minus the proscenium and that still would have been thousands of times better. One of the worst mistakes was redoing that stupid modernistic lobby they have now and that dumb steven spielberg screening room. Just look at the old pictures and you'll see what i mean.
http://catalog1.lapl.org/cgi-bin/cw_cgi?resultsScreen+9800+1+10+7

http://catalog1.lapl.org/cgi-bin/cw_cgi?resultsScreen+9800+1+10+7

I love what the American Cinemateque stands for, I love their programming and I was quite pleased to hear the announcement that they were revitalizing the historic Egyptian Theater. I had worked for the Egyptian Theater for five years during the 1980's as its projectionist.

I studied the theater's fabled past and was always in awe of the building's majesty. Even under the disinterested watch of United Artist's Theater Chain, the palace was still a beautiful place to watch films.

Walking down the restored courtyard, I was enthused. The restoration was beatifully realized. However, when I walked into the newly 'restored' Egyptian interior, I was, to put it bluntly, horrified. The design was altered so signifigantly that I have to believe that the new designers had nothing but contempt for the building's symmetry and line.

A few postings above this are tasteful and considerate when speaking of the remodel. They bring up important issues such as the seismic retrofitting and how that necessarily impacts the theater's new
look. This does not explain how the new designers came to use flimsy spiral staircases, wall 'sconces' that can only be described as arbitrary woodcut blobs and the giant, obtrusive black box parked in the middle of what used to be the auditorium's back section. Even the ceiling's famous starburst is no longer back lit, they've gone the easy route and front lit the ornamation, rendering it flat.

This is not a theater restoration, the biggest scandal in this town is that the theater was destroyed, rendered unrecognizable. The Egyptian is gone. Most people can't recall how awesome the interior used to be so the loss is nothing more than footprints in the sand.

In one of the first pamphlets the Cinemateque issued after its reopening it claimed that the redesign's goal was to bring some of the urban environment into the theater, using materials consistant with that goal. Sid Grauman built that theater to leave the city behind you. He made a 160 foot walk away from the street so you would be transported. The Cinemateque either didn't know of this or didn't care.

Your comment is right on the money, 'scenicroute'; they didn't care about anything but money, and used the EGYPTIAN'S fame as an excuse during fundraising. They may have had to adapt it, but they cared nothing at all about even a little 'restoration.' It was all a scam to grab publicity, and, sad to say, it worked.

What I find mystifying is that the Cinemateque offers monthly tours of the historic site. How do tour-guides skirt the issue of the total intrusiveness of the remodel? Worse, this tour is touted as a look at the beautiful palace and its 'restoration'. Even under the most charitable descriptions of this theater's repair, no one could possibly come away thinking that work could be categorized as restoration. If the Cinemateque wanted to alter the design, that's one thing but to do so and bask in the glory of rendering some loving restoration, forget it, that's just plain insulting to the theater's original owners and designers not to mention lying.

Even if they had to rebuild stuff they could do it in a nice style not that black box crap. And who wants the "urban environment in a movie theatre anyway? That's stupid. Maybe if it was the urban environment in the 20s when they built nice buildings, but not with the garbage they build now!

I hope someone in the know will post the name of the architect and/or design firm which led the so-called restoration. Obviously, this is a person/firm which no one interested historic theaters should employ. Knowing who did this would be helpful.

I am sure that there are people from the American Cinemateque who read this page. Could you give us the name of the perpetrators?
Who in the world would want to bring an urban environment into the Egyption? AC please explain this to us.
How do these people get a ton of money for work that rots before your very eyes?
They should be in Europe where the regular disfiguring and trashing of great works is considered a noble cause.

According to an article in the defunct electrical contractors' trade magazine, "CEENews" ( http://ceenews.com/mag/electric_bringing_hollywoods_egyptian/index.html ), of Nov. '98, the architects were: "Hodgetts & Fung", the building contractor: "Turner Construction" and the main electrical contractor: "Amelco Electric." While the article naturally deals with mostly the electrical changes, it is honest enough in some of its description, as with this: "The term 'restoration' is used loosely to describe what is taking place." Obviously, a contractor is not concerned with the aesthetics of the new or original design; its just a technical problem to them. The article does contain one 1946 photo of the street front in black&white, but nothing else.

Having said that most of us are disappointed with this lesser "restoration" it must be acknowledged that it would have been impossible for the new owner to use the original structure if it were simply restored to 1922 appearance. Not only were earthquake retrofits needed and demanded, but the building was not to become a museum, but a modern, working cinemas. Given this fact, we can extend them more slack, however disappointing the modernistic adaptations to the original are. Yes, the sun disk grille on the ceiling should have been back-lit again, and likely they could have reproduced the original massive doors, but modern day costs are often prohibitive of bringing back all we were able to build when labor was a mere 25 cents per hour in the early 'Twenties. I don't like the modern adaptations either, but at least enough of the original is still standing that one can view photos and see just how what they could have existed in that building, and needless to say, had this not been done, the building likely would be only rubble today. They could at least post large photos of the original inside the lobby, but this might prove more of an embarrassment than a compliment, though still a fine service to the public. The Theatre Historical Soc. has many fine, vintage photos. ( www.HistoricTheatres.org )

As to bringing an "urban environment" into the EGYPTIAN, one must remember the strident sounds of such movements as "Relevance" and "Urbanism" into the social fabric of our "Diversity" day and age. To be merely artistic is not enough these days, with White people being made to feel ever greater guilt for their supposed errors in not promoting the ascendance of the minorities in what is often poorly described as a "melting pot" society. Much of the $21 million cost was born by public funds from HUD, the Community Redevelopment Agency, and others, so there was heavy pressure on the owner to make the place acceptable to the 'man on the street' whose tax dollars were going to this elite project in an area apparently mostly inhabited by those of lesser incomes -- or not incomes at all.

Jim, I have the impression from others on this site that there have been restorations in other cinemas in LA that have been done with great sensitivity and respect for the original architecture and design. I assume these as well needed to conform to contemporary structural requirements.
Perhaps your final paragraph brings us closer to what was going on. White guilt is very much the rage these days. Condescension and disdain for so much of western culture is a badge that many people wear very proudly. When charges of elitism are made rest assured that the accusers are often the worst offenders.

I talked to the foreman of the Egyptian renovation when it was in progress and I was dismayed his lack of knowledge about the theatre. I walked through the theatre with a hard hat and was shocked to see what they were doing. Of all the movie palaces on Hollywood Blvd the Egyptian should have been the easier restoration. The interior was the least ornate but had a simple beauty even with the Giant Curved Screen. The projectionist who worked the Egyptian said it best,the theatre looked better even when UA lost interestin the theatre.There have been many theatres restored around the world in a lot worse shape than the Egyptian. When the City of LA gives Millions of dollars toward an historic renovation maybe there needs to be better guidelines. The current auditoium is not beautiful it is bland at best. When UA redid the current Festival in Westwood and called it the Egyptian few years ago it looked a lot better and more Egyptian than the current Egyptian in Hollywood.What a dissapointment when someone takes a tour of the famous Hollywood Egyptian Theatre. American Cinemateque puts on an excellent show and draws an intelligent crowd from all over LA to the Egyptian for people who love film and for this I applaud them. American Cinemateque should take note of our comments. I think they have a success on there hands but it would have been more successful if the theatre had been a little more magical,like the Castro in San Francisco.brucec

Bruce, et al, often in a government funded "restoration" anything added to the building specifically may NOT match the original fabric. The current philosophy being that to "make it match" is a dis-honest attempt to fool people into believing that the additional material is actually original.

Certainly there is merit in the spirit of the mandate. Unfortunately, in execution, too often the designers make this their excuse to insert incongruous elements into an historic building and trumpet their anachronistic and egocentric designs as being intellectully superior to "banal historicist recreations" because they are intentionally ironic.

I.M. Pei's glass pyramids at the Louvre are an example. (It's not only the US which promotes this philosophy.) There are plenty of other examples, the Egyptian apparently being one.

Of course it is possible to embrace the spirit AND provide a beautiful restoration. The Sistine Chapel's recent restoration was extrodinarily sensitive to both the requirements for clear deliniation between new and old material while at the same time not distracting the viewer by "ironic" intrusions.

So, I repeat my question from August 6: who was the architect that led the renovation of the Egyptian? In my opinion, this person should NOT be working on movie palaces. That name should be made public. There are plenty of restoration architects that DO know how to handle the demands of public funding and are proactively respectful of movie palace heritage. Their names should also be made public.

Best wishes all -

Will Dunklin says: " So, I repeat my question from August 6: who was the architect that led the renovation of the Egyptian?" If you will write comments as good as yours, Mr. Dunklin, may I suggest you also carefully read the others here? Just three Comments previous to yours is mine of the 7th wherein I identify the architect of the "restoration."

Jim and others, apologies. I did indeed miss the names listed in Jim's excellent post from August 7. It appears I spent too much time writing and not enough time reading. Jim, many thanks for (1) providing the names and your source and (2) reinforcing that information with the post from this morning. Your good-natured slap on the wrist is accepted as deserved. I usually read Jim's comments from top to bottom as they are among the best on the site.

Now, I'm off to see what more I can learn about that company.

Best wishes

Images from the renovation architects Hodgetts and Fung website may be seen here:

http://www.hplusf.com/1-arch-egy/egy.html

I personally find this sort of "re-invention" of a historic building appalling. As a design professional, I actively oppose such work and can and do offer alternate design solutions to achieve modern solutions to modern operation, safety and structural requirements.

At least the Egyptian still stands and these changes may one day be removed.

Will, thanks for that link, the photos are truly horrific. This firm are genuinely proud of their achievement. Its hard to believe that given the history of the Egyptian in Hollywood and the position it held for over 60 years that they can think the are doing everyone a great service.Did they actaully see any reference photos for the building in its heydey?

I know its years too late, way after the dodgy restoration has finished but these architects were clearly the wrong choice. Just read this copy of their "statement" lifted from their website...

"The creation of an appropriate design is a search guided more by rules of conduct than those of appearance. In our work we attempt to frame the goals of each project in terms which are sympathetic to the user, the place, and ultimately the planet. If we have a
prescription it is that of efficiency and performance, two words which are unusual only in their exclusion from the day-to-day world
of architecture, and their near universal application to the world
of design.Our work is correspondingly diverse, marching to no easily identified drummer but, we hope, deeply committed to providing useful and satisfying facilities for human transactions, whatever they may be".

Craig Hodgetts, Ming Fung

No what does all that crap mean? Ultimately I guess it means we lose another icon.....but perhaps not forever.

Like Mr. Faulkner, I was at first equally ready to 'stand on their chests' and bellow at them for so lame a job, but then I was reminded of the old dictum: 'He who pays the piper calls the tune.' While Messrs. Hodgetts and Fung are clearly NOT preservation specialists, one wonders just how much of the blame belongs to the Cinematheque? Did the architects advise conservative approaches to retain most building character, and were overruled? To be as charitable as possible to them, it is their job to accomplish the client's wishes, and clearly the client in this case wanted a modern projection facility with 3 screens within an existing single screen theatre; short of building more screening rooms/cinemas onto the building, there was no option but to subdivide the available space. Yes, I am still inclined to think that it could have been done more sympathetically, but then it is obvious that not everyone shares our love of the movie palace in general, and this EGYPTIAN in particular. No, I will never recommend these architects based on this job, and likely neither will any other preservation-minded project consider them either, but as they say: 'money talks' (or "SCREAMS" as says a character in "Hello Dolly") which may mean that these men were inexperienced in this specialized area of architecture, but put out the lowest bid. In a sense, you get what you pay for. And perhaps even the brass of the Cinematheque are indeed seething behind the scenes, but what can they do? Sue the architects? To what end? Demolish the "improvements" and start over? Hardly. No, this "restoration" will now stand as an example to frighten future generations as to how badly a "restoration" can be done, even if it is as they say in their text quoted by Mr. Faulkner: "If we have a prescription it is that of efficiency and performance, two words which are unusual only in their exclusion from the day-to-day world." You will notice that their twofold "prescription" does NOT include aesthetics! Modern day architects are actually rarely qualified to restore historic period structures, since they are now mostly educated in variances of engineering and to become worshipers of 'Le Corbusier' or other demigods as denounced in that landmark book: "From Bauhaus to Our House" by Tom Wolfe (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/055338063X/qid=1093092642/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/104-4962368-6877528?v=glance&s=books ), perhaps the most perceptive analysis of the pollution of modern architecture ever written, and my review of it is the 15th down on onto the next page. This is a short read that should not be missed!

I assume that the members of the American Cinemateque had no interest in the Egyption as a theater but simply as a facility. They ok'd the plans of the architect fully knowing their philosophy and then proceeded to fund accordingly. I am glad that Will brings up the IM Pei pyramid at the Louvre. A beautiful structure in and of itself but a disaster in its positioning. Of course the French will say "But that is the point." To which I respond that the Parisians are doing to Paris architecturally in a fit of anti western guilt what the germans wanted to do to it during WW 2.
I would have loved to have seen Paris before the pyramid, the Tour Montparnasse and La Defense.
Before I go on about this there must be someone from the American Cinemateque who reads this site. Please explain why you would have done this to Sid Grauman's Egyption.
Maybe you would consider a position producing Wagner in Europe?

Thanks to Jim Rankin (fellow THS member) for bringing up Tom Wolfe's "From Bauhaus to Our House." I read this enlightening book nearly two decades ago before going to art school, and applauded all the way through. I recommend it for everyone who seeks to MAKE THE PUBLIC HAPPY by venturing into any field of design, but particularly architecture. The Bauhaus has a valid place in the history of architecture, but it was embraced far too widely, mainly, I think, because it made it possible to build "fine" buildings cheaply. Personally, as an artist of stained glass and occasional mural work (and some theatre decorative restoration both professionally and as a volunteer), I resent the Bauhaus Movement for putting thousands of sculptors and decorators out of business, both past and future. I have long thought of the Bauhaus/"International Style" as the ultimate aesthetic slap against multiculturalism, in that a skyscraper in Rio de Janiero looks like a skyscraper in Cairo and looks like one in New York--no references to local/regional/national history or ethnic influence whatsoever.

To get back a little bit toward the subject of the Egyptian, I must say that Egypt itself, while blighted abundantly by the Bauhaus influence, is experiencing a strong and prolific movement in creating architecture which reflects that country's history, both Islamic and Pharaonic. Many examples are beautifully designed, though there are some oddball examples as well.

Found this link and thought it might be of interest.

http://cgi.cnn.com/STYLE/9812/07/egyptian.theatre/

fantastic i would love to visit.

I was one of the people who posted negative reactions to the 'restored' Egyptian but I need to clarify my stance. Yes, it's great that the theater is still open and vital but it did not have to be altered by a group that claims to be about film preservation. On top of that, the Cinemateque boasts that they restored this theater, it's not a restoration, it's a remodel. Don't advertise something you never accomplished or ever attempted. As a side note, I was a projectionist at the Hollywood Egyptian for five years. The sound quality was (when kept up by the notoriously lazy UA) was superb. When we ran 70mm ("Return of the Jedi"/ "Oklahoma") it was astounding. The theater didn't have the echo or loss of clarity some concrete palaces suffer.

scenicroute - I agree 100%. Could you contact me directly: got a projection question regarding another theatre here on CT.
Will

Is this the Egyptian Theater that was built by Sid Graumman, or was that demolished? I plan to visit the LA area and, considering it's entertainment history, it would be dumb not to visit a picture palace.

Yes, this is Sid Graummans Egyptian. I would like to add a couple of thoughts on this theater, if

I may. I was very thrilled when I saw the Egyptian was to be "restored" a few years ago and saw a wall at the entrance and construction workers busily working behind it.

In March of this year I finally came back and stopped by to see what was done. In the courtyard. I found the business on the left side of the entrance was newly reconstructed, but empty and a "For Lease" sign in the window. Though the last time I saw the theater exterior was in 1998, there was already graffiti staining 2 walls. I was very happy to see the "Pig N' Whistle" restaurant replicated, and it looks like a great job on that.... but the entrance to the theater itself seemed empty and lifeless. I still have NO idea what Cinemateque is but also not compelled to find out more about it other than to have scanned their confusing website and scratch my head about their "mission".

I was raised in Hollywood in the 1950s and remember the theater when it had a massive neon sign over the sidewalk and many potted plants along the walkway to the elegant entrance. I don't advocate replacing the 50s neon by any means, but it just seems to me the romance and beauty is missing from this remodelling job that was there even in the 50s. A restoration to it's 20s appearance would be ideal, but if not economically possible, perhaps some nice potted plants or a coffee kiosk in a 20s theme would warm this place up and make it more atmospheric and bring some much needed life to the courtyard.

Needless to say, I have little interest in seeing the stripped-down interior. I love "urban", but only in the historic context of what historic Hollywood was and COULD BE once more. This seems more "urban" in the current strip mall sense... and there are thousands of those types of spaces without making our historic sites look like them as well. What happened to our culture and history?

Thanks Christian

I found an early view of the Egyptian Theater Courtyard taken in 1924. The photo shows the space as almost a carnival-like atmosphere ... certainly entertaining ...

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater3/00015761.jpg

I don't live around Hollywood, but I am planning to visit someone there soon. Is this theater still a twin, or did they return it to single screen during the so called "restoration"?

It seems clear in the theater description above that there are TWO screens in this theater. The main auditorium and a small screening room taking over part of the lobby. The theater itself is a huge disppointment to visit but the Cinemateque is a fantastic organisation promoting the appreciation and preservation of motion pictures. Take a quick look and go downtown instead to Broadway to see true old movie palaces in original condition.

Thanks edward 1

Hello Edward1, Thanks for the note about Cinamateque. I went back to their website for an hour and had no idea the organization was about preservation and presenting classic film. I had the impression they were about "experimental film making". At the time I visited the Egyptian, it did not seem there was anyone around who could tell me what the organization was about or doing. I was there around noon, yet the courtyard was so austere, unoccupied and uninviting. Cinemateque seems very worthwhile and I will see if someone can tell me more. Thanks so much for inspiring me to take a second look!

Geez! I mean, they could've saved the huge wall in front, but .......

There have been a number of marquees above the entrance to the Egyptian.... here are some great photos to show how dramatically those signs altered the entrance ....

1924 - small vertical sign on right wall...
http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014533.jpg

1930 - larger vertical on left wall and broad electric marquee over entrance to courtyard...
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics39/00039150.jpg

1955 - larger curved neon "wall" in the art-moderne style....
http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014528.jpg

1969 - the horizontal neon stripe tubes were removed after the 60s...
http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014548.jpg

1989 - the theater had turned into a tri-plex at this time...
http://jpg3.lapl.org/pics18/00028678.jpg

Christian,

The Cinematheque is generally only open in the evenings on weekdays. On weekends they offer tours, a special documentary "Forever Hollywood" and then normally two movies. Their programs are usually themed (Film Noir, etc.), and whenever possible they get people involved in those movies to come by for a Q&A session. These can be classic old movies or stuff that has recently been released. They seem to rely heavily on volunteers; if you spoke to someone and didn't get a clear answer about the Cinematheque's mission, it's possible they're just helping out to get access to the cool movies.

As for the Egyptian itself, edward1 is correct that it's a disappointment. Partly because it has been greatly reduced in size, but also because of improvements to correct acoustic problems. The beautiful walls and ceiling, for the most part, have been covered with panels that leave the place feeling like a black box in one of them newfangled multiplexes. But it appears that they have been preserved, which is good.

If you can get past that, then the Egyptian is still a good place to see movies because of their programming. They've also just reopened the Aero in Santa Monica, which is closer to where I live, so I give the Cinematheque a thumbs up.

Thanks so much Don, for the kind words about the theater! I will look further into the group. It's funny that I remember some of the old theaters had a strange echo-like sound to them... but it's one of the things that I miss the most in today's theaters. I wonder if Cinemathque has considered that the classic films just sound all the more authentic with the accoustics the way they were? At least I think so.

The Egyptian has special meaning to me. I was only a few months old early in 1951, when my mom took me there. She went to see a film premier. She has always been a big movie fan. She arrived and realized she HAD to use the ladies room. She found a beautifully dressed red head with another lady sitting in the waiting room outside the door (I wonder if it is still there?). Mom asked the lady if she could me for a few minutes. She knew it would be alright because the lady was a pregnant Lucille Ball. Lucy said "of course" and when my mom came back, chatted with her about her own condition. Lucy said she was so excited about the baby. The baby turned out to be Lucille Arnaz, born later that year... and I wrote to her about 3 years ago. She sent me a reply and said it was a great story and published my letter on her website. Of course, later around the age of 5, 6 and 7... I remember sitting in the theater and looking up at the beautiful sun ornament fully lit and glowing above the curtain. It all stays with you.

The Egyptian is definitely on my list when I visit Hollywood next month. Thank God for this group. At least they are on the right track and have not destroyed anything and the theater may one day be fully restored. Thanks again.

Here is an old postcard showing the entrance area of the Egyptian.

G.A.DeL.: Terrific post card. It's an amazing building.

Does anyone have pictures of this theatre when it had its D-150 screen installed?

I have some shots of the auditorium with the D-150 installed in one of my files on the theatre.

http://imagesrvr.epnet.com/embimages/imh/mptv/full/mptv56480040.jpg

Source: MPTV
Caption: Hollywood and Los Angeles Landmarks Egyptian Theater Marquee: "My Fair Lady" 1964

And just think - it would play the Egyptian for a total of 68 weeks!

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

What is a "D-150" screen?

"And just think - it would play the Egyptian for a total of 68 weeks!"


We are lucky now if a film can play 68 days.

The D-150 process was used only on two films from Fox "The Bible" & "Patton". In the exhibition world the Dimension 150 company had an idea to market an All-Purpose projection system to theatres. The system provided aspect ratios suitable for D-150, Todd-AO, Ultra-Panavision, CinemaScope, Widescreen 1.85 and other projection formats. The theatre would be retrofitted with a large curved screen and in most cases an Ampex 8 channel stereo sound system for full magnetic sound. The screen at the Egyptian Theatre was 90 feet wide, when opened to the fullest masking setting. You also had to pay a licensing fee to present your film in the full D-150 screen, like what MGM and a few other studios did with Cinerama.
That is just a few highlights of the system.

William: Kind thanks for this interesting description. Could it handle VistVision in the horizontal format? Did Ampex provide the speakers and amps or just the magnetic reproducer electronics? Altec--of the some era--did a fair amount of work for movie theaters, both speakers and electronics. Both provided expensive, top-of-the-line equipment. A church I attended had an Altec monophonic amp (to drive headsets for the hearing impaired!!),an early solid state unit. It weighed a ton, was rack mounted, and cost a bundle. t.

No the Egyptian was not equipped for VistaVision horizontal format. I believe only the first two films released from Paramount were available in the horizontal format.

My grandfather, Jean Klossner was on the original Meyer & Holler construction crew that built the Egyptian, Chinese, Mayan and American theaters (among others) ..... After the opening of the Chinese, he performed the footprint ceremonies for over 40 years. He said Sid Grauman always wanted to open a complete chain, each theater with a different theme .... So different than the "Multiplex Giants" of today ......

A Wurlitzer organ Opus 505 Style 260 was installed in Grauman's Egyptian Theater on 12/30/1921.

Here is a picture of the theater and the Pig 'n Whistle, which has now been restored. The food is good, but a little pricey for me.

http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics39/00039150.jpg

Here are a few other interesting photos of the Egyptian, from the LA Library. Benny Rubin was a comedian who had a career of almost seventy years in film, radio and television.

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014538.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014536.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014540.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014534.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014532.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014544.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014541.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014848.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014531.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater3/00015675.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater3/00015762.jpg

http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007814.jpg

http://jpg2.lapl.org/theater1/00014847.jpg

Does anyone have any info on the Fox Egyptian in San Diego?

http://www.oac.cdlib.org/affiliates/images/csdhi/kt0290182t/hi-res/7031.jpg

Hi Ken,

To see what the San Diego Egyptian ORIGINALLY looked like when it was first built in 1926 go to.....

http://www.sandiegohistory.org/journal/92spring/images/p105.jpg

The San Diego Egyptian facade (in slightly streamlined form) is being retained for a condominium development being completed on Park Boulevard. There is a clear and large artist's rendering of the building available on the following link......

http://www.loopnet.com/Attachments/5/6/D/56DA5CCD-79D3-4E08-BA0C-B28C0FA37AAE_or.jpg

Theater lovers were not happy to lose the beautiful theater, but at least we have the facade.. that's more than most developments are doing.

William---
Curious about the eight channel D-150 sound system. How was that configured? I know Todd-Ao had six channels, five behind the screen and one surround and three projector Cinerama had seven, five behind the screen and two surrounds.... but eight channels? Was this actually part of the soundtrack on the print, a separate interlocked sound system (like Cinerama) or was this just some kind of enhancement that worked only in playback. Thanks.

Pretty theater, I like! I was wondering if the premiere of
Vampire Hunter D: Bloodlust was shown here?

While I appreciate what the Cinematheque is doing at this theatre to preserve classic cinema, I must say (as I've already said in other places around this website) that this theatre has no business hosting a 70MM film festival! I've been to a couple of 70MM film screenings here since the Cinematheque took over (My Fair Lady, Ben-Hur, Lawrence of Arabia) and was very disappointed. here Only 2 theatres in Hollywood have the skills to run 70MM as it was originally intended: The Dome and the Chinese.

Here is an interesting article about the Egyptian:
http://tinyurl.com/ppar7

does anyone know how wide the original screen was back before those columns of the proscenium were demolished to make way for the D-150 screen?

Chris don't forget the Pantages Theatre.

William: When was the last time 70 mm was run at the Pantages?

"Tora! Tora! Tora!" (late 1970/early 1971).

Thank you Michael. Shortly after I posted my question, I searched in the "from script to dvd" site, and found my answer!

It is interesting to note that the Egyptian ran a 70 mm engagement of "Tora! Tora! Tora!" the following year (1971) as well.

JSA

Michael's right to a point. Yes that was the last legit 70MM engagement open to the public at that theatre. But the 70MM equipment was removed when the theatre went to stage only shows in the late 70's. During the early 90's the theatre was re-equipped to run 70MM again. During that time of the reinstall we ran a few titles after hours. The reinstall was to re-equip the theatre only for future use. The after hours screenings were for tech work and not open to the public. But it was fun to run that booth one last time.

Thanks William! It's good to know that the theater has 70 mm capability. One can only hope that someday the general public may enjoy a few 70 mm presentations at the theatre.

Regards,
JSA

This really belongs on the Pantages page, but I will note that theater was further restored a few years back. Merely because William says that in the early 1990's it was re-equipped to run 70 mm doesn't mean the projectors are still there.

I wander if they were thinking premieres or 1st run films? Even if only once a year for Last Remaining Seats, it would be wonderful to have the chance to see a film (35 or 70) in the Pantages. The Egyptian seems to have an excellent film program, but it isn't the movie palace history tells us it was. The Pantages is still a movie palace with lots of glamour.

The Norelco's are still there at the Panatages.

The Los Angeles Public Library says that this photograph is of an "unidentified theatre", but the five aisles, the enclosed space where the balcony would normally be and the Egyptian decor clearly identify this as a rare early photo of the interior of Grauman's Egyptian seen from behind the orchestra pit.

That's the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood.

There was a nice view of the Egyptian circa 1974 in the fourth episode of Kolchak-the Night Stalker, season 1.

I've always been impressed by the design of this ad for the epic "Hawaii":

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

Scan of reproduced old postcard of the Egyptian Theater forecort:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdEgyptiancard.jpg

Visited the Egyptian for the first time yesterday for the taping of the pre Oscar episode of "Film Week", what a treat. Hollywood Blvd still has that magic feeling to it.

Here is an interesting 1923 photo from the LAPL, not so much for the theater but for the view of Hollywood Blvd in its early days. No highrises.
http://jpg1.lapl.org/pics16/00007790.jpg

Advertised in 1923 as the Hollywood Egyptian Theater.

Can anyone tell me if the Lucille Ball movie "The Magic Carpet" (1951) premiered here? If so, what the date of the premier was? Thanks so much!

Last movie I saw here was Freddy's Dead in 3D. I also saw Cinderella that was playing here as well in the 80s. (It had it's opening for one of the Exorcist movies (3 perhaps) I was so excited when it was restored. But the beauty of the exterior though beautiful couldn't compare to the interior which was totally breathtaking, my heart sunk in my chest when I saw the final product at a screening of bus stop, I couldn't believe it, it was ruined sad to say. The splendor that the interior once was, was completely lost...

From last week:
http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k79/hollywood90038/hwdEgyptianJuly200701.jpg

The photobucket link didn't work. Can you post it again?

The problem with the lack of people knowing what is playing at the New Egyptian. When I visit Hollywood I walk past the front gates, many out of town tourists go by don't even have a clue of the inside. The last time a few weeks ago the main neon was only part on. The fountain long shut off because of leaks and the dirty courtyard was bad news, now the ice cream place on the left is gone. When they did the bad remodel why did't someone put a old type marquee on the front to let people know what is going on at the theatre? The inside has no showmanship. No curtains on the screen (someone from our group THS offered the Egyptian a set of curtains,they refused) I look up today at the ceiling, and always tell the candy manager why don't you put some blue or red lights up in the only art left up on the ceiling, he just shrugs. I'ts sad with a little color lights during the film or a nice waterfall curtain and slite curve of the screen they can bring back some showmanship. The place is going broke. Bring in some new blood into management.

Bunch of slackers over there aren't they? A real shame too because I would certainly go to the Egyptain Ruins if they had some interesting Q&A screenings as those kind of events have pretty much dried up at Arclight.

How can a "restored" theater not have curtains?

The thing is that they did not "restore" the theatre in the proper sense of the word. Rather, they built a modern theatre within the restored shell of the Egyptian.

ken mc: I deleted all my photos from this website.

hollywood, why'd you delete them? They seem so tantalizing, both here and on other pages.

I deleted them because of tacky comments left by snotty NYC'ers and motion picture industry "know-it-alls".

Can anyone tell me what films premiered here at the Egyptian between October, 1950 and July, 1951? I would really appreciate it. Thanks in advance!!

Here is an undated photo:
http://tinyurl.com/2lrpml

Here is a 1950 ad from the LA Times:
http://tinyurl.com/23le8u

Here is a 1925 ad:
http://tinyurl.com/2zzhoz

It doesn't appear that very much earthquake retrofitting was done on this building. In the photo after the earthquake, you can see the support beams. In the recent photo, you can see the outline of the support beams. How safe is this??
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/hwdEgyptianreareastwalls19942007.jpg
http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/hwdEgyptianextrearwallOct112007001.jpg

That's flat out ridiculous! Comments above including Jim Rankin mention that retrofitting was needed and done. Unless you are an engineer, architect, etc. it seems less than necessary to question this aspect.

Howard, sorry, I missed something. Would you fill out your comment from 10-11-07?

The building is made of bricks and certain buildings had to get earthquake retro fitted. That was what Los Angeles county said. Mann Theatres retro fitted the nearby Fox and Hollywood theatres and did alittle work on the Chinese's stagehouse. The Rialto and Cameo Theatres on Broadway had to be refitted too. The old Warner Beverly Hills was being used a concert venue at the time and needed tobe retrofitted but the owner found it wound cost around 12 million to do it. The Egyptian Theatre needed the retrofit because it was damaged from the Northridge quake and the city owned the property.

Yes, I understand about retrofitting. I don't know what Howard is angry about.

I think what Howard is saying is don't question the structural integrity of the building based on what you see unless you are an engineer and understand such things at a professional and technical level.

Thanks, Mark for your answer which is what I was thinking. A major project like this didn't get completed without earthquake retrofitting, and government oversight. There is no need for any blogger (without engineering expertise)to scare away audiences by implying the theater isn't safe.

Enjoy the new Introduction.

Howard, the Todd-AO install (1955) fact is wrong. The demolition of the elaborate original Egyptian proscenium arch, happened with the 1969 install of the D-150 screen. The Todd-AO install put the screen in front of the old proscenium arch, like the Rivoli Theatre in NYC. And the projection booth (box) is not called a suite.

William, I know that in American English, it is a projection booth. I don't know whether in British English (where Ken Roe is) if it is a suite, but eventually we will likely adjust that since this cinema is American.

I saw different reports on when the destruction was done. We will review that.

Presumably the rest looks good?

Howard, the rest looks good. In British cinema it's a Box.

In the Todd-AO install they did not take out the stage and proscenium. Just like the Cinerama install at the Warner Hollywood Theatre. In the D-150 install they when almost to the back wall of the stagehouse.

William,
I didn't characterize it here as a "suite" and know it is a BOOTH, however, the original upstairs booth at the Boyd has several rooms including a bathroom. It does sound like a suite!

Howard, I was just saying suite was the wrong word for it. All the theatres for many years all had bathrooms for the projectionist. The El Capitian only has a sink in the booth.

Oh, it sounds like the sink at El Capitan has too many uses!

Hi. Came upon this site on accident. Can't stop reading it... Briefly wish to share with you something you might appreciate.....
I saw The Empire Strikes Back on the day it opened on May 21, 1980. As I'm sure most of you know, the place to see it was at The Egyptian. My mom got my brother and I out of school early that day. We had, again as anyone alive at the time will recall, waited 3 years to see that movie... And while it wasn't playing at the Chinese Theatre, at least it was on Hollywood Blvd, and at least there was still a line around the block for many many days ( weeks? ). So, the excitement was there just plenty for an 8th grader like me.... We got there around 2 in the afternoon, and by 4 there were thousands more people ( or at least it seemed so from the front of the line) . We had famous people in line with us with their families and kids.. Everyone was talking.. Hoping it would be good. An atmosphere of.. well.. its hard to describe. If you have ever been in a line for a Star Wars move on the opening day, then you know... Lord of the Rings was similar...
Anyway.. we went in... and watched the movie... The entire audience roared and clapped when the movie began. Cheered when we first saw Luke, Han, R2, etc.. all for the first time.. The ENTIRE audience actually gasped when Luke flew out head over first through the window... etc. etc... Clearly, it was an amazing experience, and a huge part of that was because of the theatre we were all in.
I now live in Orlando, Florida. I saw Return of the Jedi here. Obviously, not an experience equal to the one of 3 years earlier... So.. Right then and there (1983), I told myself that if George Lucas made the rest of the Star Wars movies, I would go to Hollywood to see them.
Which I did. 3 times. Took my ma and brother, too.
so.
Yes. I, on occasion, fly all the way to Hollywood just to see a damn movie....
The Egyptian of 1980, for me, was that great.

And then I remembered something... as I was reading al the stuff on this page...
I remembered that I had the little paperback novelization of The Empire Strikes Back with me on that day ....and I remembered that I kept my ticket stub from that day in that book....
so.. I just now went looking for the book on one of my book shelves..
and i found the book..
and i opened the book...
wow.

Here is an LA Times ad dated 5/21/80:
http://tinyurl.com/24543v

Its to bad the Egytian wasn't given a beautiful restoration like many of the restored films that are screened at the theatre. There was a nice tribute to Julis Roberts and American Cinematheque in the Friday October 12 issue in Variety which also talked about the historic Egyptian. I miss the giant curve screen which I saw many films through the years. The current screen is a bit small though the picture quality is superb. The Egyptian is a major let down in its current condition and doesn't look anything like a movie palace. Im surprised that they charge money for tours of this theatre. Can you imagine tourists who come from Cities like St. Louis which has the Fox theatre and then take the tour of the Hollywood Egyptian in its present condition. I have stated this before that cities large and small have restored theatres that look a lot more majestic than the current Egyptian such a shame. I love there programming and they have helped Hollywood Blvd slowly come back from its seedy state from a few years ago.brucec

William,
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/21875/
There's another British fellow writing "projection suite" so maybe that is a proper British term for projection booth (as per your comment above)?

Brucec,
I admire your love for historic theaters. I also respect what the late Jim Rankin wrote above. It is worthwhile reading again.

I was interested by the comment some way up that this theater cannot show a 70mm film well; any further explanation would be welcome, as i might make a trip to their 70mm fest at some point. Thanks!

I haven't seen 70mm there, but the comment was the screen isn't huge enough and some people don't like the decor of the place. Having enjoyed a 35mm classic at the Egyptian, I'd ignore the decor critics. If the film is a giant classic epic like Lawrence of Arabia, then perhaps the screen size might be disappointing if you've seen the film already on a huge screen. If you haven't already seen the film, or it isn't an "epic" then don't miss it. There are 70mm prints shown that won't be shown elsewhere in the area.

I saw Baraka at the Egyptian and was impressed with picture and sound. Its not the Cinerama Dome but the new screens proximity to the audience makes it seem rather large, especially when opened for 70mm.

Macbear: If your main goal is to see a 70 mm film that you like, more than likely you will not be dissapointed. Other than the fact that you staring at a blank screen before the show, once things get going it's not bad. But the Egyptian in its current state is not remotely close to the grand palace it used to be.

JSA

I don't think this link has been posted before. Click on the thumbnails to expand them.

Here is an interior photo, circa 1922, from Ben Hall's book "The Best Remaining Seats":
http://tinyurl.com/24tvja

Here are some March 2008 photos:
http://tinyurl.com/2638qz
http://tinyurl.com/2gyh6l

From today:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/EgyptianApr24200802.jpg

So what is the Polish Film Festival?

Polish Film Festival.

This is a circa 1923 view of the Egyptian Theater usherettes.

The painted scene on the wall behind the usherettes in the photo linked to the previous post was restored and can still be enjoyed today. It is on the left wall of the courtyard just before the pillared portico. What is interesting about it is that this is the only scene in the whole building which was completely copied from an actual piece of Pharaonic art, although with some artistic license. The original piece is considerably smaller, and is carved on a slab of stone. It was done during the reign of Pharaoh Thutmose III in the 18th Dynasty--he was an ancestor of Tutankhamun--and depicts Thutmose twice in the company of the gods Horus and Set. The heiroglyphs are all legible to those who can read such things and include, in cartouches, the name Thutmose, and the name Menkheperra, the latter a ceremonial name given to him on his accession to the throne. It is the name which has the scarab in it. Other heiroglyphs include the common titles "Lord of the Two Lands," "Ruler of Upper and Lower Egypt," "Living eternally," etc.

It should be noted that in ken mc's 2005 post linking to photos of the Egyptian, there are three which are of other theaters. There is one exterior shot of the Egyptian in Long Beach, and the last photo is of its interior. There is one other interior shot of some other Egyptian (maybe Pasadena?) also. The corbelled proscenium and sunburst ceiling grille of Grauman's were imitated many, many times in subsequent Egyptian style movie palaces. The sunburst grille even appears on a small scale in Oakland's Parkway Theatre, still extant and running movies.

Here is a marquee shot from this past Friday night

I've been waiting for what seems like forever to find a movie to get me over to the Egyptian (sorry, but the homosexual cinema of the Ukraine isn't exactly in my demographic). Got to go to the premiere of The Clone Wars today and after all of the doom and gloom in this thread I was fearing the worst. Much to my great surprise, I really enjoyed the theater. No, it doesn't have the opulence or grandeur of the Chinese, El Capitan, or even the Cinerama Dome, but I found it to be quite a bit better than just a typical "screening room." Now I certainly understand the complaints of this theater not being restored to match its original design and that's something I can't argue with. It's going to come down to personal preference... the pre-show presentation versus the feature presentation. As for screen size, I would say the screen is comparable to the screen at the Village. I found it quite large and certainly more so than the average multiplex. Does it match the size of the theater's former incarnation? Probably not, but it's certainly larger than the screen at the El Capitan. I also found the sight-lines in the theater to be excellent. It's kind of half traditional/half stadium, with another half devoted to the balcony (yup, three-halfs). I would actually say that the screen is bit TOO high (although it ensures unobstructed views for everyone).

I think that in our passion and appreciation for these theaters, we sometimes forget that the films are supposed to be the reason we're there in the first place. While I can appreciate and mourn the loss of what this theater might have once been, I have a deeper appreciation for what this theater currently represents. After the loss of The National, this hits home especially hard. This is a state of the art facility that has reminders of its history everywhere you look. It's a wonderful place to see great films in a town that has more than its fair share. Go just about anywhere else in the country and see if you can find something as good as The Egyptian, even in its current form. I will certainly have no hesitation visiting this theater again and again (including next week during the double feature of Alien and Aliens).

Cliff the Beauty of the Egyptian was destroyed during the latest renovation. It was quite a shock to see "Gilda" in the current state of this theatre. I saw many films here through the years and was even a flagship house for lazy United Artists during the roadshow years and later. Sound and picture are superb but it was awesome during the roadshow years. Remember "Ben Hur" played here for two years.brucec

Spirit of St. Louis premiere
http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/310/2032/1600/air2.0.jpg

Here are some October 2008 photos:
http://tinyurl.com/4rwm4w
http://tinyurl.com/4tvdhr
http://tinyurl.com/49g6tp

Here is a 1928 photo from the USC archive:
http://tinyurl.com/49zscu

I love the postcard photo of the entrance to the Egyptian Theatre. How cool!!

Here is a photo of the marquee taken last night. Bonus photo is the creepy Scientology Christmas party next door.
http://tinyurl.com/5q4xum
http://tinyurl.com/6q96ua

Theater banner:
http://tinyurl.com/6aww52

Hollywood Boulevard, December 2008:
http://tinyurl.com/5h5ov5

The Egyptian's marquee can be seen on the left in this 1955 photo from the LAPL:
http://jpg1.lapl.org/00078/00078766.jpg

It's disaster movie week at the Egyptian! Friday night is Poseidon Adventure, the original. Saturday is Earthquake in Sensurround. The rest of the films are Towering Inferno, China Syndrome, Black Sunday and Hindenburg. Go on the American Cinematheque site for more info and tickets.

Isn't one purpose of the related website link above to give the movie schedule?

I suppose, if you were prescient enough to know about the series. Otherwise it might come and go, and you would miss Earthquake, one of my favorites.

Give it a rest!

Here and here are photos of the Egyptian Theatre that I took last week.

Sorry, here's the other photo...

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b79/theseos/SDC10434.jpg

Here is a 1926 ad from the LA Times:
http://tinyurl.com/c93arc

Premiere night in 1922, from the LAPL:
http://jpg3.lapl.org/pics28/00063857.jpg

Here are photos from 1980 and 1983:
http://tinyurl.com/chwoco
http://tinyurl.com/dhmdrt

Here is an April 1970 ad from the LA Times:
http://tinyurl.com/qj3ndc

Some recent exterior photos:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/cakeight/2855028778/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cakeight/3574350417/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/cakeight/3575161148/

Here is a 1950 interior photo:
http://tinyurl.com/qro5z8

here is a real close up to the egytian sign for the cinema
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ravie13/157844481/

Here is a nice shot of the Egyptian from around 1966.

Spring 2009:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/Egyptian4.jpg

Here is a photo taken yesterday:
http://tinyurl.com/lfrgk2

A view of the Egyptian Theatre in Hollywood.

from yesterday:
http://i243.photobucket.com/albums/ff204/hollywood90038/EgyptianOct2009.jpg