Radio City Music Hall

What a place! Just going to the restroom was an artistic experience. In 1950 I saw a sneak preview of Marlon Brando's first movie, "The Men," at Radio City.

Just a note to let you know how much I appreciated the hospitality shown to me Sat. 11/24. Since I ordered my tickets through the Polish American Citizens Club of Hadley last July, my back problem has gotten worse. An usher by the name of Ken Adell saw my plight, helped me up 2 steps and told me & my wife to wait there. About a minute later, he came back with a wheel chair and the rest is history. Unbelievable hospitality, especially with all the people you had to put up with. Ken actually went out of his way to help me. PLEASE, thank him for me. I first started going to the Christmas shows in 1947.

In the 1950's I saw Doris Day and James Cagney in Love Me Or Leave Me plus a stage show featuring the Rockettes. You could sit anywhere you liked and stay as long as you wanted.

Radio City had an Art Deco exposition in 1975. It was wonderful. SO many vendors selling all SORTS of Deco items. I still have the poster from the show. In the theatre, they played the original black and white movie "King Kong" which I believe premiered there in 1933?

I remember standing in line as a small child with my grandfather at Christmas time to see whatever movie happened to be playing along with the Rockettes Holiday show. There used to be a big Easter Show as well. Those lines would wind down 50th street and then turn into Rockefeller Plaza zig-zag back and forth like those ridiculous queues in Disney World during peak periods. Having been to Radio City years before I ever set foot in a theme park, I had never experienced the like before. I still have the souvenir program for what was to have been the final movie presentation at Radio City (a Prince and the Pauper story entitled "Crossed Swords") back in 1978. Luckily, I never peeled off the "Final Attraction" sticker affixed to the front cover, even though the closing of the theater (temporary as it would be) wound up being delayed and at least one or two other features played there before it was reborn as a concert and special event venue.

The last fillm to play there was "The Promise", starring Kathleen Quinlan.

The Music hall was one of the few theatres to install VistaVision projectors for the engagement of "White Christmas" in 1954.

I worked at the Music Hall as an usher during the Easter Show in '76. The film was Robin and Marian and even Pauling Kael was wondering what this was doing as a holiday film at Radio City. This while That's Entertainment II(which should have been at the Music Hall) was playing a few blocks away at the Ziegfeld. At this point the stage show was a shadow of its former self and an embarrassment to all. It's unfortunate that the present owners see no need to show films or resurrect the stage shows of Markert and Leonidoff(The Undersea and Rhapsody in Blue ballets were sensational.) The current Christmas show has no relation to what they did except for the Rockettes. The Living Nativity is a joke and deserves a big fat Bronx cheer from believers and non-believers alike. The original Nativity pageant was a Renaissance painting come to life.

I went to the MUSIC HALL many times through the 1950's, 60's, and 70's. I still have many of the programs throughout those decades.
I and many friends signed petitions to save the theatre back in 1978. I was there on the evening that was suppose to be the final
show, It was a benefit performance for the Vairety CLub Foundatrion of New York.(April 18, 1978) Happily, the theatre was saved. S.L."Roxy" Rothafel,father of the movie palace, got the idea for the
"SUNBURST" stage when watching the sun setting while aboard a ship.

The Music Hall was originally intended for "live" stage presentations only, but the first program, which lasted over four hours on opening night (December 27,1932), was such a fiasco that the management closed the theatre briefly until a new policy of a first-run feature movie with a one-hour stage show could be installed. This was to the detriment of the Music Hall's sibling, The New Roxy (soon re-named The Center), which was intended from its opening to present a movie with a stage show. The best pictures would go to the Music Hall and the New Roxy got the leftovers. The cost of operating two theatres with stage shows also became prohibitive in those Depression times, so the New Roxy switched to straight movies for several years and was then converted to stage plays and ice shows.

Quite right Warren, in fact movies playing at Radio City and Roxy were exclusive and no other theatre within a 100 miles could play those films at the same time. I also heard, but not sure of the fact, that "King Kong" was so big when it opened that it played at both theatres continuously. I knew someone who had been a projectionist at the hall during the 50s and 60s, when 3 or sometimes even 4 projectionists were on duty at all times running the four,later to become five, projectors. The film presentaion there was always perfect.

If you look at the entry for the Center Theatre, you will find my description of the dual opening of "King Kong" at the Rockefeller Center theatres. Incredibly, both supported the movie with a stage show entitled "Jungle Drums," though the one at the Center was less spectacular because it had a smaller stage and fewer performers and musicians than at the MH.

Thanks Warren, my only memory of the Roxy is post 1953 after the Cinemascope engagement of "The Robe" which was followed by a string of Fox Cinemascope films, Fox played all the big ones there with the smaller films going to the Paramount. Most if not all the Roxy stage shows, as I recall, were on ice, and yes I recall the stage was cosiderably smaller than the Hall. They now have tours of the great Music Hall, which includes backstage, if you are in New York it's a must see.

There sems to be a bit of confusion in my mind regarding the Roxy and the Center theatres I am thinking perhaps they were not the same. Having lived in New York all my life I remember the Roxy all thru the 50s and60s but not the center. Weren't they two different theatres? THe Roxy is the theatre that presented Cinemascope for the first time and played ice shows on stage, not the Center. I think the Center was demolished to make way for what later became Rockefeller Center and NBC had their TV studios there. Can anyone clear this up.

The Roxy was at the northeast corner of Seventh Avenue & 50th Street. where the former entrance is now occupied by some fast food restaurants including Thank God It's Friday. When the founder of the Roxy left to take over the management of the two new theatres at Rockefeller Center, the smaller of the two, on the east side of Sixth Avenue at 48th Street, was christened the New Roxy, but the owners of the original Roxy filed a legal complaint and the New Roxy was re-named the Center Theatre. The original Roxy never at any time changed its name and was known as the Roxy until demolition. You may remember a famous Life Magazine photo of Gloria Swanson standing in the ruins of the Roxy. Her movie, "The Loves of Sunya," was the first to be shown at the Roxy when it opened in March, 1927. "Roxy" was originally the nickname of its founder, Samuel L. Rothafel (sometimes spelled Rothaphel), who was a pioneer in the presentation of stage shows with movies. Walter W. Ahlshlager was architect of the Seventh Avenue Roxy, which stood next to the Taft Hotel and had an auditorium built at a diagonal to the entrance in order to accommodate 6,000 seats on such a limited parcel of land...The stage shows at the original Roxy were similar to those at the Music Hall, built around a theme ("Spring Fever," for example), and using a resident company of entertainers and musicians rather than hiring new ones for each show. Early in the 1940s, the Roxy switched to "name" headliners for its stage shows, and many big stars and jazz/dance orchestras performed there (together with movies, of course)...Meanwhile, the New Roxy on Sixth Avenue, now re-named the Center, shifted from movie/stage house to movies only and then to "legit" musicals before finding a successful policy in ice-skating shows. They continued until about 1949-50, when the Center was converted to an NBC television studio. By that time, the original Roxy's stage shows weren't much different from the variety programs that could be seen on TV, so the theatre decided to copy the Center's success. Most of the Roxy's stage was converted to a skating rink which had special lighting beneath it that could change into all the colors of the rainbow. I believe that the movie/ice show policy continued until the 1953 premiere of "The Robe," when the new wide-screen process of CinemaScope seened to rule out the need for a stage show as well. But after a few more CinemaScope movies, the novelty wore off and the Roxy resumed ice shows as part of the program.

That is how I remember things as well, thanks Warren for clearing all that up. I believe the original Center was built back in 1914

Vito, what "original" Center do you mean? The Center (ex-New Roxy) in Rockefeller Center was built in 1931-32. I don't recall any other Manhattan theatres known as the Center except the New York City Center on West 55th Street, which was originally a Shriners temple built in the 1920s.

Sorry Warren, I was refering to the Center theatre on B'way built in 1914 which I believe Roxy managed but did not build.

What would be great is if the Music Hall would have a summer stage show much as it had years ago for the tourists and as it now how has at Christmas in the style of Markert and Leonidoff. I'm sure that many people are still around who were a part of this and would remember the stagings.The settings and costumes exist in designs in theater collections and photos.(I remember the landing on the moon from the '69 Christmas show and I understand in '59 with The Nun's Story they burned Nome, Alaska 4 times a day.
In between they could show a classic film that played at the Hall like King Kong, Swing Time, North by Norwest or The Music Man which would look unlike anything people see on DVD. They could change the film every week keeping the stage spectacle the same throughout the summer due to costs. Why should we only get the Rockettes at Christmas? They are still as great as ever.

That would be wonderful vincent, I would be there every week, in my favorite seat, front row in the first balcony. As for movies, I don't understand why the Hall never shows them anymore. What a magnificent experience for all the young people who have to endure a movie sitting in a tiny multiplex and have never experienced seeing a movie in a theatre like RCMH. The last time I believe a movie was shown there at all was back in 2002 with a special 40th anniversary presentation of "West Side Story" I believe the same was done for the 50th anniversaty of "Singin In The Rain" We should, all of us, write the management and suggest something like a movie now and then accompanied by a stage show.

Would love to see a film and stage show presentation again. I remember waiting in line for 3 hours to see the 1958 Christmas show when "Auntie Mame" was playing. Still have the Showplace magazine they use to hand out. I also remember in the spring of 1975 they kept the same stage show and changed the film. It was great seeing Gone With The Wind and Singin' In The Rain on the big screen. They also played 2001: A Space Odyssey and Doctor Zhivago during that engagement.

I have never seen anything like Radio City Music Hall. Who can imagine a stage on hydrolics either going up and down in three different places, on three different levels or rotating in circles with the Rockettes' legs a-kicking? My lower jaw drops when I go into this place.

I remember that year of the MGM revivals that p7350 mentioned, I went to see all of them. When I was in college in 1979-80 they were presenting morning musicals for a few months on that awesome screen.

I remember that as well. I saw Funny Face, Seven Brides, and Flower Drum Song during that period. Boy did they look great in the Music Hall. The cinemscope screen was the largest I had ever seen.I could only envy the original audiences for whom those films and that type of presentation were an every day occurrence. As casual as going to the multiplex for most people today.

I also recall a few summers ago there was a Universal festival one night a week for a month. I managed to catch Psyco.

Recalling the long lines that people used to wait on to get in to see a film at Radio City I was told by a long time usher, who had been there since The Miracle in '59, that the longest that he could remember was for "A Boy Named Charlie Brown." One amazing Saturday people who had gotten there at 11AM only got in at 7PM. I always wondered if this was true or simply a Music Hall legend.

Radio City Music Hall went into decline in the late 60's and the 1970's for various reasons. The Music Hall always had the top class A films available to them from the 1930's thru 1967. The Music Hall then had trouble getting good G rated films to go along with there stage shows. Then the Music Hall would play many films that weren't very good such as The Promise and 1776. The Music Hall STARTED to loose money in the Fall and the months following The Christmas show and the months following The Easter Show. To stem the loss the Music Hall would close down there film and stage show during some of the slower months to reduce the red ink. I think a summer stage show along with classic films from all decades that would include the Rockettes is a wonderful idea. Maybe a corpoarate sponser could help fund the summer show if needed. If the Music Hall had a major concert the summer show could be dark that day. I feel the Music Hall has yet to reach its full potential. Cablevision bring back the stage and film presentation on a limited time such as summer when a lot of tourists are in town. brucec

Yes Bruce I often went to the Music Hall in the early '70's and the films were dreadful(1776 and Mame which should have been perfect Music Hall product were pretty awful.) Occasionally they got lucky like a What's Up Doc but that was pretty rare. Films were being made during that period that would have been suitable such as the That's Entertainment films, The Way We Were and Prisoner of Second Av. The Hollywood producers of the era did not want to give the Music Hall their product despite the fact that their opening engagements in NY had less seats than the Music Hall. The low budget stage shows did not help. If you see some of the color photos of the stage shows from the 50's you'll know why the Music Hall had what was called the Great Stage. It may not have been art but it must have been a helluva lot of fun and very impressive. The Music Hall with its concerts today is pretty much being wasted. Leonidoff knew how to use the stage and its settings to maximum effect. For the Christmas show today it just seems to be lights on, lights off, stage up, stage down. I can't imagine the producers there today using any imagination or showmanship. These people can only see what's at the end of their noses. That's why they have these positions and make the big bucks. As well, the Music hall today is reduced to having kiddie shows like Barney and The Rug Rats. What would Roxy have thought?

I remember an engagement of "The Magic of Lassie" in 1978 which starred James Stewart, Mickey Rooney and the first appearance in 20 years of Alice Faye. The theatre was packed almost to capacity. They had Lassie on stage 5x a day with The Rockettes. It may have been corny but was alot of fun.

Yes Vincent, the lines for the holiday shows were rather long, I would think a 3 hour wait for the Christmas show was not usual.
In 1954 when "White Christmas" played the Music Hall and
"There's no buisness like show buisness" was down the block to the Roxy, a lot of people spent a great deal of time on line, ah those were the days

Just think when Random Harvest(one of my all time favorites and yes I know the film doesn't make much sense)opened as the Christmas show in '42 it played until March of '43. If MGM hadn't pulled it they probably could have kept it running until the summer.

By the way I believe, though the name is not mentioned, Random Harvest is the film Holden sees at the Music Hall in Catcher in the Rye.

Prior to the introduction of CinemaScope and other wide screen systems, the Music Hall's projection sometimes switched to a Magnascopic lens for a single spectacular scene in a movie. Two that I recall are the animal stampede in "King Solomon's Mines" and the train wreck in "The Greatest Show on Earth." The screen enlarged in size as the black masking around it diminished, and then returned to normal when the scene was over.

Warren, the way I understand it, the Magnascope lens was a wide angle lens, about 7" that increased the size of the picture dramatically but also increased some of the grain, but was fine for projecting a special event in a movie such as the train wreck in "The Greatest Show on Earth" which was on a reel by itself and a changeover (remember those?)was made to one of the projectors installed with the Magna lens. Magnascope was actually invented back in the 20s and installed at New York's Rivoli theatre in 1926 for the engagement of "Old Ironsides" It was billed as "The biggest screen in the world"

The "Magnascope" lens was used mainly by the larger first-run theatres that had screens big enough to accommodate it. Since it required both a projectionist and a backstage technician to adjust the masking around the screen, it was reserved for the most spectacular movies. Two neighborhood theatres in Queens, NY, that had "Magnascope" were Loew's Valencia in Jamaica and Century's Bliss in Sunnyside.

My parents are always talking about how the Valencia in it's day was like seeing a movie in Manhattan. I guess if they had something that few theatres had back then like "Magnascope" it must have been special.

When the Music Hall started showing classics in the mornings at 11AM for a brief time in the late seventies(as discussed above) they showed some of the films in the ratio 1:33(I believe it is) in Magnascope. I saw Showboat and Good News like this. Though the screen was large the grain was pretty bad. When I saw Singing in the Rain however in '75 the screen was surprisingly small(like a postage stamp as an usher there remarked) but the technicolor was astounding. I've never seen it more magnificently presented, like a brilliant jewel against plush black velvet.

The '75 screening was probably in the original 1:33 ratio, that's why it seemed so small (at least in comparison to wide-screen presentations at the RCMH).

By the way, the presention of Rain was so wonderful in fact that Vincent Canby wrote a piece about it in the Sunday Art's and Leisure section at the time which you can read if you have access in a library to the microfilm archives of the New York Times.

I remember that engagement they ran Gone With The Wind and Dr. Zhivago that year also, it was an MGM revivial year. Does anyone remember the hoopla the time the Regency got a new IB technicolor print of "The Gangs All Here"? Carmen Miranda & Alice Faye in Technicolor so rich it dripped off the screen :)

Yes, in response to Vito's questions in February, there WERE two theaters...the Roxy and the New Roxy which quickly was renamed the Center. The Center Theater was the sister theater of Radio City Music Hall...built around the same time as RCMH and operated by RKO as well. It wobbled around a lot....from movie theater to legitimate theater. The stage show of THE GREAT WALTZ played there as well as other massive extravaganzas. But it was so huge (though slightly smaller than RCMH) that it had difficulty competing financially. In the forties it became home of the ice shows you remember....for about ten years. HOWDY, MR. ICE, that kind of thing, etc. In the early 50's it became an NBC radio and television studio. THE BIG SHOW with Tallulah Bankhead was broadcast from there....and the BUICK BERLE HOUR, some of YOUR SHOW OF SHOWS, some LUCKY STRIKE HIT PARADES, and some FOUR STAR REVIEWS among others were telecast from there.....and then, what a shame...by the mid 50's....it was gone forever. A great loss.

yes he has and your point?

Brilliant Michael, you are fool for this April and any other time of the year!!!!!!

Well actually Sinatra played there just recently, yes I know he's dead but he performed anyway. Anyone see that show or know anything about the process used to create it?

I hope some Cablevision executives are looking at these comments. It would be so great to have classic films at the Music Hall again. When they had the week of WB classics a few years ago, they advertised it as the First Annual Radio City Classic Film Festival. The Friday night showing of "The Exorcist", hosted by Ellen Burstyn and William Friedkin, was a complete sell-out and a real blast. Then the next year they showed films from Universal: "Psycho", "Jaws", and "Animal House" all played to 5,000+ people. Unfortunately, there haven't been any showings since then, and the recent 40th anniversary showing of "West Side Story" was invitation-only and not open to the public. Why not give the people what they want (and make lots of money besides) and do something like the Classic Film Festivals every year?

Vincent, I waited many hours to see "A Boy Named Charlie Brown" in January 1970. It was a Friday and I don't remember the exact length of time, but it definitely took most of an entire day to get in. We got there in the morning and it was dark outside when we came out (and it was a very short movie).

The operating "nut" for RCMH is too high to show revivals of old movies. The management makes more money from renting it out for concerts and conducting sightseeing tours. In yesterday's New York Times, they were already advertising the next Christmas Spectacular, which runs from November 4th through January 2nd. Curiously, though the ad gave a full calendar of performances, no ticket prices were mentioned.

I still think if done properly the classic film series along with the Rockettes and stage show could be a big draw. Did you know that I was looking at theatre grosses and found that the Detroit Fox has out grossed the Music Hall the last few years. The Detroit Fox has better bookings and even has The Radio City spectacular during the Holidays. This tells me that the Music Hall is not being used to its full potential. The Fox in Detroit,St Louis, and Atlanta also has film in there programming mix. The Music Hall on its big Screen could show films like Titanic, Gladiator,Funny Girl, Oliver, The Longest Day, Pillow Talk, Dr. Zhivago, 2001 , Planet of The Apes, Star Wars, The King and I, Anastasia, To Catch A Thief, The Sundowners, Charade, The Sound of Music. Patton, Magnificient Men in Flying Machines, How The West Was Won, A Star is Born, Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, Bridge on The River Kwai, The Odd Couple, Giant, El Cid, Goldfinger, Chitty, Chitty Bang Bang, No Business Like Show Business, The Bandwagon, How To Marry a Millionaire , Auntie Mame, Ivanhoe, The Time Machine, Day The Earth Stood Still, Out of Africa, Close Encounters, E.T., Its a MAd Mad World, North By Northwest, Gigi, My Fair Lady etc just to name a few. Make the presentation of these features a big Event that can't be duplicated on TV and the Megaplex on the Music Hall Giant Screen.Note I focused on the Wide Screen Movies.I think this could be a big draw if done correctly plus the stage show.Brucec

This is so amazing that the Music Hall has already started selling the Christmas show in mid April. It now take them almost a year to sell seats for this thing and then they end up giving away thousands of tickets through the Daily News or the Post. Maybe this is because people are sick of the same lame production numbers and the same children's TV show sets and costumes every year. Except for the Rockettes this is amateur night on a grand scale.
Bruce I love your list but can we throw in a few RKO classics?

Whats shocking is the top ticket price for the golden circle is over $100. The last movie Chjristmas show was still only $5 now inflation has note gone up that much since 1979.

The overcharging for the Christmas show wouldn't be so bad if it helped subsidize some classic movies being shown. And like I said before, the audience is out there. What a thrill it was to see "Psycho" in a theater that size with not an empty seat to be had.

Well, you got a movie and a stage show for that five bucks. Which is what you paid for a first run movie at the time. Now a top movie is 10.25. So we've got a little over a 100% increase. So lets do the math. How much did the cost of the Music Hall Christmas show ticket go up? And they use the same production every year!

I recall my first trip to the Music Hall, age 7, to see "That Touch of Mink" with Doris Day and Cary Grant. The ticket price was 99 cents if you sat in the balcony before noon. Talk about your bargains.

Not only is the production the same every year, they are paying no film rental out to a film company.

Well look at the price of a Broadway show back in the 70's, it was around $15-20 for a ticket. Now it is around $80-100+ for a top show. The cost to put a live show has gone up so high because of All the people you have to pay. The Music Hall is a Union shop, so you have the stage hands, lighting, sound, orchestra, dancers, ushers, security, concessions, box office personnel, managers. So if your selling out 6-7 live shows a day. That uses the theatre to the fullest. So if you place a 90-120 minute movie with the show, that would make a better show package for the price. But the company Cablevision knows it could sell out the live show more than the movie. And you could add more shows and make more money. As for concerts it could be booked better. Depends may be on the artist. Because the Beacon is a medium sized theatre and has a good booking history. The Music Hall is a classic, but is a little large for some artists. The Garden get all the giant shows because of the size. You might have to play 3-4 night at the Music Hall for one night at the Garden. So the cost of putting on the show or shows is a factor.
I would love to show films return to the Music Hall in some form.

Remember sometime in the 70's the Music Hall was going to closed because it was not making any money. But they found away to keep it going.

From the 1940s until the movie/stage policy ended, RCMH got a special deal on film rentals from the distributors. I can't recall the exact details, but for the first two or three weeks of the engagement, the distributor got only a small percentage of the gross to enable RCMH to recoup the cost of the stage shows. After that, the distributor's percentage of the weekly gross increased sharply, I think to a maximum of 60% of the takings.

Today the main cost is labor to put on a live show and maintain the theatre. Today the distributor's percentage of the weekly gross is 90% and works it way down for following weeks of the engagement.

What about for rental on film classics? Do they work the same way?
Would they charge the same for Singin' in the Rain as they would for the new Kidman movie?

Normally with classics its a sliding scale around 35-40% but theres usually a guarantee.

It depends on what type of screening. Like if it's a one time festival screening or a theatre booking the as a filler or midnight. The rental might be, say a flat fee rental plus a percentage of the box office. We ran a few pictures with booked from MGM and Warner. They charged depending on title $125-150 flat fee + Box office percentage. While Warner charged $500 + box office percentage. Or what the studio wants to charge for the booking. Those numbers look small in size. But it depends on how much you want tickets to be and what is the cost of running a film in a large theatre as the Music Hall. Look at your payroll: Projectionists, Managers, Ushers, concessions, security, box office personel and maybe a stagehand.
Over at Loew's Jersey City Theatre it's a different. The people over there are volunteers and the Friends of the Jersey City are a non-profit company. So the studios might give them a break in fees.

Actually in the days when I was in the theatre business I found that the studios were usually generous when you needed a print for a fund-raiser or for a charitable organization. Sometimes all they charged you for was a shipping charge, or at the most a flat $100.

For many years, the Music Hall operated an underground boxoffice for the convenience of those arriving by subway at the 50th Street-Rockefeller Center station of the IND line. The boxoffice was located at the NW end of the shopping arcade beneath Rockfeller Center. If a performance sold out, the boxoffice would close and you had to join the waiting line upstairs on 50th Street. After purchasing your ticket underground, you entered a lobby that connected to the theatre's downstairs lounge and checkroom. Enroute, a doorman cut your ticket and handed you the stub.

My first travel to New york was decided after receiving a post card with the picture of the radio city music hall in 1981.
Two weeks later i was waking up in a Time Square hotel and after a short walk i discovered the facade of the radio city and took a ticket for a tour .Of course i was amazed by the grandeur of the place,and the day after i had my ticket for "America" the summer show.
I had heard so much about these shows but it was far more what i imagined.Entering the stalls the pipe organ sound gave me such an emotion that i was near to cry and everything was exactly what i dreamed before.i saw the show twice that summer.
Years later i saw the Christmas show with the same pleasure and i hope a future travel will give me the opportunity to see the result or the restoration.The Radio City music hall of NY and the Tuchinski in Amsterdam are the most beautifull theatres i know.

Bill..I saw Psycho, Jaws and The Sting at the Music Hall in 97. It was awesome. The year before, I saw Bonnie and Clyde. I thought they'd have a yearly festival too, but I guess gave in to the demands of MTV and the hiphop youth culture. I can't believe they didn't make money on the flicks, as they were all sellouts and a success.

Many of the comments here maintain that BIG shows on stage will certainly bring back the big audiences and maybe could be combined with films, vintage or current. Sad to say, none of this works today from the standpoint of the operators of RCMH. Times have changed; theatres are no longer temples of amusement, and movies and shows are not produced by impassioned impresarios. Today everything is controlled by conglomerates which own the studios, film distributors, and often the theatre operators. A conglomerate is not interested one little bit in the nature of what it owns or its history; they exist solely for the acquisition of MONEY and all the power that comes from more and more MONEY. As one previous post said, the 'nut' (total operating expenses) for RCMH is too large to permit much more that the least expensive fare the management is able to find, and that fare must be so inexpensive to allow the ultimate owners, the conglomerates, to get as much PROFIT as possible, since that is their raison d'être. The Music Hall and thousands of other businesses are simply pawns in the international competition of one conglomerate to another to gain market dominance, and thus more power and MONEY, the real god of most people today. Shed a tear for our theatres and showmanship heritage, for less and less of it will remain in our future filled with ever increasing greed, corporate and personal. As God's word the Bible says at 1 Timothy 6:10 "For the love of money is a root of all sorts of injurious things…"

That's very sad, Jim, but I'm sure you're right. It sounds like all the dire predictions about corporations that Paddy Chayefsky made in NETWORK have come to pass.

Jim, you should go to the Lafayette theater in Suffern NY, they show classic movies on the big screen, it's an old vaudeville style single screen movie house and the owmers love movies, they put on quite a presentation. Go to...bigscreenclassics.com

Rhett brings out a good point: in some smaller locations, it is possible for a non-greedy owner to put on successful shows and vintage films and still keep the theatre alive, but that option is gone for megalopolises such as New York City. In such places the property values and attendant taxes upon them are so huge as to make any enterprise strain at the need to bring in the maximum possible dollars per square foot, and believe me when I say that every theatre is calculated as being worth so many dollars per square foot in income. Overarching greed is everywhere, but some places such as NYC are so unfortunate as to have a business climate that does not much allow any property to be 'marginal' as to profits. I hope the LAFAYETTE continues in its success, but I am afraid that it cannot be easily transported to the much, much larger Gotham.

You nkow, they have remastered and are releasing Around World in 80 days to DVD this month or next. I'm wondering if any of the big theaters are planning a special engagement screening. It won't be in Cinerama, that's for sure, but wouldn't it be grand if RCMH, or Zeigfeld or Astor Plaza played the film...I doubt they will though. It would interfere with the Will Smith flick.....oh well

"Around the World in 80 Days" was not a Cinerama film, it was the second Todd-AO feature. It would've been nice engagement over at the Rivoli Theatre. It opened at the Rivoli on Oct. 17th 1956 and ran Roadshow till Oct. 5th, 1958 for a total of 113 weeks.

Is that possible? Did it really run that long? I thought the record breaker there was the Sound of Music which I believe was 88 weeks which the theater wanted to keep longer and Fox pulled it to put in Sand Pebbles(Made strangely enough in Panavision and not in Todd AO.I'd love to know why.)

What house did they move the Sound of Music to when it left The Rivoli?

Here are a few of the 70MM Roadshow engagements for Times Square area.
(List not by date)
"Oklahoma" at the Rivoli (51 weeks)
"Around the World in 80 Days" at the Rivoli (113 weeks)
"Can Can" at the Rivoli
"Cleopatra" at the Rivoli
"Sound of Music" at the Rivoli
"Star" at the Rivoli
"Hello Dolly" at the Rivoli
"The Big Fisherman" at the Rivoli
"West Side Story" at the Rivoli
"The Last Valley" at the Rivoli
"South Pacific" (open Criterion for 29 weeks, move-over Rivoli for 25 weeks more.)
"My Fair Lady" at the Criterion
"Agony and the Ectasy" at the State
"Ben-Hur" at the State
"Mutiny on the Bounty" at the State
"King of Kings" at the State
"Chitty Chitty, Bang Bang" at the State 2
"Porgy and Bess" at the Warner
"Greatest Story Ever Told" at the Warner
"Battle of the Bulge" at the Warner
"Exodus" at the Warner
"How the West Was Won" at the Warner
"Hallelujah Trail" (premired at the Warner)opened at the Capital
"Spartacus" at the DeMille
"Those Magnificent Men in there Flying Machines" at the DeMille
"2001" at the Capital
"Grand Prix" at the Warner
"Airport" at the Radio City Music Hall (1st 70MM film)
"Krakatoa, East of Java" at the Warner
"Song of Norway" at the Warner

Those are just a few of the original 70MM Roadshow films that played in the Time Square area over the years.

Vincent
You might find the answer about why "The Sand Pebbles" was not a Todd-AO film in the documentary about the making of "The Sound of Music" in Special Edition DVD. I think Robert Wise talked alittle about it. Right before the engagement of "The Sand Pebbles" United Artists Theatre installed the D-150 screen into the Rivoli Theatre.
But the only two D-150 films were booked into other Times Square theatres. "Patton" opened at the Criterion Theatre and "The Bible" opened at the Loew's State Theatre.

I could have sworn I saw Patton at The Rivoli?

To add to William's excellent list, here are a few more Times Square roadshows from the final years of the roadshow era:

"Funny Girl" at the Criterion
"Oliver!" at Loew's State 1
"Chitty Chitty Bang Bang" at Loew's State 2
"Star!" at the Rivoli
"Tora! Tora! Tora!" at the Criterion
"Nicholas and Alexandra" at the Criterion
"Fiddler on the Roof" at the Rivoli

What do Times Square roadshows have to do with Radio City Music Hall? To the best of my knowledge, RCMH was never a "roadshow" house. The movies and accompanying stage shows were presented continuously, and at "popular prices." The only reserved seats sold were for the first mezzanine.

Warren this is correct. The current Radio City owneres haven't even tested the viability of a limited stage and screen series during the summer. There could be a cross promotion between Cablevisions AMC movie channel and Radio City. Is the Disney Company the only distibutor left that knows a little bit about showmanship take a look at the small scale stage and screen at the El Capitan in Hollywood. Since the distributors make more money on DVD's than the theatical run of the movie the Music Hall could be used for the new releases of classics and newer films as part of there promotion.Its amazing to me that two of the most successful movie palaces of all times Radio City and the Chicago Theatre are not being utilized to there full potential.The Music Hall could even be used for 1 week on the release of a new film such as Troy, Spiderman,Harry Potter,Alexander,Phantom of the Opera etc.This could be done without the stage show if necessary,because the distributor would want 90 per cent of the Box Office after the house expense. The point is the current owner Cablevision needs to try different things some may work and some may not.brucec

Brucec makes an excellent point here. In 1989, the first New York showing of "The Abyss" was at the Music Hall, for one night only, and it looked like every seat was taken.

Warren, sorry for going off-topic and off-theater so much, but I think the Music Hall was used for a roadshow attraction at least once, and recently too: "The Lion King" in 1994. I remember having to order tickets in advance. Not technically a real roadshow, I guess, but close.

Well I think now it's time for a comprehensive list of all theaters in NY, their hardticket films and dates of opening and closing and the date when a film at same theater(if this being the case) switched to continuous performances.
Please list under this page of the Astor Plaza.

Did everyone hear movies will be returning to the Music Hall this summer !!!!!!!!!! It was in yesterdays daily news. I am not thrilled with some of the films they mentioned, where are the epics????

Robert, I read the Daily News every day, but did not see the story. Could you please post details, and price scale if you know it. RCMH's website does not have any information, nor does Ticketmaster, which lists RCMH's schedule of events for entire summer and beyond.

On the front page of this site under Theatre News it reported that movies were coming to the Music Hall, but Tarrytown, NY. They have the article from the "Journal News", Westchester. On June 25-27, a series of films return to that screen. "Cinema Paradiso", "Some Like It Hot", "Being John Malkovich" and "The Wizard of Oz".

Donald Deskey was the architect and interior designer of Radio City Music Hall. "Roxy" Rothafel was only the theatre's managing director, though he did oversee the project after persuading Rockefeller Center to pay for it.

Under the list of Roadshows they list Airport, but this was really a moveover from the Warner Cinerama. Was it really roadshow even at the Warner? Also Didnt Mary Poppins play roadshow except in New York where it opeded at the Music Hall?

"Airport" was not given a true Roadshow release be Universal. It was one of the last features tobe filmed in 65mm. It got major showcased release.

Airport opened at the Music Hall not at the Warner.Except for a few films in the 30's the Music Hall always opened a film in NY until the mid 70's.(Though they probably should have taken 2nd run a few roadshow films like Gigi and Millie.)

The Music Hall was relatively late in installing 70MM projection equipment because of the necessity of accommodating the stage show that accompanied the film. The Music Hall show always ran between two and three hours including the stage show which varied in length depending on the length of the feature. Since the initial 70MM attractions were all Roadshow presentations, it was felt that they were too long to be played at the Music Hall. Then in 1970 Ross Hunter, the producer of "Airport" insisted that film be shown at the Hall in 70MM. The Music Hall would run two other 70MM featuresthat year "Darling Lili" and "Scrooge". Since 1970 approximately twenty-two features have had 70MM presentation at the Hall, either as part of the movie.stage show policy or as premieres and special presentations. The screen at the Music Hall is 69 1/2' x 34 1/2'. The regular 35mm 1.85 ratio use is 48' x 26' and the 70MM Full screen is 69' x 31' and spherical 70MM (1.85 blow-up) is 63' x 34'.
The size of the auditorium presents a number of unique projection problems. Often prints are tailored to the theatre. This usually means printing them a little lighter in density to increse the apparent light on the screen. since the projection throw is about 185' to the screen, if the sound is in sync with the picture at the screen it is four frames out-of-sync at the back of the third mezzanine.

The Music Hall was relatively late in installing 70MM projection equipment because of the necessity of accommodating the stage show that accompanied the film. The Music Hall show always ran between two and three hours including the stage show which varied in length depending on the length of the feature. Since the initial 70MM attractions were all Roadshow presentations, it was felt that they were too long to be played at the Music Hall. Then in 1970 Ross Hunter, the producer of "Airport" insisted that film be shown at the Hall in 70MM. The Music Hall would run two other 70MM featuresthat year "Darling Lili" and "Scrooge". Since 1970 approximately twenty-two features have had 70MM presentation at the Hall, either as part of the movie.stage show policy or as premieres and special presentations. The screen at the Music Hall is 69 1/2' x 34 1/2'. The regular 35mm 1.85 ratio use is 48' x 26' and the 70MM Full screen is 69' x 31' and spherical 70MM (1.85 blow-up) is 63' x 34'.
The size of the auditorium presents a number of unique projection problems. Often prints are tailored to the theatre. This usually means printing them a little lighter in density to increse the apparent light on the screen. since the projection throw is about 185' to the screen, if the sound is in sync with the picture at the screen it is four frames out-of-sync at the back of the third mezzanine.

William what is the size of the of the cinemascope screen? From what I remember from seeing 7 Brides there in the late 70's it is larger than the 70mm screen. Also was Darling Lillie a blow up like Scrooge or real 70mm? Blow-ups never looked good at the Music Hall. Both Scrooge and Tom Sawyer were somewhat grainy and washed out but Airport in Todd AO with those old fashioned glossy Ross Hunter production values looked sensational.

I was saddened by reading that the vast stage of RCMH is being turned into a basketball court for games by the NY Liberty team in July and September...For most of the summer, the theatre will be closed except for "backstage" tours and nine concerts or special events (including the Tony Awards telecast on June 6th, which is not open to the public).

This is another example of NY theatres not being respected. This is one of the most degrading things to ever happen at The Music Hall. ANyways how can basketball be played on a stage>?

The scope screen is 69' x 31' and full ratio 70MM screen is 69' x 34'. I was typing to fast on that post. All three films "Darling Lili", "Scrooge" and "Tom Sawyer" were all 70MM blow-ups. "Airport" looked fantastic on the big screen.

How do people who make these decisions get their jobs?
I assume they're recruited from the FBI and the CIA. Nothing else seems to explain such waste and staggering incompetency.

Basketball can be played anywhere if you have a flat space large enough to accommodate it. During the Depression, many large neighborhood theatres booked basketball games on stage during slow nights of the week.

But this is the height of the tourist season in July!
Considering how the Music Hall is used now I guess Andrew Stein's idea of turning it into the NY stock exchange back in the 70's wasn't much different.

But this is the height of the tourist season in July!
Considering how the Music Hall is used now I guess Andrew Stein's idea of turning it into the NY stock exchange back in the 70's wasn't much different.

I was very interested in Williams notes about the Hall's 70mm presentations. I knew the 35mm prints were made a little lighter because I worked at Deluxe labs in New York during that time. I believe before Dolby came along many 35mm prints were struck with magnetic stereo tracks and although after 1960 such prints were hard to come by, Radio City still played a lot of films in 35mm 4 track magnetic. Anyone know more about this?

Has anyone ben in the Music Halls projection booth lately? I visited the booth several years ago when there were five projectors,
three Simplex 35/70 with Dolby Digital capability as well as magnetic penthouses, and two Simplex XL 35mm with optical capability only. There were no platters, thankfully, although I was told that "Lion King" was presented in 70mm, but not with standard 70mm six track magnetic sound, a seperate 35mm Dolby Digital sound print was interlocked using platters. What is in the booth today?

I saw Casablanca here during a film festival a few years ago, and the image seemed small to me, considering the space available, and the sound was terrible. It was all echoes and tinny, and if I didn't already know the movie so well, I wouldn't have known what all the Casablanca fuss was about.

The image was true to the original 1.33 ratio which made the picture look small but it was shown the way it was meant to be seen and how it was presented originally. As for the sound I think perhaps you have gotten used to modern day Dolby sound and have forgotten or are too young to remember what is what like back then, Warren, William, Vincent...
any comments?

The aspect ratio was correct during Casablanca, but the image was small in relation to the proscenium. When the Music Hall showed films on a regular basis, did they really use so little of the available space?

As to the sound, I did see several movies there during the movie/stage show era, and don't recall any sound problems.

I think that when theaters aren't regularly showing films, but do show the occasional movie, when they do play a movie the equipment and the projectionists aren't always up to speed. If a projectionist comes in and find that the bulb isn't bright enough, or the speakers aren't working right, there is very little he or she can do about it.

The booth is still the same today. In fact, today, Sunday 5/23/04, RCMH is hosting the World Premiere of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azcaban".

I've said somewhere on this site that when I saw Singin in the Rain here in '75 the image was surprisingly small and there is an old Hitchcock where there is a chase through the Music Hall during the film presentation and the image is that small. So I guess from when the Music Hall opened to the 50's people were watching a pretty small screen. So what was that like for the audiences in the second and third mezzanines during this era when the Hall frequently filled up? Their powers of concentration must have been enormous.
Unfortunately when the screen is opened for the Magnascope lenses the image becomes fairly grainy.

Vito - Two of the last features release with prints in a 4-Track Mag stereo format were "Scarface" and "Yentl" in 1983. Any other titles would have been special ordered or what was still left at the film exchanges.

Before 1952 with the premiere of "This is Cinerama" (2.65:1 ratio) and in 1953 with the debut of "The Robe" in CinemaScope (2.55:1 ratio). All films were projected at 1.37:1 (Standard Academy ratio). The original screen might have had alittle more height too it. But because the Music Hall is a very large theatre and has a very wide proscenium, that might be what audiences saw during the early days at the Music Hall. Most of the times people remember the screens as small as a postage stamp. In the book about the San Francisco Fox Theatre, there is a picture of how small the screen looked when projecting a 1.37:1 ratio picture, before CinemaScope. When using Magnascope / Magnacom type lenses the picture will have more grain because you are blowing up the picture and those type lenses eat alot of light too.

Thanks William, Yes the end off 4-track mag came along with Dolby optical noise reduction prints and then Dolby stereo, although most studios had stop making mag prints available in the early 60s. Even Fox which released all of their films prior to 1960 in 4-track
mag-optical, switched to straight optical mono prints.I can recall the joy of getting a rare post 1960 mag print like "Hello Dolly", "Star", "2001" amoung a few others,and then presenting the film in stereo. We would put it on the marguee, presented in 4 track sterophonic sound. As for the Music Hall's image size I believe you are quite right, it was rather small but the alternative Magnascope added much to much grain and robbed more light, even with carbon arc ,then the Hall could afford to lose.

I believe abot twelve years ago they had a classic film series at Radio City. Does anyone remember if it was well attended?

Yankee Mike: I don't know if it was 12 years ago but sometime in the 1990's, there was a Warner Bros. Classic Film Festival, followed a year later by a Universal Classic Film Festival. I attended the showings of Bonnie and Clyde, The Exorcist, My Fair Lady, Psycho, Jaws, Animal House and The Blues Brothers. Bonnie and Clyde was a Wednesday night show and attracted a fairly good crowd, but all the other shows looked like sellouts to me.

I saw Bonnie and Clyde that year. The next year I saw Psycho, Jaws and The Sting. I remember the reaction and the screams of people when watching Psycho and Jaws. It was like the first time seeing it, and people laughed and applauded. It was great. The prints were archived prints, good but nothing special, it was good enough though. Mono soundtracks, sounding echoing in the auditorium. I remember talking to an usher that night and he was saying they were planning for the next series with a screening of Superman. That was in 1997. So, that's a done deal. But seeing these films in the Music Hall were a special experience. It's too bad they don't do this anymore. But I guess there's too many rap concerts to plan.

Bonnie and Clyde was made even cooler with an appearance by the film's director Arthur Penn. These two consecutive series were incredible. It seemed like a new light had shown on Manhattan theatergoing. Jaws was PACKED! I believe Blade Runner may even have been sold out. The Exorcist was an experience like none other, and with William Friedkin and Ellen Burstyn both there... priceless.

I've been hoping someone would pick that idea back up again, but now reading over the posts I wonder just how much it must cost to make Radio City run for a night. As many noticed, so many of these screenings were packed. Seeing a movie with 5,000 other people is just incredible.

Does anyone know who organized these film series? To this outsider they sure seemed easy to run. If you can charge $40 for a show ticket and do okay with all the hydraulics and smoke machines of a concert, you should be able to have a film projected for $12 a ticket times 5,000 tickets. Older films are just not that expensive to rent. Even if they're collecting 35% of the door, sharing $60K for projecting a film print just doesn't seem like bad business.

It seems that those who now run the Music Hall have no interest in films whatsoever. Remember years ago that first run film presentation was not so much about making a pile of money from the get go but giving it the best possible send off. It had everything to do with showmanship and class. Real money was usually not made until second and third run. Disney pulled Snow White from the Hall after five weeks(when it surely could have run a few more) simply because he wanted the neighborhood money after getting the Music Hall's prestige. He would continue using the Music Hall for special films until his death.

I've heard that the reason there are 5 projectors is because "in the day" 2 prints were run simultaneously, one projecting onto the screen and one running with the dowser closed. I was told was that should a projector fail, film break, anything go wrong, they would instantly switch to the other running projector. Supposedly this was cheaper than refunding 6000 tickets.

Also regarding screen size, I have a 1926 Paramount magazine ad, (part of their "Friendship Means More at the Movies" ad campaign) that shows a theater full of happy people watching a tiny screen in a vast curtained movie palace proscenium. My old time projectionist buddy tells me that the pre WWII lamps simply weren't bright enough to really light up a big screen. If the image got too big, the image was too dim: a problem in all the big halls, but obviously compounded by the outsize RCMH screen.

I'm not a New Yorker, so I've only been to this theatre 3 times, but I remember those three trips well! I thought the theatre was gorgeous back then, and it probably still is, but it seems like the magic is gone. It was great to go there and catch a great movie AND a great stage show, to watch the lights slowly change color in the auditorium during the presentation, to feel the rumble of the organ even as you're standing out in the lobby, the crush of thousands of people all enjoying themselves. I remember how even the "ordinary" stage shows (the non-holiday ones) were spectacular.

Now it just seems as if it's just another 75 dollar a head theatre which presents a whole lot of stuff that doesn't do this great place justice. Wasn't the whole point behind movie palaces to provide a huge amount of entertainment at the lowest possible price, and to be surrounded by incredible luxury that anyone could afford to enjoy?

I'm glad the place is still standing and serving, it's just not the same place anymore.

I always wondered why the screen from that era into the early fifties was so tiny. How did 6,000 people collectively concentrate on such a tiny screen film after film without constantly being distracted or losing interest?

Shade....from your lips to God's ear...I remember Arthur Penn being there, I was so pumped. Peter Benchley was at Jaws...There's no showmanship anymore....they should read this site.

Here are a few films that played Radio City from the New York Times movie adds.

Mar 1933 King Kong
Apr 1937 A Star is Born
Jan 1938 Snow White and The Seven Dwarfs
Mar 1939 Stagecoach
Oct 1939 Mr Smith Goes To Washington
Mar 1940 Rebecca
Aug 1950 Sunset Boulevard
Oct 1951 An American in Paris
Apr 1953 Shane
Oct 1954 White Christmas
Sep 1964 Mary Poppins

brucec

Yes Will, you are correct, two prints were run in case of a film break or malfuntion. In those days a blank screen, or white sheet, as it was called then, was a projectionist worse nightmare.

Here are a list of a few of the films that Played Radio City from 1950 Thru 1970

1950 Stage Fright,Father of the Bride,The Men, King Solomons Mines
1951 Royal Wedding,The Great Caruso,Showboat,An American in Paris
1952 The Greatest Show on Earth,Singing in the Rain,Ivanhoe
1953 Shane,The Bandwagon,Roman Holiday,Mogambo,Kiss Me Kate
1954 Knights of the Round Table,The Long Long Trailer,White Christmas
1955 Love Me or Leave Me,Mister Roberts,I'll Cry Tommorrow,Picnic
1956 The Swan,High Society,Bhowana Junction,Tea and Sympathy
1957 The Spirit of St Louis,Funny Face,Silk Stockings,Sayonara
1958 No Time For Seargeants,Cat on a Hot Tin Roof,Auntie Mame
1959 The Nuns Story,North By Northwest,Operation Petticoat
1960 Please Don't Eat the Daisies,Midnight Lace,The Sundowners
1961 Fanny,Come September,Breakfest at Tiffanys,Babes in Toyland
1962 Lover Come Back,The Music Man,To Kill a Mockingbird,Jumbo
1963 Bye Bye Birdie,Spencers Mountain,Come Blow Your Horn,Charade
1964 The Pink Panther,The Unsinkable Molly Brown,Mary Poppins,
1965 The Sandpiper,The Great Race,That Darn Cat,Dear Heart
1966 Inside Daisy Clover,How To Steal a Million,Follow The Boys
1967 Two For The Road,Barefoot in the Park,Wait Until Dark
1968 The Odd Couple,Bulitt,The Impossible Years,Hotel,The 25th Hour
1969 The Love Bug,True Grit,A Boy Named Charlie Brown,Mayerling
1970 Airport,The Out of Towners,Darling Lili,Scrooge

The most successful film to ever play the Music Hall was
Paramount Pictures The Odd Couple it played for 14 Weeks and
grossed $3.1 Million in 1968.

Cary Grant is the Music Hall's alltime boxoffice champ.The
Music Hall played Twenty-seven of his films which played a
total of 113 weeks.

Fred Astaire is second place with Sixtheen films playing a
total of sixty weeks.

Greer Garson is the Queen of Radio City with Eleven films
playing a total of Seventy-Nine weeks.

Ginger Rogers had twenty-three films which played fifty-five
weeks.

Katherine Hepburn had twenty-two films which played sixty-four
weeks. Hepburn is the only performer,male or female,to have
seventeen successive films open at the Music Hall.


Note the above stats are from the 1979 Radio City Music Hall
by Charles Francisco.brucec

A list of movies that played at RCMH from opening through July 1978 can be found as an appendix to Charles Francisco's hardcover book, "The Radio City Music Hall." The list claims to be complete, but I found at least one omission, "Mr. Lucky," which played in 1943 after the run of "The Youngest Profession" and before "So Proudly We Hail." Also, some of the years between 1947 and 1953 end with the wrong movie. 1947, for example, ended with "Good News." "A Double Life" was the first attraction of 1948, and not "The Paradine Case," which followed.

I love that fact that this summer five games of the NY Liberty, a WNBA entry also owned by RCMH's Cablevision, will be played on the stage of this grand old hall.

As a former RCMH usher (1958 - 1959), I am delighted to find so many fans of the theater out there, notwithstanding those with such authoritative knowledge...technical and otherwise. One issue that was never brought up, but is interesting to consider is why huge single screen theaters are no longer practical for films is this: We all know how most films are shown today: i.e. not continuous, but rather with an admission to one particular showing. The theater is emptied and swept between performances in most multi-plexes. In the days of the movie palaces, such as RCMH, a 3,000 to 6,000 seater would have patrons entering and exiting at any time from morning to last show. Except for road shows, patrons would not tolerate being kept from entering a theater (except when SRO) at their discretion even if the film was a mystery and in the middle. At RCMH, it took a full hour with four cashiers going (sometimes five plus the reserved seat window)to fill the 6,000 seats on those days (especially during holidays)when the theater expected a "tight initial" (house filled before the start of the first feature). The Music Hall, as did others with thousands of seats to fill, only had a five to ten minute (maximum)break between film and stage shows. Except for the lucky few hundred patrons waiting in the lobby, those in the street line had little hope of getting into the theater before the start of the feature. It didn't matter to them. We have changed our movie going habits and would not tolerate a film starting before we were in our seats. Except at the Paramount on Times Square during the 1940s(where police actually helped clear the theater of screaming teens who wanted to stay all day), the big theaters counted on a constant flow of traffic. I remember when "All About Eve" opened at the Roxy, the managment tried to seat patrons only during the 30 minute break between shows. It failed because irate patrons were unwilling to wait if there were empty seats inside. Also the problem of getting 6,000 people into their seats in 30 minutes proved next to impossible. That lasted one week and the film went back to continuous showings. Another interesting point is that the Music Hall was not designed for standing lobby crowds (only a couple of hundred would fit without blocking critical exits from the auditorium). The theater was obliged to keep most patrons in the street. However, once the line moved it moved swiftly and 1,500 people could be inside within fifteen minutes. In contrast, The Roxy could hold 2,000 people in the rotunda. That is also why you rarely saw a street line at the Roxy. (I also ush-ed at the Roxy from 1956 - 1957). One of my favorite assignments as an RCMH usher to to do a spot check of number of patrons at the Roxy when a new film opened. I suspect it had to do with a bit of rivalry but also to see if the grosses reported in Variety were credible based on attendance. My wife loves my picture in my RCMH uniform. I also had a thrill watching a FOX newsreel on TCM one night when they showed the opening night crowd of "Anastasia" (ROXY). And there I am...immortalized and standing proudly in the rotunda as the stars pass by.

I hope that SimonL decides to send a copy of that photo of him in his usher's uniform to the Theatre Historical Society of America at: 152 N. York Rd., Suite 200, Elmhurst Il, 60126-2806 They also have a web site that might be of interest to you: www.HistoricTheatres.org They have a wonderful painting of the ROXY right on their site if you click on the link to it, and possibly they will be willing to trade a cvolor copy of that for your photo(s). By donating such copies, you make sure that posterity knows of your achievements and the glories of the long-lost ROXY, and any other theatres you woked at. Do send a copy of your memories here too! Thank you for them.

One should not forget to mention Dick Leibert, one of the original organists at Radio City Music Hall. He played there for 40 years. Mr. Leibert also recorded many albums, many on the RCMH organ, for RCA. What a superb musician.

Yes, Leibert was a supurb musician, but he was not alone in keeping the break pealing with the sounds of the great organ. Ashley Miller and Raymond F. Bohr Jr. alternated (as well as in concert)with him. Jim: I am a member of THS and have gone on about six conclaves.

For anyone who might be interested...for about seven years I have had a page on AOL devoted to a salute to Radio City Music Hall. I change photos several times a year. The photos are mainly taken from various souvenir booklets that I purchased beginning in the mid 1940's. The text is my appreciation of this incredible theater. Several years ago I received a wonderfully nice letter from someone who worked there. She thanked me for feeling about the theater as she herself did. The link is: http://hometown.aol.com/ctrobert8/MainPage.html

Oh my gosh, go right now to Bob Ketler's home page and read the magnificent article he wrote on RCMH. I also want to thank Simonl for the walk thru memory lane. I attended just about every new show from the mid 1950s thru the mid 1970s We always tried to see the stage show in the front row behind the lighting guy and then rush up to the top mezzanine to watch the movie.We would sit right under the projection booth. What I would not give to go back there and see one more movie and a stage show for a buck twenty five.

I remember seeing Fantasia in 1978 and was awed by the size of the screen. When I saw special showings of Bonnie and Clyde, Psycho, Jaws, The Sting in the late 90's, while the screen was big, I wasn't awed. Was it a smaller screen than what RCMH used?

Bravo to Bob Ketler's home page salute to RCMH. Here are a few very minor corrections. Except during Christmas and Easter week when the doors would open 7:45 am, and on one Christmas occasion at 6:45 am (due to the length of "Sayonara" and to allow 5 shows), the normal house opening was at 10:15 am with the feature beginning at 10:30 on weekdays. Last stage show was always between 9:15 and 9:30, except on Sundays which strangly had a late stage show around 10:15. Also let's get the seating capacity right. Both the Roxy and RCMH claimed to have 6,000 seats when in reality the Roxy had 5,800 and the Music Hall 5,945. But whose counting right? Has anyone noticed that the new contour curtain (since the magnificent restoration) hangs rigidly on the stage floor and only when it begins to rise does it show the folds. I understand the process, but I remember that the original gold curtain still displayed a hint of a swagger...or am I dreaming. Oh yes, the prices. Throughout the 1950s, or until "Rosemarie" opened as the first Cinemascope film and they raised the admission price by 10 cents the prices were as follows: Weekdays Opening to noon .80; noon to 6pm 1.25 and 6 to closing 1.50. Saturdays .95 to noon; 1.25 to 3pm and 1.50 to close; Sundays 1.25 from opening to 1pm and 1.50 1pm to close. Reserved seats (1st mezzanine)1.80 for matiness and 2.40 evenings and holidays. Reserved seat "subsciption" tickets were also available during the first two weeks of every show. This was very popular among the elite during the 1940s and 1950s and the crowd in the first mezzanine looked like the grand tier set at the Met.

Simon L- Knights of the Round Table was the first cinemascope at the Music Hall. Sorry to hear about the new curtain as it used to have many vertical folds. But then the place is no longer Radio City Music Hall(and Rockefeller Center is now a 5th Av Paramus Park.)

The curtain at the hall does appear to raise differently as well, I remember visiting the stage being shown the many motors required to raise her. As we know the curtain can be raised in many different ways it all depends on the ways the motors are programmed. I don't like the way she raises now, it seems to eliminate most of the waterfall effect and it goes up all at once. Even in the full up position it's almost a straight horizontal line across.

Another bit of trivia about RCMH: trailers of the next attraction were shown, however, there was a one minute "announcement" of the next attraction shown on the screen in which a few lines describing the film would appear over a grey background with live organ accompaniment. It began "The Radio City Music Hall is proud to present as its next distinquished attraction the world premiere of XXXXX. Also on the great stage a new spectacle produced by (either) Leon Leonidoff or Russell Markert. Also the latest Walt Disney cartoon would get a spot on the program if the film were not more than 110 minutes long. One more bit of info: During the 1950s, a film had to gross $88,000 in the four day period from Thursday thru Sunday to warrent a holdover. A good opening week was around $145,000 and would suggest a four week run. The only film I know that didn't break the $100,000 barrier during its opening week in the 1950s was "The Barretts of Wimpole Street." It grossed a paltry $85,000 for the entire week, but it was held for 2 weeks, the miniumum run in that decade.

I am very sorry to hear from the previous comments that the wonderful and 'signature' CONTOUR CURTAIN no longer works as some seem to remember it. I wonder if some people are not confusing it with the AUSTRIAN FOLD curtain, where, unlike the Contour, there are continuous horizontal swag folds from one side of a vertical panel to the other, from top to bottom even when the curtain is fully descended. This Austrian Fold type can be rigged to either rise entirely as does a typical 'drop curtain', or it can also be rigged to gather up from the bottom as does a Contour type. A true Contour Curtain, on the other hand, looks very like a standard drop ('guillotine') curtain when at full descent, but when opening it gathers up from the bottom to form swaged folds similar to the Austrian, but only for a ways up from the bottom, the distance depending upon how far it is raised to fully ascended position. It is also quite possible that the controls for the Contour in RCMH are now starting to malfunction with age, and the owners are reluctant to put the money into repairing them. For those interested in this singular Contour Curtain rigging method, there is a very rare photo of the control panel for it showing the 13 lines of peg switches completing the X-Y coordinates to achieve the desired pattern and height once raised, on page 23 of MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Soc. of 3rd Qtr. 1999, along with a great deal of other technical info about RCMH by Lyman C. Brenneman. Let's hope that at least this signature feature of the opulent opening days can be retained in at least this one theatre where it is so much a part of the unique experience.

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 lend 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)

Simon L how do you know all this great stuff? Did you attend the MH during this era?
I think that during the 70's 2001 made below 90 grand. Also during the 70's films were kept well past their expiration date. Airport played well after its grosses dropped and I worked there during Robin and Marian which seemed to play forever which even before and during Easter week played to empty houses. After that was 1776 and The Blubird where you could have shot off cannons and not harmed a soul(you've never seen an emptier and sadder theater than the Music Hall in the mid 70's.)An old man there who had been a Roxy usher in the late 20's told me that The Odd Couple had as many people on its last day after 14 weeks as it had on opening day. And a ticket seller told me it was the last film where the pressure was unrelenting. How in the world did things change so fast?

Yes Simon, I remember the coming attractions made exclusivly for RCMH,I used to think it lent a certain amount of class to the show. I also remember Radio City Music Hall news which was a compulation of the best stories from two or three different news reels.The news began with a wonderful RCMH opening folowed by the best clips from News Of The Day, Warner Pathe and Movietone news. I wish clips were available of those wonderful previews and news openings.

I believe the decline of the Music Hall during the 1960s is well documented. HOwever, those of us who worked there, as well as at the Roxy, will never forget what a class operation they were from managment to the service personel. How a film was presented was of paramount importantance. A patron never saw a blank screen. The film (or studio logo)would begin as the contour curtain lifted and the traveler curtain opened simultaneously. The contour curtain would begin its descent timed perfectly to hit the stage as the film ended. Also no short or cartoon ever started with the traveler opening and closing. Also the organist would pick up on the last note off the sound track and then seque into his medley. If's fun to remember and hear the responses.

Correction: Previous sentence should read: Also no short or cartoon ever started WITHOUT the traveler opening and closing. Sorry.

Simon - Thank you for putting down some memories. Your writing style and descriptions are exceptional. Can I pester you for more? Tell us about the training you got to be a Roxy and RCMH usher. Was there any of the military bravura that Ben Hall describes in his book? Were there sports teams? Did RCMH play the Capitol? Did you ever sing in the glee club? Or was all that just publicitiy hype?

Also, what were the accomodations like for the ushers? Is there a vast hidden suite of rooms? Where is it? Did you ever date a Rockette? Was the Center Theatre still there when you were working? Did you ever get sent there?

Details! Untold millions are sitting here eagerly waiting to hear every detail from someone who was there!

Thank you Will for the compliments. Remember that I was only at the Roxy (1956 - 57) and Music Hall (1958-59)during the last of the glory days, but also well after the days that you describe above. Yes, the ushers at both the Roxy and Music Hall were trained to exceptional standards to handle large crowds, assist patrons and help in keeping the theater running smoothly and efficiently. We had morning inspections and evening inspections. An in-house tailor shop regularly cleaned and repaired all uniforms and good grooming was essential. I was only 18 years old when I started at the Roxy on the evening and weekend shifts and went to college during the day. The most difficult thing about the job was standing erect and still for long periods of time. No slouching or leaning was tolerated. Neither was conversation with other ushers. Our assignments were given by the captain before we went on the floor. They included an aisle or foyer assignment, center rotunda or near the front lobby. Only doormen (you had to be over 6ft) worked the outer lobby and street. Most everyone preferred the orchestra as the upper mezzanine rarely had the action or flow of patrons. Our uniforms were season specific i.e. white jackets in summer and black jackets in winter. and included a white dicky and black bow tie. We carried flashlights and learned complicated hand signals that came in very handy when relaying messages across such a huge expanse. We had house phones on every level to use reach head ushers and asst managers when needed. The most important function was to keep tabs on seat availability and let those handling the lines (whether inside or out) know how many seats were available and in what location. There was always an usher at the auditorium entrance with a notebook counting the number of patrons (called a spill)that entered every 10 minutes. This gave us a clue as to when seats would become available after 3 hours. No patrons were ever seated during the overture but had to stay in the standing room section in rear of orchestra. Also no seating was allowed during the Nativity or Glory of Easter pageants. To answer you questions above: we did not have sport teams (bummer)or sing. But I did participate with my fellow ushers as escorts for the Rockettes (they rode on a float until we got to Macy's)the first time they appeared in the Thanksgiving Day parade. To digress just a bit: It was the movie studios that were responsible for the downward spiral of the Music Hall. The studios would not guarantee the Music Hall an exclusive run prior to regular release. The growing number of poor G rated films and the growing number of excellent films with R ratings also hurt.The 1960s introduced the mass multiple run openings across the country. I'm sure you've all read enough about that. And NO, I never dated a Rockette.

I remember telling a ticket seller there who had been there for years
(during the forties she had been at the Strand) that Harry and Walter was not going to be exclusive to the Music Hall in the metro area and she responded that that was it, it was all over and she was right.
Of course the Music Hall hastened its own demise by its threadbare and amateurish stage shows of the period. They got rid of the ballet company which was the backbone of the spectacles(Bolero, Rhapsody in Blue, the Undersea Ballet etc.) which was really the raison d'etre of the Hall and the Rockettes were cut back to 30.
The only (mediocre)spectacle today is at Christmas and I want to know why they got rid of the Leonidoff Renaissance Nativity(which even Pauline Kael liked!) and replaced it with a piece of Christian fundamentalist nonsense.

Let's remember that many of the old movie palaces, at least those that were known as "presentation houses" were a phenomenon. For the first time (from the 1920s thru 1950s) middle class and poor people could experience "classical" music played by a symphony orchestra, world class ballet, the great arias and cantatas sung by a renowned singer and a choral ensemble, all with a film and at popular prices and in a city near you. It raised the consciousness of the nation and brought an unexpected shower of culture to people that could only imagine it through the radio. Even the theaters that catered to the "Big Bands" reached millions that could only hear them on the radio. Like it or not, the era has passed and the dumming down of America has had its effect. The pop/rap scene has virtually eradicated classical culture from our society. Only the elite and wealthy are privileged to enjoy it nowadays. The cost of producing a show that would please Vincent at the Music Hall would be prohibitive. As it is, tickets to the Christmas show now can run as high as $90. Ridiculous. My question: Does anyone know if there are any filmed records of complete Music Hall shows of the 1930s, 40s, & 50s? Also I've tried to find the archived records of the grosses of the New York Theaters on the web...without going to micro-film. Is that possible?

Can we really fault the 1960's - '70's Music Hall management for insisting on "G" rated films even at the expense of profit? Certainly the result was the decline and near failure of the "Showplace of the Nation," but they were actually trying to uphold a standard. In the face of a cultural and business shift RCMH seems to have tried to keep to the high road. It's more than I can say for the managers who chopped their halls into mulit-plexes, went to porno or tore the halls down.

All of the super-palace class theaters (think Chicago's Uptown, Paradise, Marbro, New York's Capitol, Roxy, Center and many more) were financial balacing acts. We all held our breath when the Music Hall's future hung in that balance. RCMH, for all its lack of vision in production at least remains intact, doors open and protected from demolition. If the Christmas shows pander to a specific audience AND pay the bills to keep the greatest theater ever built open, I for one won't complain too much. As long as the hall stands, there's hope that someday, some brilliant showman will come along who can draw the thousands necessary to make the money to pay the orchestra, the organists, the ballet, the Rockettes, the ushers, the engineers, the stage hands, the projectionists, the costumers, the choreographers, the publicists and everyone else it takes to create magnificent, wonderful, outlandish spectacle at "popular" prices.

I remain optimistic.

Simon much to my chagrin I must agree with you and yes rock(not pop) and rap have eradicated classical culture from society(pace those of you who love rock and rap. Even those of you who love them have to admit that we've paid a terribly high price culturally and socially their success. Now don't get all bent out of shape and be defensive and angry. It's just the natures of those beasts.)

The Music Hall for all intensive purposes is a white elephant. Just think that it was used for the Kerry camapign and it is about to house basketball games! And by that I mean you don't need the Music Hall's resources for much of anything that goes on there now.
There was a large middle class audience that enjoyed a classical ballet and classical overture along with the Rockettes and acrobats and didn't find it laughable or tedious.
But our society and culture have coarsened and been polarized 10 times over from when The Odd Couple played there in '68. The hit movies of that year were in addition to that film 2001, Lion in Winter and Funny Girl. Today they are Passion of the Christ, Farenheit 9/11, and Spiderman. Read it and weep.

What was the name of that movie theatre that was in Radio City's building but around the corner, and smaller? I saw its last film, an Albert Brooks movie several years ago, and it's now a retail store. It's astonishing that a movie theatre at that superb location couldn't flourish. The chairs were threadbare and the concession stand only sold one relatively small and non-buttered container of popcorn, oddly, but when you stepped outside, you were right in the middle of the Rockefeller Center complex. Sensational location.

Camden

Are you thinking of the Guild?

I believe the theater that "Camden" is referring to is the Guild. It was a classy little art house operation (about 500 seats)that specialized in British films. It was very comfortable and posh during its heyday and had a lovely lounge one level below the theater in which coffee and small cakes were served to patrons waiting for the film to end. Like the Music Hall it used its trailer curtain effectively opening and closing between the news and the feature. One of its greatest and longest running hits was the documentary "A Queen is Crowned" that ran for six months and had long lines. Also "Gate of Hell," was another smash hit from Japan (played about six months or more)and is considered was the breakthrough film from Japan. Its breathtaking use of Technicolor and portait quality cinematography are landmarks in film making. The Boulting Brothers comedys from the U.K. were great favorites. The Guild enjoyed its greatest success during the 1940s and 1950s. Sometimes there was a long line waiting to get into the Guild while the Music Hall had immediate seating. Patrons arriving from 5th Avenue would get confused when they saw the line and had to be told to continue walking toward 6th Avenue to the Music Hall entrance.

The Guild
http://cinematreasures.org/theater/1077/

Part of the history of a great theater is the films which played there. This is especially true of the Radio City Music Hall, the largest theater in New York City, and truly the "Showplace of the Nation." I have enjoyed reading the comments posted wherein people remember visits to the Hall and the films that were showing there. Listed below are the films which played at Radio City Music Hall from late 1959 to 1975. Research is from microfilms of Variety and The New York Times. The date listed is the Wednesday of the week that the film opened. In those days, most new films opened on that day, not on Fridays as they do now. I believe in most cases, the RCMH opened its films and new stageshows on Thursdays, although there may be instances where this was not the case.
11/11/59 The Miracle
12/02/59 Operation Petticoat
01/20/60 Never So Few
02/10/60 Once More, With Feeling
03/02/60 Home From the Hill
03/30/60 Please Don't Eat the Daisies
05/18/60 Pollyanna
06/22/60 Bells are Ringing
08/10/60 Song Without End
09/21/60 The Dark at the Top of the Stairs
10/12/60 Midnight Lace
11/09/60 The World of Suzie Wong
12/07/60 The Sundowners
01/18/61 Where the Boys Are
02/15/61 Cimarron
03/15/61 The Absent-Minded Professor
05/03/61 Parrish
05/31/61 The Pleasure of His Company
07/05/61 Fanny
09/06/61 Come September
10/04/61 Breakfast at Tiffany's
11/08/61 Flower Drum Song
12/13/61 Babes in Toyland
01/10/62 A Majority of One
02/07/62 Lover Come Back
03/14/62 Rome Adventure
04/04/62 Moon Pilot
05/16/62 Bon Voyage
06/13/62 That Touch of Mink
08/22/62 The Music Man
09/26/62 Gigot
10/31/62 Gypsy
12/05/62 Billy Rose's "Jumbo"
01/09/63 The Days of Wine and Roses
02/06/63 To Kill a Mockingbird
03/13/63 A Girl Named Tamiko
04/02/63 Bye Bye Birdie
05/15/63 Spencer's Mountain
06/05/63 Come Blow Your Horn
07/31/63 The Thrill of it All
09/18/63 The VIPs
10/23/63 Mary, Mary
11/13/63 The Wheeler Dealers
12/04/63 Charade
01/22/64 The Prize
02/19/64 Captain Newman, MD
03/18/64 The World of Henry Orient
04/22/64 The Pink Panther
05/20/64 The Chalk Garden
07/15/64 The Unsinkable Molly Brown
09/23/64 Mary Poppins
11/11/64 Send Me No Flowers
12/09/64 Father Goose
01/27/65 36 Hours
03/03/65 Dear Heart
03/31/65 Operation Crossbow
05/12/65 The Yellow Rolls-Royce
07/14/65 The Sandpiper
09/15/65 The Great Race
11/03/65 Never Too Late
12/01/65 That Darn Cat
01/19/66 Judith
02/16/66 Inside Daisy Clover
03/16/66 The Singing Nun
05/04/66 Arabesque
06/08/66 The Glass-Bottom Boat
07/13/66 How to Steal a Million
09/21/66 Kaleidoscope
10/12/66 Any Wednesday
11/09/66 Penelope
11/30/66 Follow Me, Boys!
01/18/67 Hotel
02/15/67 The 25th Hour
03/08/67 How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
04/26/67 Two for the Road
05/24/67 Barefoot in the Park
08/16/67 Up the down Staircase
09/27/67 The Bobo
10/25/67 Wait Until Dark
11/29/67 The Happiest Millionaire
01/17/68 How to Save a Marriage & Ruin Your Life
02/07/68 Sweet November
02/28/68 The Secret War of Harry Frigg
03/20/68 The One & Only, Genuine, Original Family Band
05/01/68 The Odd Couple
08/07/68 Where Were You When the Lights Went Out?
09/18/68 Hot Millions
10/16/68 Bullitt
12/04/68 The Impossible Years
01/15/69 The Brotherhood
02/12/69 Mayerling
03/12/69 The Love Bug
04/23/69 If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium
05/21/69 Winning
07/02/69 True Grit
08/27/69 The Gypsy Moths
09/24/69 The Christmas Tree
10/22/69 Hail, Hero!
11/12/69 The Brain
12/03/69 A Boy Named Charlie Brown
01/21/70 Viva, Max!
02/11/70 ...tick...tick...tick...
03/04/70 Airport
05/27/70 The Out-of-Towners
07/22/70 Darling Lili
09/23/70 Sunflower
10/28/70 The Private Life of Sherlock Holmes
11/18/70 Scrooge
01/20/71 Promise at Dawn
02/17/71 Wuthering Heights
03/10/71 A New Leaf
05/12/71 Plaza Suite
06/30/71 Murphy's War
07/28/71 The Red Tent
09/01/71 See No Evil
09/29/71 Kotch
10/27/71 The Railway Children
11/10/71 Bedknobs and Broomsticks
01/12/72 The Cowboys
02/02/72 Mary, Queen of Scots
03/08/72 What's Up, Doc?
05/03/72 Play it Again, Sam
05/31/72 The War Between Men and Women
07/05/72 Butterflies are Free
08/16/72 The Last of the Red Hot Lovers
09/20/72 Cancel My Reservation
10/18/72 When the Legends Die
11/08/72 1776
01/31/73 The World's Greatest Athlete
02/21/73 Charlotte's Web
03/14/73 Tom Sawyer
05/16/73 Mary Poppins
06/27/73 40 Carats
08/08/73 Night Watch
09/26/73 From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankenweiler
10/17/73 The Optimists
11/07/73 Robin Hood
01/31/74 Superdad
03/06/74 Mame
05/16/74 The Black Windmill
06/05/74 Herbie Rides Again
07/10/74 The Tamarind Seed
08/21/74 The Girl From Petrovka
-------------------------------
From this point, my records only show first-run films that were reviewed in The New York Times. Certainly, the films below did not have such long runs, indicating that the Hall began to be used for other events or was dark.

11/06/74 The Little Prince
03/05/75 At Long Last Love
05/21/75 The Wind and the Lion
06/25/75 Bite the Bullet
07/30/75 Hennessy
11/04/75 The Sunshine Boys

As can be seen, during the period from 1959 to 1975, most of the films which played at Radio City Music Hall were indeed, family-friendly, which along with the accompanying stage shows were selected to draw in not only New York residents but the large tourist trade. There were only rare instances when RCMH featured a film with "adult" themes, such as "The Days of Wine & Roses," "The World of Suzie Wong," and "The Sandpiper." Of course, many big films received their American and NYC premieres there. A number of films which played the Hall were those which were set in NYC. And special consideration was given to booking films from the Walt Disney studios, cute romantic comedies, and the film versions of successful plays and musicals from Broadway which in New York had built-in name recognition. Almost all of the films which were made from Neil Simon comedies got their NY premiere at the Hall. Finally, a big consideration was given to films which had the name box-office stars of the time such as Cary Grant, Doris Day, Rock Hudson, Sophia Loren, Julie Andrews, Goldie Hawn, Jack Lemmon, Walter Matthau, Debbie Reynolds, James Garner, Paul Newman, John Wayne.

(If I have made omissions or there are corrections, please post and let visitors to this fine website know. I realize from reading above that these films are listed in a book about the Hall, but not all of us have access to it, and so they are now on this site. My research and interest in films began in 1958 when I was only 5, so perhaps someone who has access to data about the films which played there in earlier decades will be kind enough to put it here. I am trying to get my research information on the Cinema Treasures website for all of the major theaters in the large cities around the country so it will be easy for future theater scholars to find it. Thank you.)

Nice job Ron!
Thank you for sharing

I wonder if Ron3853, or anyone, has found a website that has compiled the weekly grosses that Variety has only on microfilm.

Movie credits are fairly easy to come by. But what is desparately needed is a full list of all the stage shows that supported the movies at RCMH, complete with titles, dates, producers, directors, writers, and casts of performers, including the members of the Rockettes, Corps De Ballet and Symphony Orchestra. This seems a worthy dissertation for someone going for a PHD in theatre history.

Well done Rob...I know I was there for Mary,Mary...Mary Poppins...True Grit...What's Up Doc...Viva Max...The Odd Couple and The Out of Towners though it feels like more than that

Thanks so much Ron - what a great list and what great memories it triggered. Now I know for sure that the first film I saw at the Music Hall was Bon Voyage, when I always thought it was That Touch of Mink. I was 7 years old for both films. I also got to relive all the films I WANTED to see at the Music Hall but was too young to go see by myself.

Ron-Thanks for the great work but now I'm reminded of all the great films that I would have loved to see at the Hall but couldn't because I was too young. As you can see the list in the 70's gets pretty pathetic(with a rare gem every now and then.) And of course most of them I did get to see while regreting the fact that the Music Hall was stuck with such mediocrity to show on its screen(like watching paint dry as they say.)
Well either the Hall couldn't get anything else because of studio execs or the people choosing the films had pretty horrendous taste. I remember when Wanda Hale was lamenting the fact that a mindless gore fest like See No Evil was playing there. They might have well shown Night of the Living Dead which is a better film.
Films the Hall should have shown from this era;
The Boy Friend
The Way We Were
Prisoner of Second Avenue
Murder on the Orient Express
The Poseiden Adventure
That's Entertainment 1 and 2
Funny Lady
Lost Horizon(yes, a seriously bad movie but it would have packed the place)

I'm sure there are others I have left out. But PG product was plentiful during this era and every time I saw the ad for the next Music Hall film my heart would sink.

Interesting that Days of Wine and Roses and To Kill a Mockingbird played back to back. If New Yorkers wanted to see some of the best screen performances from the year 1962 (besides Lawrence of Arabia), they had to go to the Music Hall in early 1963.

Interesting that Bill would mention those two films above. Although critically acclaimed, neither one did extraordinary business: 4 & 5 weeks respectively under a guarantee. Granted that those films attracted a mature audience, they were hard to sell to the typical Music Hall audience. Curiously, the Hall attracted a more mature audience during its first two decades notably "Randam Harvest" (ll weeks) and "Sunset Boulevard" in 1950 (7 weeks). I guess the dumbing down began right after "Days..." and "...Mockingbird." That tells us something...maybe about the drinking water.

Those pictures listed above seem like that same kind that played to empty houses coast-to-coast, helping kill many old theaters in the process. I think Hollywood forgot how to make movies for a while.

Vincent is so right about the films he talks about...all of them day dated East and West Side and suburbs except the That's Entertainments which were exclusive to the Ziegfeld in Manhattan...Sadly in its last few film engagements around 1976 the Music Hall was even daydating with the suburbs on something called Paper Tiger with David Niven and Toshiro Mifune

A major reason for the Music Hall's decline was the introduction in 1962 of the "Premiere Showcase" concept. Although it was started by United Artists, it rapidly spread to all the distributors, who found they could make more money through saturation release. Fewer and fewer "major" movies became available to the Music Hall, which often had to settle for the leftovers. By 1969, this was the full film schedule, in order of opening: "The Brotherhood," "Mayerling," "The Love Bug," "If It's Tuesday, This Must Be Belgium," "Winning," "True Grit," "The Gypsy Moths," "The Christmas Tree," "Hail, Hero," "The Brain," and "A Boy Named Charlie Brown." The majority were losers, and some, including "The Christmas Tree" and "The Brain," are among the worst movies ever made.

A slight digression from the Music Hall: The common practice of saturation booking policy by the studios explains the demise of all the single screen cinemas with 1,200 seats or more. The Ziegfeld Theater no longer gets the "exclusive" except perhaps for one week prior to general release. And the 1,500 seat Loew's on 45th St is closing to become a retail store.

I thought Charlie Brown was pretty awful as well(They should have had the O'Toole Goodbye Mr Chips for the Christmas Show)but it was probably one of the most successful films to ever play the Hall. The stage show for it however was the best I ever saw there.

In my opinion, the greedy studios in conjunction with the nation's largest theater chains have totally ruined the once pleasurable pastime of moviegoing. They can have their 24-screen multiplex with stadium seating and cup-holders in the seats! It was much better in the old days when downtown theaters showed first-run films exclusively and neighborhood theaters with balconies got them on second-run as part of a double feature. You could see virtually everything but art films at the local "Bijou" or "Orpheum" in your own neighborhood and even walk to the theater. A wonderful bygone era. Somebody invent a time machine so I can go back to the days of Ike and Mamie!

Ahhhh a time machine, lets see, take me to Christmas 1954 to see "White Christmas" in VistaVision at RCMH

If I had access to the time machine, there are lots of trips I'd be making to the Music Hall: King Kong (1933), The Devil and Daniel Webster (1941), The Yearling (1946), The Ghost and Mrs. Muir (1947), I Remember Mama (1948), The Nun's Story and North by Northwest (both 1959) and, from Ron's list, The Music Man (1962), To Kill a Mockingbird (1963) and Wait Until Dark (1967 - there must've been lots of screams echoing throughout the Hall at the end of that one).

Vito, If you went back in time to Christmas '54 I'm afraid you would have blown it. You would have seen Deep in my Heart with Jose Ferrar.
I hope that you would not have been too bummed and you got a second chance to go back to Thanksgiving '54. Then you would have see it.
The Nov/Dec Christmas show only started in '70 when the Thanksgiving show that year was such a bomb(Wilders cut to shreds "Private Life of Sherlock Holmes") they had to pull it and open the Christmas show early. They never had a Thanksgiving movie again.

Two more quickies - It's a shame that our need for instant gratification doesn't allow for a slower rollout of big pictures and I'm thinking largely of Disney's animation resurgence in the last ten years so that there couldn't still be exclusives at venues such as RCMH...I am curious in how the Premiere Showcase trend emerged in the 60s and 70s...from studio sponsored showcases we found ourselves in Manhattan with amorphous brands such as Flagship, Red Carpet, Blue Ribbon...if anyone can explain

SimonL-
I second William Dunklin's kudos for your description-- Here a couple of supplements: Before CinemaScope brought alterations to the narrow picture sheet space that eliminated a solid draft curtain (with "Knights of the RT" in January, rather than "RoseMarie" at Easter), the contour curtain used to rise before the main film in a fully lit house revealing the yellow traveller behind it. When the studio logo flashed on the traveller siumultaneously with the last organ notes, the lights dimmed and the traveller parted. That way, spectators saw the contour rise in full lighted glory, and enjoyed it in a fractional pause before the film began. The larger CinrmaScope screen eliminated a backstage draft curtain that kept the whole tableau in place, and so that was the end of the pre-film treat. Another supplement: The introduction of big screen in 1953 (with "Shane") eliminated the spectaculkar MagnaScope effect mentioned elsewhere above, whereby certain spectacle scenes in movies were shown on an enlarged screen, when the masks widened from the standard 27'x35' size to a (at that time) manouth 36'x48' size. I remember the effect for the stampede scene in "ing Solomon's Miones" (1950), the storm scene in "Plymouth Adventure" (Thanksgioving, 1952), the Busby Berkeley acquatic scene in "Million Dollar Mermaid" (Christmas, 1952), and, oh yes, the train wreck scene in "Greatest Show on Earth" (January 1951). When "Shane" opened in May '53 at a time when B'way movies were going WideScreen, the Music Hall advertised shhowing the film o"On the Panoramic Screen." I was hugely disappointed, because they simply showed it on the Magnascope Screen, without installing a cuurved wide screen as the Capitol, Loew's State, and others had done. I saw "Band Wagon," "Roman Holiday," and LKiss Me Kate" (defiantly not in #D) that way. By the time of the Christmas show ("Easy to Wed)), the CinemaScope screen was in place, though that Esther Williams splash was made for and shown in c theby-then conventional 1x1.6 ratio on it 32'x52' or so). In those early 'Scope years, the Music Hall narrowed the screen to the (now) tiny 27'x35' for the news , cartoon, and coming attraction announcement (with, yes, the traveller aopening and closing between each segment).

While we are in RCMH time machine mode, I would pick June 1955. On screen was LOVE ME OR LEAVE ME with Doris Day and James Cagney. Featured in the stage show was the Ravel’s BOLERO production number, which was so incredible to my 15 year old mind at the time that I sat through the movie and stage show a second time just to experience that number a second time. It started with a completely dark RCMH, the low drumbeats started and a pair of dancers was spotlighted center stage in the darkness. As the music kept building in volume, more and more dancers appeared and started to fill the stage. As the thundering finale was approaching, which by that time involved all of the Rockettes, the Corps de Ballet and God knows who else filled the stage. For the final crescendo of the music, huge drums on those mini-stages on the sides of the theater were played. It was quite a spectacle to behold.

They attempted a revival of this number in the late 70’s, I believe, as part of one of their summer shows after the screen and stage show combo had been abandoned. However, it was totally unmemorable and a mere shadow of its former self. It lacked the energy and large number of cast members required on stage to recreate that 1955 rendering of RCMH magic.

Re: Seth's question on Premiere Showcases

I'm from Pittsburgh, but it was the same in every big city in the mid-60s...the studios had more product than first-run theaters in which to show them (particularly when good product led to long runs in the downtown movie palaces), so they put together networks of second-run neighborhood houses to serve as first-run houses for a week or two for films that were more cheaply-made or of an exploitational type...good examples would be the Elvis Presley or Jerry Lewis vehicles which came out two or more times a year. Using names like "Showcase" "Red Carpet" and "Blue Ribbon," they made it seem like it was something special that you didn't have to go all the way downtown on the trolley to see a new release.

Darling Lili was the last time the Florence Rogge Bolero was done at the Hall. I kept hoping to see it at some point during the early '70s as I had missed it that summer of '70. They never did it again and then decided in the bizarre thinking that has continued to plague the Hall ever since to stage Bolero in a summer show called Encore but with completely new sets, costumes and choreography by Geoffrey Holder. I didn't bother to go because I knew it would be a travesty and I ask for the millionth time can somebody tell me why they don't do Leonidoff's wonderful Nativity anymore which would open the stage show and then lead into the secular part allowing for a grand Christmas finale? Which of course they wouldn't do now because the clowns who run the place(yes you are)have no sense of showmanship.
Maybe they'll use the place this autumn for football games?

"Premiere Showcase" in NYC was the brainchild of Eugene Picker, who was fired from the presidency of Loew's Theatres when the Tisch brothers bought the company. Picker, who'd joined Loew's as a young man and had spent about 40 years with the company, swore to get even by breaking the dominance of Loew's in the NYC area. He did it with the help of his brother, Arnold Picker, who was one of the top execs of United Artists Corporation. The first "Premiere Showcase" movies were all UA releases, starting with "Road to Hong Kong." When this concept proved successful, all the other distributors followed suit. Some companies, especially MGM and Paramount, which had long associations with Loew's, remained, but eventually jumped ship as well. In the end, Loew's could no longer function as a circuit, and had to book its theatres individually into the various "showcases" that were formed.

Well put Vincent and thanks for filling in some details on the Bolero number.
As you say there is a total lack of "showmanship" at RCMH these days. 76 million dollars to fix the place up and they hardly use the contour curtain, which watching it in the "old days" go up and down in various configurations was almost worth the price of admission alone. Too bad I wasn't alive for the opening night show where 20 minutes were devoted to watching it do all sorts of tricks to a musical accompaniment.
Recently attended an Andres Rieu concert and the Boston Pops and the curtain just sat there in the upward position and didn't move once. Also, I think they also screwed up the acoustics because in our seats on the far left of the orchestra for the Rieu concert there was an annoying echo.
Something else to kvetch about is....why do they have to have that gigantic lighting rig hanging in from of the procenium arch, which destroys the whole art deco effect of how it was meant to look? How did the Music Hall staff ever manage to light those four shows a day quite magnificently for some 35 odd years without that thing hanging there?

Seth and others ask 'Why' things are as they are at RCMH as well as the few large theatres still operating around the country, and the answer to that is well displayed in the documentary "The Monster That Ate Hollywood" shown on PBS a couple years back. It is because of conglomerates, the same business type that is devouring the rest our commercial culture and destroying our society. Likely the owners of RCMH are also ultimately a conglomerate and answer only to the 'bottom line.' As is always the case, when the 'bean counters' take over, artistry goes out the window.

Erwin
How lucky you were you got to see a Cagney, Day Cinemascope film at the Hall along with the Bolero. You might envy those who were there opening night(I wish I had been there too though from all accounts it was a very long, tedious vaudeville show, kind of like the current xmas show( midgets too!)
But I have to say I also envy those who were going there on a regular basis in the 50's and 60's. All those wonderful movies(and the Bolero, Undersea Ballet, Serenade to the Stars, the burning of Nome, Alaska...)

The Burning of Nome Alaska?

Strange but true. For some reason, which none of us alive now will ever know, someone in the Hall in '59 thought a fitting accompaniment to "The Nun's Story" would be the destruction and devastation of Nome. So they burned the place 4 times a day. Now I wasn't there so I can't confirm any of this but I believe they threw in an earthquake as well.

Audrey Hepburn and Dame Edith Evans are still turning in their graves over that one!

Yes, I was there for the "The Great Nome Fire," in which a replica of the town was engulfed in flames (I believe the Japanese are masters of on-stage fires, and they were also in charge of the burning of Atlanta in the London stage production of "Gone With The Wind"). The finale had fire engines racing through the town across the great stage spraying water on the fire with giant hoses as smoke billowed up and engulfed the entire stage from floor to rafters. The curtain came down as the smoke cleared showing the destroyed building. There were brighter moments during the first part of the show that included the Rockettes, as dance hall girls. It was a rather impressive but short display, as "The Nun's Story" was 2 hours and 30 minutes leaving only twenty minutes for a stage show. The other shortest stage show (22 minutes)in my memory was for "The Greatest Show on Earth," (2 hrs 32 mins). It had a circus theme. But when it comes to short stage shows, we can't forget the 15 minutes devoted to the ice show (American Indian theme) that accompanied "Giant" (3 hrs 20 min at the Roxy. The running time for the entire show was just under 4 hours includidng breaks.

Here's another stage show for the books. I believe I saw it with "Home Before Dark" with Jean Simmons (don't hold me to this one). The finale was danced to the ballet music from "Faust." It was a Dante's Inferno number during which huge flames shot up from various holes in the stage floor as the entire company including the dancers (corps de ballet and the Rockettes) whirled around in a sort of orgiastic frenzy until (once again) the stage was engulfed in smoke. This was an unusual number in that the curtain didn't descend during the climactic moment but the cast came forward for bows. The curtain came down after the bows. Can anyone remember any other really bizarre stage shows? I know a mini-opera version of "Madama Butterfly" was staged during the mid-1930s and held for a second week with a change of the film. I believe that was the only time a stage show was held over but not the film. The Paramount would do that on occasion.

Many of the ballets and production numbers at RCMH were repeated over the years, using the same sets and costumes from the theatre's warehouse. One of the most frequently revived of all was Ravel's "Bolero."

EdwinM remarks that: "Recently attended an Andres Rieu concert and the Boston Pops and the curtain just sat there in the upward position and didn't move once." This should not be faulted to the Music Hall, for it is customary at concerts to NOT use moving drapery, since the tradition is to emulate a standard concert hall which does not usually have a true stage or proscenium, and therefore no real drapery. The other uses of a true stage (legit theatre, opera, ballet, etc.) DO make use of moving/changing draperies to signal the opening, middle parts, and closing of a production, but not so for concerts. Still, I lament with you that the use of the wonderful House Curtain in RCMH (the vast Contour-type of curtain) is evidently so rarely used or moved these days. Who knows? Maybe the stage hands' union now requires a special person just to operate the Contour House Curtain, and that would be another expense for the management, which now exists for profit, NOT showmanship. It is sad, for as was said earlier, the raising and use of the vast golden curtain was part of the magic that made the Hall above and beyond the other theatres. We can but hope that a wiser and less money-focused administration will take over there in future.

How long were RKO and Radio City associated? Did the stage shows under RKO exclusively feature acts/stars under RKO contract? Or were the stage shows always produced in-house. Of course vaudeville was all-but gone by the time Radio City opened, but as the RKO Palace continued to operate with a "variety" policy for many years, I'm curious if RKO's contract players dominated the Music Hall's "great stage."

The only hope for the Music Hall would for the city and various sponsers to take over. It needs to be treated and maintained as a city landmark as much as Grants Tomb or Central Park. It needs to be managed by people who appreciate its history and resources. I believe the last year the Hall showed a profit was '55. After that I imagine it was propped up by the Rockefellers.
But this is a city that will spend a fortune of the taxpayers money on a sports stadium in Manhattan something that they wouldn't even do in the beginning of the last century when the city was a fraction of its current density. This will cause us great security risks , congestion, and financial burdens while its very rich sponsers become even richer.
So I guess we won't be seeing football games at the Music Hall but how about a golf range?

The RKO Theatres circuit managed the Music Hall through most of the 1930s. During that period, many RKO Radio movies played at the RCMH, but the stage shows were always in-house and did not feature big "names" from anywhere. If I recall correctly, the radio team of Amos & Andy, which had a movie contract with RKO, did appear in one of the first stage shows, but that was the only time that stars from any medium did.

Was Citizen Kane ever shown at the Music Hall in 1941? I know it didn't have a regular run there for the general public (although it was supposed to at one time), but I think I heard something about a special screening for RKO executives and/or theater owners.

I believe according to Pauline Kael it was booked for the Hall but then Hearst put pressure on the Rockefellers to pull it.
Another great movie that the Hall was planning to show was Streetcar Named Desire which was pulled when the Catholic church was considering giving the film a C rating.
Occasionally the Hall had name talent but this was pretty rare.
Annette Funicello appeared on stage with the film Pollyana.

Once in a whle, a star of the movie would also appear as part of the stage show. In December of 1936, musical child star Bobby Breen appeared in the movie "RAINBOW ON THE RIVER" and was featured in the stage show.

I remember a little program light that was built into the back of the seat in front of me. I think these lights were removed by the 1960's.

OH MY GOD! Did anyone else see those pictures of RCMH on television last night? The stage is a basketball court. They built some sort of hidious frame around the stage and hoops were installed and I saw men playing basketball. The image of that has been burned into my mind and I am cursed to see that forever.
How dare they do such a thing? obviously they have no respect at all. Do yourself a favor and do not allow yourself to see the hall in her present state.

One can thank the Republican National Convention being at Madison Square Garden, the Garden is unavalible for the next 5 weeks. All home basketball games had to be moved somewhere.
It is not going to be a permanent installation.

Yes, it's definitely the fault of the Republicans. I mean, how dare they have a convention!?! It's not at all the fault of poor planning on Madison Square's part, and it's definitely not the fault of Radio
City Music Hall's management, who apparently have no standards at all and are only beginning to reveal the depths to which they will sink if it means making a buck!

"Citizen Kane" had its NYC premiere engagement at the RKO Palace. I doubt that it was ever "trade screened" at RCMH, but it might have been shown in the theatre's private projection room.

"Streetcar..." wasn't the only film originally expected to open at the RCMH but nixed (It went to the Warner...previously the Strand)after it was screened by the executives. "A Place in the Sun" was also removed (too sexy) from the year's roster...it went instead to the Capitol. Anyone know why "Annie Get Your Gun" went to Loew's State instead of RCMH. RCMH chose "Father of the Bride." Annie seems so much more a Hall picture and "Father..." more typical of the Loew's State fare. Interesting trivia: "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" (Jennifer Jones) was the first film (although a good one)to gross under $100,000 in its opening week in more than 20 years.

Loew's State needed "big" movies more than RCMH, which is why "Annie Get Your Gun" opened there instead. MGM's "The Three Musketeers" and "Easter Parade" are two more examples of that...There were rumors that RCMH booked "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" as a favor to David O. Selznick, whose wife, Jennifer Jones, starred in it.

SimonL--
Yes about the abbreviated stage shoes--in the 1950s they eliminated the specialty acts between the ballet and the choral group and between that group and the Rockettes. In the '60s, the film's length mattered less, and they ran full-length stage shows for "Sayonara (Christmas '57) and "Auntie Mame" (Christmas '58) even though those pictures ran well over two hours. Yes, I remember the Roxy's "Indian Fall" quickie with "Giant. Better I recall the Roxy's show with "giant"'s predecessor, "Bus Stop," where they exploityed their full repertoire of stage sets in a constant display of over-the-top scene changewhile the Ice Blades and Roxyettes skated on and on--they even raised the cyclorama toi show the bare back wall, rerevealing the odd triangular stage plan on which the house was built. Among nuttier stage shows at RCMH, I recall for "Ivanhoe" in summer '52 a segment on the Civil War featuring photo projections of military gore, by turns macabre and maudlin, as the (I think( Tusgeegee Choir sang patriotic period songs. For "Green Mansions" (Easter late '50s), the show featured the multti0octave-range Yma Sumak singing away in an a San Amazonian setting while the Rockettes danced a Brazilian routine (Amazonian, but with left-breasts intact) to match the thematics of the picture (they also blew in Odorama of tropical scents to matrch the olefactory senses). Another match between picture-and-stage-show was with "Singing in the Rain" (Easter '52): the finale deployed the rain sprinklers (reral water) on a set of cast-tourists aagainst a Rockefeller Center backdrop, with Rockettes dancing to the tune of "Singing' in the Rain," a frenetic segue into the picture that followed. Whew. Don't get me started. .

SimonL and others--

sorry for the typos above--I find it hard to type blindly after running out of space in the visible box allowed -- is there a way to edit one's comments before submitting them tothe site:
Box Office Bill

To Box Office Bill: Thanks a lot for sharing your memories of the Radio City stage shows. You really describe them well - you have a great memory. I've been to about 15 shows there but the only one I can remember featured a stand-up comic during the engagement of "2001" in 1975. One of his jokes was "I'm so old I can remember when the air was clean and sex was dirty", and nobody laughed, out of the thousands of people that were there. I wish I could have seen some of the shows you talked about instead.

Father of the Bride makes sense for the Music Hall but The Next Voice You Hear?!(You can read about it in the current Vanity Fair with the Reagans on the cover.) This was obviously a favor to Dory Schary.
Annie would have been great at the Hall. And Meet Me in St Louis would have been a much better choice than National Velvet and what about them playing a Date with Judy instead of Easter Parade?
And what was it with the lousy Green Mansions as the '59 Easter show?
And then the violent, brutal, action World War 2 film Operation Crossbow as the 65 Easter show?
Even Charade was a pretty dark and violent film for a Christmas show.

I imagine that MGM (and probably RCMH) thought "Annie Get Your Gun" a disaster (remember the firing of Judy Garland). Even the Capitol would have been more prestigious than the State (and the Capitol still had stage shows then). It's odd thatRCMH instead chose "The Great Caruso," and odder still that this operatic middle-brow went on to break records (I remember that the stage show ended with the Underwater Ballet, the first time I'd seen that chestnut). The newspapers announced that "Streetcar" was pulled because "Caruso"'s hold over pushed back its date too far. But I think SimonL's explanation is accurate. In 1956 RCMH did not flinch from such adult films as "I'll Cry Tomorrow," "Picnic," and "Tea and Sympathy." As a young teen at the time, I could size up those pictures pretty well. For "The Next Voice You Hear" (yes, I saw that dreadful pic there too), the July 4-oriented stage show ended with the famous electriocal fireworks, and Rockettes clad all in re-white-'n-blue. Patriotic fever indeed. Box Office Bill

With such films as "Sayonarra," and "Auntie Mame," (both 2 1/2 hours) the stage show NEVER topped 30 minutes. Regular stage shows ran from 40 to 55 minutes. The show could never run past 3 hours total thus allowing for 4 stage shows and five films...except during Christmas and Easter Week. For "Sayonarra" and "Auntie Mame," the doors opened (except Sunday) at 6:45 am with the picture starting at 7 am. Can you imagine getting your family up and dressed and over to the Music Hall at that time of day? But if you didn't, you could depend on standing in line for three hours. For those that didn't like lines or stage shows, you could go to the Music Hall (during the 1940s and early 1950s) and see a midnight showing of the movie alone (it followed the normal last showing of the complete stage and film show) that began with the stage show around 9:20 with the film at 10:10. I think the worst Christmas picture that ever had was "The Impossible Years," (1968)with David Niven. Yet it broke attendance records.

"The Great Caruso" seemed perfectly suited to RCMH, which always included some classical music in its stage shows and employed a resident ballet corps and symphony orchestra.

Do you think Impossible Years(yes pretty awful and I have a taste for mindless 60's comedies) was worse than No No Nanette which didn't even make it to New Years or Balalaika?
And yes Lanza was an ideal RCMH star.
Any other nominees for worst holiday films? (The 70's dont'count.)

The IDEAL Christmas movie would have been "White Christmas," but RCMH had to play it for Thanksgiving so that Paramount could release it wide at the year-end. "Deep In My Heart" was the Christmas attraction that year (1954)...And by the way, what was the first MGM feature to ever play RCMH?

I'll take a guess and say "A Tale of Two Cities" (1935).

Here's an oddity: For "Spirit of St. Louis in March '56, the organ interludes between movie and stage show were set in a way I'd never experienced before or after at RCMH. Instead of using the golden houselights on the contour curtain and arches, they lit the latter in sky blue to match the movie's theme. And instead of using organ #1 on the left as usual, they used organ #2 on the right (which they dusted off from time to time, and occasionally used in conjunction with the former for special effect; was the former being renovated at that particular time?). I remember thinking, jees, all these tourists here for the first and probably last time will never see the famous "sunset" effect of the golden curtain. Some might recall that the newsreels and coming-attraction announcement always took place under dimly blue-lit arches to anable patrons arriving and departing between movie and stage shows to see their way..

BoxOfficeBill: You don't provide any E-mail address in your Contact information on your Member page ( http://cinematreasures.org/members/profile_view_ind.php?id=3642 ), so to answer your question as to editing your submissions here, the answer is 'no', you cannot edit them once you submit them, though you can hit "Preview" and see how it will look, and if you find a mistake, you can hit your BACK button and return to editing the Comment, and then hit either "Preview" again, or "Submit" if you find no more problems. Once you hit "Submit" there is no more chance to edit it.

The way I get around the awkward little text box on each Comments page, is to first type the comment in my word processor, edit it there (automatic spell check will eliminate many errors for you), and then click on Edit>Select-All, then Edit again, then Copy, then go back to the Comments page and click in the Comments Box, then again click on Edit>Paste, and the entire message you created in your word processor (virtually all operating systems have one built in these days) will appear there, even if you used more space than the box appears to hold. They told me, however, that there is a 300-word limit on comment length, so you could ask your processor to count the words for you in advance by clicking on Tools>Word-Count (if you are using Microsoft Word) and a panel will pop up telling you the totals. You will then see if there is a need to shorten the message. When you have pasted the Comment into the box, just hit "Submit" (since you have already previewed it in your processor) and it will appear just as you intended.

Note that if you are going to submit a URL, as I did above for your Member Page, it must have a space immediately before and immediately after the whole URL to enable their program to understand that it is a URL and highlight it accordingly. Do not use special characters not found on your keyboard; they will not reproduce on the site reliably. In many cases this means that your quote marks (') or (") should be set to the default (standard, NOT "Smart Quotes") ones, and you should set your 'dash' character (--) to be two hyphens as shown here, since the true 'dash' character, which is available from your Characters/Symbols page, is not found on a standard keyboard and will not reproduce in most on-line systems reliably. Hope this helps. Best Wishes.

Getting back to the stage shows:


Getting back to the stage shows: Does anyone remember "Dancing Waters," the gorgeous water falls display that was introduced (in a stage show called "Many Waters")at the Music Hall with the film "The Bad and the Beautiful." Dancing waters was also used to spectacular effect in a French themed show that recreated The Gardens of Versaille with "The Reluctant Debutante." Speaking of unusual stage shows (but down the block)...The Roxy had the entire New York Philharmonic four times a day on stage with "The Black Rose."

SimonL....A million thanks for all the information on the Roxy and Radio City Music Hall. I have some questions about the projection booths in both theatres. Who was responsible for maintaining the showmanship aspect of things? Were the projectionists hired specifically for each theatre of was it a union placement? Were the booths at the Roxy and RCMH similar in size? I understand the Roxy booth was in the front of the balcony, at 90 degrees to the screen to prevent distortion. Anything else you provide about the projection function would be appreciated.
Thank you.

The first MGM feature to be shown at RCMH was "Young Dr. Kildare," in October, 1938...In 1933, its first year of operation, RCMH showed 21 features from RKO, 14 from Fox, 5 from Warner Brothers, 4 from Columbia, and 1 each from Paramount, Universal, and United Artists. The lack of MGM product was probably due to the rivalry between RKO Theatres and Loew's Theatres, with the latter using the Capitol and the Astor for most of the major MGM releases (rarely Loew's State, where vaudeville was king and the movies usually move-overs).

I visited the RCMH booth just before the restoration and wondered about what has changed. At the time there were 5 projectors, 3 of them were Simplex 35/70 and the other two were Simplex XL 35. All were equipt with a Xenon light source, the carbon arc lamps having been removed a while ago.Dolby Digital had been installed and they were running on 6k reels. No platter in site ,thank heavens, I hope it stayed that way. At one time RCMH employed multiple union projectionist on each shift, two would monitor the changeovers, one calling out the que marks as not to miss them. A chief projectionist was also on hand.The reels were rewound by hand and inspected after each showing. Any one with more info?

Jim-- many thanks for the technical info --

My nominees for sub-standard holiday movies are “Easy to Love” (Christmas ’53) and “RoseMarie” (Easter ’54). As an eleven-year-old, I found it unbearable to watch the tight-teethed Esther Williams and stolid Van Johnson in the first, and the diminutive Ann Blythe and stage-Latin Fernando Lamas in the second. The best thing about the Christmas movie was that finally RCMH had installed a reasonable (though flat, not curved) wide screen. The Thanksgiving movie, “Kiss Me Kate,” was shown on the flat, square-ish old MagnaScope sheet that RCMH had used instead of a proper new Miracle Mirror screen in 1953. And they famously declined to project it in 3D. Hoping against hope, I crossed my fingers that on the day I saw it, the management might finally come to its senses and distribute polaroid glasses. But, alas, no such luck. The thrill of the Christmas show for me was that, as a movie-mad kid, I had just received the most extravagant Xmas present any kid could ever imagine, an 8mm movie camera, and so I brought it to film the Nativity pageant. My biggest disappointment was that not a single image developed at all, except for a blurry head of Mary spotlighted briefly in the final creche tableau. Of course, the Nativity’s dimly lit nocturnal set was not good for any photo-shoot at all. Someone has asked whether anyone took movies of early RCMH stage shows, and this might explain why. The 2.8 aperture on my camera simply couldn’t pick up even a fully-lit stage from the audience’s distance.
The Christmas show’s new screen had been installed in anticipation of the first MGM CinemaScope film, “Knights of the Round Table,” which followed in January. Again hoping against hope, I kept my fingers that the stage-crew might curve this vast screen for the new format (perhaps with a giant crowbar, or some such thing). But, alas, flat projection was here to stay at RCMH. I anticipated that the stage show would be stripped down to highpoint the movie (after all, the Roxy had dropped stage shows altogether when it brought in CinemaScope). As things turned out, it was one of the best stage shows that I ever remembered seeing at RCMH. The Rockettes’ number was set against a perspectival backdrop of RCMH’s 50th Street façade, and began with a stage-door Johnny greeting each dancer with flowers and chocolates as she emerged from the set’s stage-door. An announcer named each dancer as she stepped out, and the audience applauded for every one of them. As the stage filled up with all thirty-six, the effect proved tremendous when the lineup reached completion and broke into precision dance. The music with its sultry jazzy-blues rhythm, “Amy Doesn’t Dance Here Any More,” struck my pre-pubescent imagination as really sexy.
The following attraction was “Long, Long Trailer,” and I recall its stage show as the height of sophistication, thinking that when I grew up, this would be the kind of showmanship I’d truly appreciate. It was a Russell Markert production, which meant less spectacle and more art, and the music offered an all-Cole Porter score. The opening choral number was “Another Opening of Another Show,” and it dawned on me that the producers must have been sketching their program a few months earlier when “Kiss Me Kate” was playing, and that they took inspiration from the film. It offered me a good lesson in planning ahead. The Easter show that April was a disaster, and not just because of the movie. I recall on stage enormous pastel-colored Easter eggs in tones of yellow, green, and pink that really didn’t coordinate, with a kind of cheap cardboard look to it. But by that time I was already into staging my own 8mm spectacles of some quality (mostly poor quality) and could think myself a critic who’d earned the right to judge even the best work of others.

As mjc wants to know about the differences between the Roxy and RCMH projection booths, may I suggest that he contact both The League of Historic American Theaters (lhat.com) and The Theater Historical Society of America (http://www2.hawaii.edu/~angell/thsa/. Also the definitive Roxy info can be found in "The Best Remaining Seats" by Ben Hall. It is out of print, but libraries and buffs are sure to have it.

Simon is right that the Theatre Historical Soc. is the quintessential resource on most any theatre, especially the ROXY, since all photos shown in the late Ben Hall's "The Best Remaining Seats ..." as well as both of the issues of their MARQUEE magazine devoted to the ROXY, are retained at their Archive, and all materials are available for reference or duplication. The URL which Simon lists for them is correct, but they have been using an Internet convention called an "alias" for some years now, which makes their URL, or Internet address, easier to remember and type: www.HistoricTheatres.org

I suspect that the decision to show "Kiss Me Kate" flat was due mainly to the problems associated with the distribution of viewing glasses. The theatre might have to hand out as many as 6,000 pairs per performance, which required extra personnel and would slow down entries and exits. The movie was shown in 3-D when it hit the Loew's circuit, but even its largest theatres (Paradise, Valencia, Metropolitan, etc.) were much smaller than RCMH.

Simon, Vito and Jim:
Thanks for replying. I have the Ben Hall book but there is very little in there about the projection function at the Roxy. He mentions there was a large projection staff at the time it opened but there is not much other info and no photo's.
I'll check with the Theatre Historical Society ( I used to be a member) to see if they have anything else on file.
There is a great 360 degree picture of the projection booth at Radio City Music Hall on their website. There is not a lot of equipment in but I can imagine what an impressive place it would have been at one time.
I worked as a trainee projectionist for over a year when I was in my teens and still have the bug.I visited the projection booth at the Ohio Theatre in Columbus several years ago and it was as if time had never changed. Same projectors, carbon arcs and sound system I had worked on in the theatre I was at in 1960.

I was just thinking, RCMH could have presented "Kiss me Kate"
in 3-D without intermission, since they had enough projectors to make a 3-D reel changeover. That is what the Paramount, with four projectors, did with "House Of Wax" and "Charge At Feather River"

mjc, Very few theatres run reel to reel carbon arc now a days, but some remain with Xenon reel to reel. Everyone has gone platter happy, even the single screen Zigfield, which has two projectors in the booth, uses a platter. What a boring job that projectionist must have.

vito:

"Boring" is right. Seems like its a just a matter of turning the projectors on and off now. One person makes up the show and sticks it on the platter..and thats about it.
When I was working it was very much as you described at RCMH. Always two projectionists and a rewind guy on a shift, a chief projectionist breathing down your neck to make sure there were no mistakes. At intermission time on continuous shows it was wild....one guy operating the lights and curtains, one guy changing lenses and gates for Cinemascope feature or previews, reels to be rewound rolling across the floor to the rewind guy with its replacement being rolled back. Everything was timed out. The audience had no idea what was going on. I remember at one time there was sign over each of the ports which read "Your performance is the audience's pleasure". Amen.
So it is good to know the amount of work that went on at RCMH. I wish I could have seen a movie/live show there. I visted in 1980 but it was all a live show.

Vito and everyone:

I just want to clarify my previous post to say that I did not work at Radio City Music Hall. I wish I had. The work I referred to was when I was a trainee projectionist in England in 1960.

mjc, I wondered about that rolling the reels around on the floor. I somehow did not think that happened at RCMH.Thanks for clearing that up.

Vito:

We got pretty good at it too!

I am continually in the process of putting the film schedules for the great old movie palaces (1960-1975) on their respective listings here on the Cinema Treasures website. Check other theaters in NYC, PHL, DC, PGH and other big cities, as I hope to get around to all of them eventually. It is most interesting to see the similarities and differences in film scheduling in different cities. Thanks.

In one of the above posts asking about union projectionist placements. In each area local there was what is called a bidding process. In which if a job opens up at a theatre, it is placed on a bidding sheet and all member can bid on this job. Or if the theatre is a special venue the company or chain can ask for or choose an operator them selfs. From the bid sheet a member could send a bid by mail to the local office before the closed of the bid process. Then out of that the members with the lowest seniority number would be offered the job at that theatre. (Lowest seniority number like ones and twos etc... are better than 10's or 20's, so the lower the number the longer you have worked as a projectionist.) In the Los Angeles market in the union contract at one time stated that theatres seating more than 1000 seats had to employ two projectionists. And the Roadshow House projectionists would get $50.00 per performance, remember that was during the days of Roadshow of two a day shows.

William is quite correct, I was a union projectionist in New York for many years and the jobs were awarded just as he said. In the early years with a low seniority number I worked as a relief projectionist and would travel from theatre to theatre covering vacations.When a projectionist vacated a job the bids would go out and I would work the booth untill the bids were closed and the job awarded.In addition whenever a roadshow was presented in 70mm, two projectionists were on duty at all times no matter how big the house. Incidendently, $50-$75 per show was pretty good money in those days, we only worked about 3 to 4 hours per shift. On a Roadshow engagement we were required to be in the booth one hour before show time, and half hour on regular continuous shows. engagements.

William and Vito:

Thanks for the responses. Thats exactly what I was looking for.

Vito what roadshow engagements di you cover for?

so...how does one go about becoming a projectionist??

The golden age of being a true projectionist is all but over. By saying that I mean, during that era you had a operator or two in every theatre booth in all the big cities. And you only handled one screen not the 10 or 20 screens of todays cinemas. In those days you worked your way up to the better theatres and if you worked the relief board. You got to work a lot more theatres and work with many different types of theatre projection equipment. And if you were good in the booth the regular operator would ask for you to work his vacation time. During that time it was a profession that paid very well and you could make a living on it. It was a skill of mastering the equipment in the booth and the lighting and curtains to make it all look like it was all done with machines. But it was all in the timing of everything, the footage, the speed of your curtains, the types of light fixtures etc... . Today all you do is thread the projector, set a timer or push the button and everything is done with automation or pre-programed. To become a union projectionist at one time, you had tho call the business agent for the local and ask, then you get presented to the executive board and if there is a opening for apprenticeships then you would be sent to a few booths to see if you would be a good candidate as an operator. And you would pay a fee to become a member of the union. After that point you would be placed of the out of work list and the business agent would assign you to work. Remember there was a lot more jobs available as a projectionist than today. So you would work your way on the extra board and every month there would be a
job or a few jobs on the bid sheet. Now on the bid sheet you would go up againist members with better or equal seniority numbers for the jobs. The older members would get awarded the better theatre jobs. Remember also that there was many older single screen theatres and adult theatre running too. Most of the times the newer members would work or win bid on the adult houses till the next round of bidding. And after time and a lot of work, you might get a theatre in the First Run theatres district. Today you work your way up from being a usher/doorman to the booth. Now with all the automation, Xenon lamps, platters, one or two booth people can run a 10-20 screen plex. With the major chains cutting most of their professional projectionists to limited service, the usher/doorman operators run the show. The major chains most of the time pays way under $10.00 an hour for that job. So the days of being a projectionist and making a living are long gone.
Today I still make change-overs and keep the reels moving for my audiences. I'm still a projectionist.

William:

When I lived in England in 1960 the unions had nothing to do with hiring. You applied for a job as projectionist at any theatre you wanted. The pay was not very good though. You began as a rewind boy and moved up to the fourth...then third.....second and after a few years the Chief's job where the pay was still not particularly good. Most people had to move around to go up the ladder. At the larger theatres at that time there was a rewind boy and two projectionists on each shift. The rewind boy doubled up on the lights at intermission time. At the Odeon Leicester Square in London, you had to have been a chief projectionist for a certain amount of time before you could be hired onto the regular projection staff. You had to know your electrical stuff and your showmanship backwards.
When I moved to Hamilton, Ontario, Canada in 1961, it was much as you described in the US. I wanted to continue with my part-time projection work while I was in high school but it was very difficult to get into an apprenticeship program. It was all single operator booths. Showmanship was almost non-existent in Hamilton in those days.
I am glad I had a taste of real showmanship on the part of the projectionists. Roadshow movies (eg South Pacific) were always rehearsed prior to the first night so the presentation and timing was as good as it could be.
I can imagine how good Radio City Music Hall's presentation must have been when there was also a stage show.

Vincent, my roadshow days were a long time ago, however I remember a few standouts such as, "Sound Of Music" (70mm and 35mm)
"Oliver" (70mm), "Ben Hur" (70mm) "My Fair Lady" (70mm) "Hello Dolly" and Grand Prix (70mm Cinerama) I do remember the last one which was "Fiddler On The Roof" in 35mm with 4 track mag sound.
Prior to the opening, a dress rehersal would be done to check the print and set volume levels as well as timing the lights and curtains for the overture, intermission and exit music. Sometimes as in the case of "Hello Dolly" the studio (fox) attended to put their two cents in. As for becoming a projectionist, in my day you had to pass a written test and then take a practical exam which was given at a theatre in New York, then if you passed both tests you were issued a licence and the business agent would present you to the executive board exactally as outlined by William.

The following Message was in the program for the Radio City Music Hall for the date Wednesday Evening April 12th, 1978 from Charles R. Hacker. (Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer)

A MESSAGE TO OUT PATRONS

The curtain went up on Radio city Music Hall on December 27, 1932. Tonight, 45 years later, you will be seeing the very last performance of our traditional stage and film presentation. In the short time since the announcement of the theatre's closing, thousands of you have written us wonderfully warm letters about what the theatre has meant to you. We do appreciate your sentiments.

During these past 45 years, over 650 films and shows have been presented here. The Music Hall is not only "The Showplace of the Nation" and the greatest theatre in the world, but perhaps it is safe to say it is the greatest theatre in the history of the world. Having played to over 238 million people, it is a showbusiness phenomenon-unique!

So why then must we close? The painful fact is that our costs have been steadily outrunning our income. while we still have thousands of devoted patrons, in the end they were not generating enough revenue--and on the Music Hall's scale of operation--"not enough" translates into many millions of dollars.

We have persevered as long as we could, and it is a real tribute to you, our audience. And patrons, please permit me to take opportunity to thank the Music Hall's magnificent staff, past and present, for their dedication, accomplishments and showmanship. I have been very fortunate to have been associated with this fine organization for 30 years.

Thank you--all of you-who have patronized the Radio City Music Hall. Our deepest gratitude for being such a demanding and responsive audience.

Sincerely,
CHARLES R. HACKER
Excutive Vice President & Chief Operating Officer

On this night it was a Variety Club Foundation of New York Benefit Performance. The feature was "Crossed Swords".

The top should read "A MESSAGE to OUR PATRONS" sorry about the typo.

Box Office Bill on the Rivoli site talks about some of the climactic dramatic moments in film that were shown in Magnascope at the Music Hall. I was wondering if anyone who was going to the Music Hall in the late forties early fities could tell us if the big musical climactic moments were shown that way as well. For example the Varsity Drag from Good News, The American in Paris ballet from same film and the Broadway Melody from Singin In the Rain.

I don't know if they used it for big musical numbers, because it would tend to cut off the feet of the dancers, a problem that became very apparent with the introduction of CinemaScope. I recall seeing Magnascope used only twice at RCMH, during the animal stampede in "King Solomon's Mines" and the train wreck in "The Greatest Show On Earth." But I never attended RCMH prior to 1950, so I can't speak for previous decades.

I thought that Magnascope was simply an enlarged screen. Was there cropping involved? And how much?

As a regular patron of the Music Hall during the late 1940s and 1950s, (and an usher in the 1950s)and going regularly as a subscriber (reserved seats) with my parents, I have no memory of the screen enlarging for climactic scenes (something that would stand out as special)at any of the films that played there. Yes, the screen enlarged after the credits as when such films as "Shane," and a few others played there (that didn't last long), notwithstanding all the wide screen films after "Knights of the Roundtable," that otherwise made no fuss in presentation over the the film that was shown in wide-screen format. But getting back to the Rivoli, that theater was always at the forefront of presentation. I especially remember "Samson and Delilah" (which played day and date with the Paramount)being shown on some new type of screen (anyone know what that was?,) as well as a special surround sound going back to "Portrait of Jenny."

When RCMH was presenting stage show and feature, were there short subjects and/or trailers?

To Will: In 1970 I can remember seeing a short subject with "The Out-of-Towners" , and a trailer for the scheduled next attraction at the Music Hall, "Darling Lili", playing with "Airport" (even though it wasn't the next attraction. "The Out-of-Towners" was. Don't know what happened there - maybe "Darling Lili" wasn't finished on time).

I was looking through the programs I saved from RCMH and forgot all about "The Blue Bird". Does anyone remember that one? Elizabeth Taylor and Ava Gardner. It was billed as the first US-Soviet co-production. George Cukor directed it. I have never seen this film again on tv or video.

Absolutely. Here's the deal. The idea was to give patrons approximately 3 hours of entertainment. The stage show portion would run anywhere from 22 minutes (with a 2 hr 30 minute film like "The Greatest Show on Earth," or "The Nun's Story," or "Sayonara."). If the film was only 75 to 90 minutes or so, as with many of the films during the 1930s, the stage show could run up to an hour. The balance of the screen time would be filled with either The March of Time (18 minutes), the newest Walt Disney cartoon, or one or even two 10 minute shorts, and a newsreel(their own compliation). Sometimes all were included in the program, added or removed during the course of the day, depending on where the management needed to fill or gain time. Only The March of Time or the Disney cartoon would ever get credit in the printed program. The organ breaks would also be used to fill time (to the great joy of the patrons). Sunday morning was the best time for an extended organ concert, as the house opened almost an hour before the feature began, and the organist would often play for a half hour.

Look at what we used to get when we went to the movies. A theatre to die for along with a movie, stage show and the organ. We were fortunate to have it until 1979, I dont think any other theatre had this policy after the 1950's did they?

The Rivoli Theatre had the same type of Magnascopic screen as RCMH. At the Rivoli for "Samson and Delilah," it was only used for the climactic scene of the destruction of the temple. The Magnascopic screen was a combination of an enlarging lens on the projector and changing the "masking" around the screen so that the screen was large enough to accomodate the bigger image. At the end of the scene, projection would be switched to an ordinary lens and the screen masking would return to normal.

I worked as a front lobby doorman at the Music Hall during The Blue Bird.The only patrons the Music Hall had in the evening by this time were high school spring trips to New York. After sightseeing during the day they would come to the Music Hall at night. During this film the patrons would exit the auditorium in droves and hang out in the lobby until the stage show started(I never was able to sit through the entire film myself.)The stage show itself was pretty bad and its amazing the Music Hall was still able to limp along for another year or two as the only people going there were the few desperate tourists still going to New York in the latter 70's. A very sad time which as far as the Music Hall and Rockefeller Center were concerned only got worse(unless of course you like watching basketball games in theaters and like shopping at Banana Republic.)

I don't think that the Music Hall ever advertised or publicized its Magnascope. It was just something that they used to surprise and amaze the audience, and to make the theatre seem more unique, aka "showmanship," which has all but vanished in the cinemas of 2004.

SimonL-- Thanks for the notes about the program fillers in the '40s-'50s. They concur exactly with my memories. The Rivoli named its expanded screen "the Cycloramic screen." I describe its use in this site's listing for the Rivoli. Aside from the Destruction of the Temple in "Samson and Delilah" (December '49), I did not see it used again at that theater. In Summer '53, the Rivoli (like every other NYC house) installed its all-purpose CinemaScope screen, which it used until converting to Todd-AO in October '55. In my movie-going experience, RHMH used its Magnascope screen for the scenes described above, as well as for the sea storm sequence in "Plymouth Adventure" and the Busby Berkeley aquatic scene in "Million Dollar Mermaid," in November and December '52 respectively. My parents told me that RCMH used it for the horserace scene in "National Velvet" as well. The Rivoli's Cycloramic screen raised my seven-year-old consciousness to delerious heights, so whenever I saw it at RCMH, I snapped to attention. I expected that the theater would have used it for all its "big" pictures, and was chagrined when it didn't. Except for the Esther Williams splasher, I recall it for no other MGM musical, including "The Great Caruso," "Show Boat," "An American in Paris," "Singin' in the Rain," and a bunch of others that I saw there (the latter-day "That's Entertainment" of course deployed the device for excepts from these films). I can still taste my disappointment when RCMH withheld it from scenes in such spectaculars as "Kim," "Scaramouche," and "Ivanhoe." (You may gather correctly that I was a pint-sized nut about that projection device.) There would have been no concern about cropping, since the Magnascope screen was framed in the standard 1.33 ratio. With "Shane" in May '53, RCMH used it (now named "the Panoramic Screen" and still at 1.33 ratio) for the entire picture, in lieu of installing a new curved screen, and continued to do so until introducing its properly proportioned all-purpose screen the following December, in anticipation of CinemaScope. There's a swell picture of the latter in the journal "Theatre Catalogue" (1954-55). I know of no other first-run B'way theaters that used Magnascope in the late '40s-'50s, or at least I saw none other used there or then. The Roxy, a candidate, did not, because it projected its films onto a black-bordered sheet hanging in front of voluminous, dimly-lit lavender curtains. For a picture of the remodeled (but still old-screen) Roxy in December '52, with its then shamefully draped proscenium, see the above mentioned "Theatre Catalogue" (1952-53).

I hate to post-script my contribution, but I do want to register my crabby memory that in the early '50s the screen at RCMH had an annoying distraction: you could see the lines where its panels had been sewn together. I know that the much-E-Bayed Souvenir Pictorial of that time proclaims a totally seamless screen. But the truth was otherwise. The CinemaScope screen consisted of seven panels (each 4’ wide) sewn together horizontally, unlike the panels at other theaters that were joined vertically with less noticeable sutures. For its regular wide-screen format, the masking rose to reveal an eighth horizontal panel, even as the side maskings closed in for a 1.66 ratio (RCMH seemed always to have had a narrower ratio than other theaters, even when the format was 1.33—an optical illusion perhaps?). In any case, the black lines crossing the screen were maddeningly annoying. Every kid in the theater noticed it and would draw attention to it. Parents would shh us and tell us not to spoil the show. But the sutures remained. At some point in 1956, around the run of “Friendly Persuasion” if I remember correctly, RCMH finally installed a truly seamless screen, or so it seemed. Or maybe because I was older and perhaps going blind from teenage activities, I didn’t see the familiar old lines so acutely. To me in the early ‘50s, the most impressive wide-screen was at the Capitol. Gently curved and with barely perceptible seams, it was proportioned at 1.85 and it covered nearly the entire proscenium. It awed me in August ’53 at “From Here to Eternity” (with stereophonic sound, too, which RCMH did not offer until much later). Later the Capitol reduced the size of its wide-screen somewhat (in truth, its larger size probably invited graininess), but still used its flawless facilities for such films as “War and Peace,” “The Pride and the Passion,” “Vertigo,” and others of that era.

Do any of you very knowledgeable gentlemen know if the Capital projected Vertigo in VistaVision? I can recall RCMH and the Paramount having VistaVision projection, what about the Capital.

When I saw 7 Brides at the Music Hall in the late 70's the cinemascope screen seemed wider than any panavision or 70MM film I had ever seen there(and no seams.) It was great except for the Ansco color. Could I have been mistaken?
Also weren't the MGM musicals such as Brigadoon at this point in '54 presented in stereo at the Hall?

I remember some stereo effect with RCMH's first CinemaScope fims, viz. "Knights of the Round Table," and with others as well, notably the "Glorious Technicolor, Breathtaking CinemaScope, and StereoPhonic Sound" number in "Silk Stockings." But the device never seemed to me as, um, pronounced as it did at other theaters, chiefly and memorably at the Roxy. Perhaps the auditorium's vastness at RCMH diffused the sound? In all honesty, too, I remember a distracting echoic effect at RCMH, particularly when the house was less than full, as at the 10:30 am showings that my parents took me to as a kid. I hate to complain about the facilities at RCMH, because their grandeur certainly more than compensated for their recognizable failings. But sometimes other theaters worked as better venues for certain presentations. For "White Christmas," I recall a wider frame (at 1.85 rather than the usual 1.66 that RCMH used for conventional projection) but still its flat screen, with the same for later VistaVision that I saw there, principally "High Society" and the fabulous "North-by-Northwest." (I remember viewing the last one as a teen, from the third balcony where my friends and I could smoke cigarettes and anticipate going for a beer afterwards--NYC in those days!) As for VistaVision at the Capitol, I recall no special bally-hoo about it, and certainly no vast curvilinear screen as at the Paramount and Criterion.

Vincent
I am also reminded of another total dog I saw at RCMH, do you remember "Matilda-the Boxing Kangaroo" with Eliot Gould? I could not believe the music hall playing an AIP picture. At the same time was the Film Vincent Minnelli did for Liza and Ingrid Bergman called "A Matter of Time". AIP may have also released that. In spite of it all seeing even bad films there was still special. One of my happiest memories was seeing "Magic of Lassie" which I mentioned in an earlier post. Although I was already a teen it was still a kick seeing Lassie on stage in the stage show.

I too remember seeing "Magic of Lassie" at RCMH with Lassie on stage.
However, it was more memorable for one of the last big screen appearances of the late, great Alice Faye as the waitress in the diner.
I also remember "Matilda" What a super dud that was. They really scrapped the bottom of the barrel on that one.

I do remember those films playing at the Hall however at that point I had seen so many bad movies there that I couldn't stomach any more. It was just one dog(or kangaroo) after another. There was an Easter movie called Mr. Billion that they had to pull after a couple of weeks and stick in a Disney film about mining ponies which I think I saw a part of. I also took no pleasure in the minimalist stage shows which took place on a bare stage containing only a few people. They themselves looked pretty embarassed.
The only nice thing was that for the price of a movie ticket you could actually enter the place and spend some time there.

As so many of you are interested in the various widescreen processes, the projection ratios, the flat and curved screen, and what wide screen films premiered where, how, why and when, may I suggest you go to Widescreenmuseum.com. or widescreenmuseumlobby.com. It's a great site and one that you will undoubtedly go and stay until someone sends a posse out to look for you.

Well said vincent, I felt same way about the Roxy and Paramount, I went not only for the movie but sometimes just to melt away in the grandeur of it all, and in the 40s and 50s with very little air conditioning anywhere else, it was a great place to beat the heat.
As for RCNH and stereo sound, from 1954 till about 1960 most of the product from MGM and all of the product from FOX was available in four track magnetic sound.I believe all those MGM pictures, as well as some from Columbia, played the hall were in four track. The seperation did get lost at RCMH but there was no dening the quality of the sound. However, one had to sit in one of the mezzanines to notice the surrounds, which in the days before Dolby, were located in the ceiling. I believe RCMH management resisted placing surround speaker boxes all over the hall when 70mmm was installed, but when Dolby Digital came along surround speakers with gold covered speaker fabric popped up all the place, this of course, as ugly as they are, intensified the surround experience. Oh and yes Bill, I too remember "Today to get the people to attend the picture show" the great sterophonic sound song and dance number from "Silk Stockings"

Silk Stockings contains some of Astaires and Charisse's best dancing so to have seen that at the Music Hall in cinemascope and stereo-well it must have been great.
Does anybody know if North by Northwest played there in stereo?
Concerning sound, when I saw Singin in the Rain there in '75 they utilizzed some sort of fake stereo and while I usually hate that sort of thing it was beautifully done. Those wonderful MGM arrangements came through with such clarity and impact and the movie has never sounded as good since.
I also remember the sound for the musical numbers of Scrooge being very good especially in the finale scene where one had a sense of surround sound as the various musical factions converged(this is what I believe happened as I haven't seen the film since '70.)

Vincent, I never saw any magnetic prints of "North By Northwest"
I played the film a couple of times and the prints were always
optical (mono).By 1959 the mag stereo prints had begun to get scarce.
Only the 35mm versions of 70mm roadshow pictures were coming thru in mag sound. In adition since "North By Nothwest" was filmed in VistaVision and shown as a reduction print, I don't think it had stereo sound. Most VistaVision pictures were released mono with some Prespecta prints around. I also saw "Singin in the Rain" which was re-mixed in stereo and it didn't sound to bad, The worst offender of the re-mixed tracks had to be the re-release of "Gone with the Wind". What a disaster,especially the 70mm vesion. the surround track would simply go and and off, and since there was no real separation, just playing different parts of the dialogue and sound thru the surround speakers, well, it was awful The four track mag prints were of course just as bad. But it looked better in 35mm,
the 70mm prints looked all out of porportion. Lastly "Scrooge",
I believe played RCMH in 70mm, hense the great sound.

I remember the 70mm print looking washed out and dull compared to the 35mm version. Making it widescreen and projected on that enormous screen just seemed to fade the otherwise brilliant colors.

I remember thinking the same thing but it was the only print I saw so I figured the movie was shot that way. Especially bad was the 70mm blow up of Tom Sawyer during Easter of '73 which looked washed out and dull on the huge screen. I kept thinking how did color get so bad when just a few years before in the late '60s it had still been so vibrant. Even 1776 didn't look too good. I guess of the movies that I saw at the Hall the best looking outside of revivals was Airport. But that was Ross Hunter and the last of the old Hollywood big budget productions. The Todd AO didn't hurt either.
So how much would it cost to rent out the Hall get some great prints of some terrific movies and use the Hall for something other than a glorified warehouse for current cultural debris?
King Kong, Swing Time, and North by Northwest are my first choices.

Vito is, of course correct, in stating that they were mostly mono or Perspecta sound prints used in the mid to late fifties at the Music Hall. The Hall was not equipped to show magnetic 4 track prints because of the rejection of audiece-participation speakers in the auditorium and the product base being mainly MGM films. This was a major expense for exhibitors and was also damaging to the decor in many theatres. MGM and Paramount embraced Perspecta which gives a stereo directional effect from a mono soundtrack but in the stage range only. It did not require or benefit from speakers in the auditorium. 20th Century-Fox championed the much more expensive 4 track magnetic prints initially as part of their promotion of CinemaScope.The spectacular multi-directional sound from these prints was expensive for the studio and for the exhibitor but also meant that the print was only usable in one type of theatre and from usually only one studio. Meanwhile, because of the cost of these prints, they developed mag/optical prints. These carried 2 tracks of stereo and and a mono optical track but didnt start to be taken up until the late 50's. From then on 4 track was only used infrequently,mostly for event pictures or special prints for gala engagements. This continued up until the late seventies when Dolby became widespread.

Just because the wide release of a film was in a certain sound process or aspect ratio doesnt mean that other prints do not exist. The studios ran off prints in all sorts of strange variations in different cities. 'Scope films were released flat or rereleases of classics or even just new prints were run off in different processes. Having worked in a film exchange I remember having a print of "Gentlemen Prefer Blondes" and "Call Me Madam" in 4 track, whilst having "Carousel" in a flat 1:1.66 and mono. One of the last special magnetic 4 track prints I saw was for a premiere of "Hair", which came direct from UA in Los Angeles and was returned to their library after the engagement.

Part of the reason the 70mm prints of "GWTW" looked so bad is they were printed up from Technicolor IB masters and converted to Metrocolor then blown up. The only way to get enough picture to fill the 70mm ratio was to zoom in on the 1.33 image sufficiently to get enough picture to fill the sides of the screen(a bit like the Pan&Scan process when they need to fill height when printing up from a widescreen image).Resulting an a blotchy,grainy and washed out look to a treasure most people remember as being akin to "Wizard of Oz" A ghastly mistake which MGM never repeated and the 70mm prints of "GWTW" were discarded. This didn't however stop them from trying it with other classics on the odd occasion as there was a 70mm print struck of "Camille" and used to fill the screen at RCMH when filming John Huston's "Annie"!!!

If I'm not mistaken, didn't "Camille" play the Capitol?

Yes, Simon, you are correct. Garbo's Camille did play at the Capitol.
However, Porter is referring to a clip of "Camille" that was blown up and used in the "Annie" movie musical. It was used quite erroneously. As I recall, Daddy Warbucks buys out a performance at Radio City and takes Orphan Annie et. al. to see Garbo in "Camille".
As far as I know, "Camille" never played RCMH.

I believe the only Garbo film to play RCMH was "Ninotchka." Interestingly "Silk Stockings," the musical remake also played there, as has been noted above.

I am not sure I agree with the statement about RCMH and mag sound. I thought it was used rather extensily during the mid to late 50s.RCMH also used magnetic sound when 70mm was installed. The Simplex 35/70 projectors have 35mm as well as 70mm magnetic readers.
The last four track I saw at RCMH was in 1972 with "The Red Tent".
"A Star Is Born" in 1976 was just about the last film to have four track, it included Dolby noise reduction which of course became Dolby optical stereo. Then "Star Wars" started the Dolby stereo revolution we enjoy today. Only Fox was completely commited to magnetic sound, all fox releases starting with "The Robe" in 1953 were available in either optical or magnetic versions. later on with the advent of mag/optical prints, all fox releases were distributed mag/optical untill 1963 when Fox abanded CinemaScope for Panavision. The last CinemaScope fox release, I believe was "Capriece" starting Doris Day. After that it was goodbye to mag sound at Fox and all Panavision prints were optical.Fox was going through some tough financial times then and the added cost of magnetic prints was one of the first to go. This brings up a question to which I never really recieved a satisfactory answer.
Why did Fox dump CinemaScope? I for one missed the extended scope Fox fanfare which disapeared with the switch to Panavision, which was never heard again untill "Star Wars" when Lucas changed "A Cinemascope production" to "A George Lucas Production", returning Mr. Newmans great fanfare to it's former glory.

Fox dumped CinemaScope because the name no longer drew crowds and the process itself proved inferior to Panavision. When MGM made "Green Mansions," they intended to film it in CinemaScope, but Audrey Hepburn was horrified by the close-ups that she did for test shots and insisted that they use another process. MGM ended up with a then small company called Panavision, which used a new lens invented by Robert E. Gottschalk.

I believe "Jailhouse Rock" was the first feature to be photographed witb the new anamorphic Panavision lenses.

MGM offered many of their stereo prints in both mono optical Perspecta, and 4-track mag/optical prints. This policy lasted until sometime in late 1957 when Perspecta was abandoned by the studio.

Thanks Warren, I long standing question of mine has been answered.
A lot of movie peole complained about CinemaScope and refused to use it. Making things worse in those days was the refusal on the part of the studios to pay Fox royalties to use the process, which spawned many ananorphic nightmares like SuperScope. MGM stayed with CinemScope until late 50s but others came up their own version like WarnerScope etc. Thank heavens we were able to project all of these anamorphic processes with the same lens, the only odd ball was SuperScope which required a different aperature plate than the others. Panavision is of course a superior anamorphic process. Perspecta never was accepted very much although the Paramount on Staten Island did have it.
By the way it sure is a great pleasure chatting with you guys!

Perspecta was installed by MGM in every Loew's theater, as well as the Paramount, Criterion, Capitol and possibly Strand theaters on Times Square. It was used by MGM, Paramount, Universal, Warner Bros, Allied Artists and United Artists. It lasted from late 1954 to 1957/58.

I've heard quite a few tracks through a restored Fairchild integrator. While it is panned mono, the mix (and careful use of separate gain levels for each channel) gives a very convincing illusion of stereo. We ran "Forbidden Planet" at the Loew's Jersey on a 50 foot screen, and the Perspecta track sounded pretty good!

" I for one missed the extended scope Fox fanfare which disapeared with the switch to Panavision"

Vito: Ah yes....what a wonderful fanfare that was. In the theatre I worked we used to crank the sound up a couple of notches when we opened up after the intermission and the curtain rose.....just to make sure the audience paid attention! My favourite movie music follow right after the 20th Century-Fox fanfare was "North To Alaska" with Johnny Horton singing the theme. What a great way to open a show.

Another question ...did the projectionists at RCMH operate the curtains, house lights and stage lights for the movie part of the show or was it all done by the stagehands union?

MartinC

Vito and Martin: Thanks for talking about the Fox CinemaScope fanfare. I'm grateful to George Lucas or whoever it was on "Star Wars" who was responsible for bringing it back. Speaking of Lucas, maybe it's my imagination but has anyone else noticed that on the last two Star Wars films (Episodes 1 & 2), Alfred Newman's Fox music sounds way too low, much lower than the Star Wars fanfare that follows it? Maybe this is Lucas's way of keeping 20th Cebtury Fox in their place - they just distribute the movies but he creates them ... I don't know.

My favorite movie music to follow the Fox fanfare? There are two of them, both from the '50's. "The King and I", with that glorious Alfred Newman arrangement of the March of the Siamese Children, and "Journey to the Center of the Earth", a terrifying blast of percussion and pipe organ courtesy of the Master, Bernard Herrmann.

Favourite music to follow Newmans great Fox fanfare and CinemaScope extension? The Fox music department and its head Alfred Newman embarked on hiring the greatest selection of film composers for CinemaScope product which was designed to bring the "world to your doorstep"

There was great music for the many moods of Fox CinemaScope. Manhattan chic/"How to Marry a Millionaire", Western drama/"Broken Lance", Grandeur/"Anastasia", Raunch,"Revolt of Mamie Stover", Drama/"Rains of Ranchipur" Exotica/"Boy on a Dolphin", Adventure/ "Soldier of Fortune", Musical/"The King and I" and just plain fun/ "The Girl Can't Help It"

How could you choose just one? But best seen mostly at the Roxy with magnetic sound.

Forget Dolby and all its sanitised technical sharpness. Give me the enormous depth and power of magnetic 4 or 6 track anytime, I can live with the hiss.

Bill mentioned the fanfare seamed a bit low, my complaint is the treatment given to the new Fox logo, introduced a few years ago, which includes rhe fanfare with the extension not quite sounding the way Newman wrote it. Almost sounds like some kids in the garage banging it out instead of a full orchestra. I also disaprove about the way the last few bars have been slowed down. These people are messing with a national treasure here and need to learn a little respect for the way the fanfare was written. One last gripe, the Fox logo shown without the fanfare, but some other music, as in "Farewell to Arms".(There I feel better now)
Porter mentioned great fox music, let's not forget the wonderful overture to "How to Marry a Millionare", played by the Fox orchestra
As I understand it, Millionaire was actually the first CinemaScope production fox made, but Zanack, in his wisdom, decided to hold off realease until after "The Robe" as to present CinemaSacope on a grandeur scale. I always thought the overture ahead of "How to Marry a Millionaire" was intended to show off and impress audiences with stereophonic sound. As to the question about who ran the lights and curtains at RCMH, it was all stagehands, projectionist had no control over any of that. In New York City, if you had a stage were you now or once presented live shows, you had stagehands even if you are showing movies.

Porter wrote: " How could you choose just one?"

Porter: You are right of course. There were so many great movie intros that came after the fanfare.
For me though it was all about a time and a place.I just loved that short part of my young life when I was in the projection business. For some reason that combination of the fanfare and the intro to the music stayed with me over many others. Thats probably also why I like "South Pacific" despite the movie's many faults including those ridiculous colour filters. I just loved showing that movie and seeing the audience leave with smiles on their faces.
MartinC

Even though "South Pacific" did not have the Fox fanfare, as a young projectionist to get a print of that movie in four track with the intermission and all the entrance and exit music was a thrill.
mjc, do you remember your first mag print?

Vito:

Yes I do ....it was South Pacific. I helped out with the manual re-winding, changeovers and lighting at a large theatre (the Dorchester, Hull, England) occasionally. If I remember correctly, they installed the extra speakers and equipment just for South Pacific which ran for about 3 months. In the theatre I worked at on weekends in a small town nearby we got South Pacific much later that year but it was the regular soundtrack. I was not connecting the fanfare to South Pacific in my previous post. Just pointing out the impact that movies at the time had on me. South Pacific was also the first and only time I ran a blank reel with just the soundtrack containing the overture before the movie started. Thrill was right. I was lucky to be doing that job at 16. The job lasted about a year.
I have made some inquiries through the daily paper in Hull to see if I can get some photo's of the Dorchester to set up a listing here on Cinema Treasures. It was a wonderful 16 hundred seat theatre, the showmanship by the regular projection staff was superb. I am told the Dorchester was demolished several years ago.

Just a thought that occured to me regarding overtures and entrance music on movies. I don' know how everyone handled this, but in New York we would cement a strip of film, one sprocket in width, across the area where it was time to change the lighting levels. This would cause a click going thru the gate, similar to the sound of a splice, which would be our cue to change the lighting. With a movie like "South Pacific" there would be a couple of lighting cues. The first "click" would signal us to bring the house lights down about 25%, then the second one brought the lights down about 60%. The final cue was to kill the lights completly, and begin lowering the stage lights and open the curtain. The curtain could never expose a white screen, it had to be timed in such a way as to have the fade in of the movie as the curtains began to part. The same thing would apply to closing the curtains, they were timed so that the two panels would "kiss" as the movie faded out.Another point was, we NEVER played any other music (records in those days) before the start of the movie, or during intermission. RCMH always timed both the traveler and waterfall (contuer)curtains perfectly. The curtains were so heavy that the sound would drop 50% for the last few bars of music as the curtains closed over the speakers. Of course then the organ would begin with missing a beat. RCMH, in it's day, was a first class act few could copy or do as well. one might try and find a flaw in the program but.... I never did.

Vito:

Well...we were an ocean apart at the time but the kind of showmanship I talked about was exactly as you mentioned. The trick of cementing a piece of film was not one I saw done but it sure sounds like a heck of a good idea. The Chief or second who always ran the shows where I was did it strictly by practising dry runs.
The Dorchester had a beautiful gold festoon (drop) curtain and some slow moving big side curtains. We would use the side curtains to close the movie as you describe. We would drop the festoon after the side curtains closed during the intermission. No one would see it because it came down behind the side curtains. So when we opened again with the house lights dimmed and the lights all around the stage changing colours we would open with the side curtains again first..displaying the dropped festoon. Then we opened up the movie on the festoon which began to rise at the same time. Now you see why we liked the Fox fanfare so much! In England at the time each movie began with a Board of Film Censors title but we left that on the festoon. By the time the festoon was up all the stage lights were gone. What a great feeling that was. When we ran shorts, previews and newsreels between continuous shows we just used the festoon to close....it would rise again almost immediately which gave us time to open the tabs for Cinemascope previews after a newsreel or non scope preview or short without the audience seeing the screen open up. After all that we would close off using the side curtains and then drop the festoon behind.....ready to open the main show again. Busy time!
I wish have could have seen that stuff as you described in such splendid surroundings as RCMH. The best showmanship I ever saw in England was at the Odeon Leicester Square butI always thought the show at the Dorchester was pretty close behind.

What about the Empire on Leicester Square which was the flagship of M-G-M for decades and from what I here was a more impressive theatre?brucec

Vito: Your description of the RCMH traveller closing and the contour descending was right on, but you should have noted that at the second that the sound track ended, the organ would pick up on the exact note so that there was no glaring change in key, after which the organist would segue into his medley. Even with the showing of "Executive Suite," which had no sound track except for the peeling of a bell that began and ended the film, the organ picked this up before continuing. It should be noted that the Roxy was notoriously sloppy about this part of the presentation and the film would end with the curtain still halfway down exposing a blank screen.

BruceC:

I was in the Empire when it was single screen and the huge Warner the same weekend I visited the Odeon Leicester Square. That would be in 1960. Both theatres were older and a bit more grand than the Odoen....but I was more interested back then about the showmanship. Nothing wrong with the way they did things either from what I can remember but for some reason the Odeon show struck me as being more precise. The Odeon also had the reputation for excellence in presentation because whenever the Queen went to see a movie she went (at that time) to the Odeon. I have been in contact with a former Chief there and we discussed the very high standards of showmanship and technical expertise that projectionists had to meet before they could work there.
I understand now that the Empire has been carved up and there is a spectacular laser show with the movie.
Its so good to read in these postings that RCMH had such high standards.....because they cared. For me thats the point of all of this reminiscing. I have been to so many theatres over the past 20 years where all you got was a blank screen and silence when you walked in until the movie flashed on.

SimonL--You're right about comparing the Roxy and RCMH. Part of the Roxy's problem stemmed from the height of its projection booth and the distance of the screen from the curtain line. As the Roxy's contour curtain rose or fell, the film projected nearly a quarter-way up on it, and the curtain cast an elongated shadow back upon the the screen. The Roxy could have solved the problem by using a traveller as well (as RCMH did), but it would have lost some of the Fox fanfare if the heavy curtains remained closed until the music began. The Roxy, of course, didn't install its golden contour curtain until December '52 (with Ice Colorama on stage)-- before that, it flaunted a wonderful burgundy-red opera-style swag. And, yes, the curtains at RCMH were so heavy that they muffled the sound -- most damagingly for "The Barretts of Wimpole Street" which I saw there in January '57 (one of the few, to judge from the attendance figures you cited last 23 July): the movie began with an off-screen recitation of Elizabeth BB's "How do I love thee," which you couldn't hear because of the curtain. I earlier described how, before CinemaScope brought alterations, RCMH's contour curtain used to rise in a fully lit house, framing the yellow traveller behind it for a half-minute or so as the organist built to his finale. When the film flashed on the traveller, the lights dimmed and the curtain parted. That way, spectators saw the waterfall effect in brightly lit glory, and marvelled at the draped tableau for a fractional pause before the film began. That ended when larger-screen projection required a more complicated masking mechanism that likely interfered with the effect. In the late 50s, if you looked very, very carefully at the contour curtain during the organist's finale, you could see the outline of a draft shield rising behind it, with an accompanying backstage gust of air that drew the curtain inwards. Or so it seemed to my un-professional but very sharp teen-aged eyes.

The way all you guys are sharing your experience and reminiscences with us is the next best thing to having access to H.G. Wells's time machine. Thanks!

I would like to add my thanks to Bill. This stuff is amazing. But I must add that for those of us who were not able to enjoy this kind of showmanship during its heyday we can only regret what we missed(though I love DVD's they are no replacement.) How very often after work or on the weekend would I love to see a good film at the Music Hall, the Criterion or the Rivoli.
The talk above about London's Leicester Square also makes one want to get into a time machine and see those great 1 screen theaters.
Going to Paris and seeing the theaters on the Champs Elysee and see nothing but multiplexes was such a bummer. Now its happening in Italy.The french and italians may despise us but they love to imitate us at every opportunity.

Vincent:

I was lucky enough to visit the 2800 seat Ohio Theatre in Columbus twice several years ago during the summer. They ran classic movies (We saw "To Catch a Thief" and "Meet Me in St Louis") on Saturday afternoons, complete with an organist prior to the movie. To hear the cheers and clapping from a full house as the organist descended into the floor when the movie began was an incredible nostalgia trip. The kids who were there got a glimpse of what it was like all those years ago to see a movie in a wonderful theatre.
I was also very fortunate to visit the projection room afterwards. It was all so familiar. Peerless Magnarcs, Century ( I think) projectors...and they still did changeovers! Made my summer.

Note for Vito: Hey Vito.....I think we would make a heck of a team. Whaddya say I head down your way and we'll offer our services to the folks at the Loews Jersey Theatre?

I am currently working on bringing classic films back to the grand 2400 seat St George theatre on Staten Island http://cinematreasures.org/theater/1865/

I have been wanting to see the Jersey theatre, perhaps when I get back from vacation. I will be away for two weeks, going back to Hawaii where I lived and worked for several years. I will update the movie going experience there as well.

I have a question maybe someone knows the answer to. I know because of its stage and movie policy the music hall never played Roadshows. However did movies open continuos showings at RCMH and roadshow in other places? I thought someone once told me "Music Man" and "Mary Poppins" played roadshow in other states. Is this true?

To the best of my knowledge, Warner Brothers premiered and showed "The Music Man" as a regular non-roadshow film in all of the big cities during the summer of 1962.

"Mary Poppins," however, was a roadshow film in almost all of the large cities when it came out in the fall of 1964.

Looking again through the list of films which played RCMH that I previously submitted, only "Mary Poppins" and "The Happiest Millionaire" (both from Disney) could truly be considered to have played roadshow engagements in cities other than New York, although "Fanny," "The Unsinkable Molly Brown," "The Great Race," "Bedknobs and Broomsticks," and "1776," among others, probably could have been roadshow films, had the studios decided to release them that way.

Thanks Ron

My friend and I were just discussing how great it would be to run a Music Hall festival and revive some of the great films that opened there over the years. Many years ago when I was running the DW Griffith a collector friend had an IB Technicolor print of "Bye Bye Birdie" from Germany complete with German subtitles. We ran it after the theatre closed for our friends. I think this may have played in the states in Eastmancolor. Many times the europeon prints were still struck in IB. The colors were a knockout. Think how it would look on the music hall screen.

Watching Music Man at 2 and 1/2 hours it looks like it might have been planned as a roadshow and then changed to regular status. There is even a perfect place for the intermission. Does anybody know why On a Clear Day which would have been a perfect film for the Music Hall did not play there? This was originally planned as a road show but due to a change in distribution patterns was downgrading to continuous perfs. The film was cut accordingly and I understand lost some great stuff. It would be nice if it still existed and was added to the DVD.

Premiering a big, splashy roadshow musical in the 60s was a hit or miss proposition. Certainly "West Side Story," "Mary Poppins," and "My Fair Lady" were huge successes.

But then in 1965 came "The Sound of Music," and the overwhelming popularity of the Julie Andrews-20th Century Fox hit changed everything. All of the studios thought the public wanted big musicals and that they too would have similar blockbusters. So many of the Broadway musical hits which hadn't yet been filmed were dusted off for the big screen, as well as ideas for original screen musicals.

In the next decade, we got "The Happiest Millionaire," "Doctor Dolittle," "Thoroughly Modern Millie," "Camelot," "Funny Girl," "Oliver!," "Chitty Chitty Bang Bang," "Half a Sixpence," "Star!," "Finian's Rainbow," "Goodbye, Mr. Chips," "Sweet Charity," "Paint Your Wagon," "Hello, Dolly!," "Song of Norway," "Fiddler on the Roof," "Man of La Mancha," "On a Clear Day You Can See Forever," "1776," "Jesus Christ Superstar," "Tom Sawyer," "Cabaret," "Godspell, and "Mame." Most of these WERE released as hard-ticket roadshow films, and although their artistic qualities varied, very few of them earned back their production costs. And younger audiences at the time were not embracing the musical unless it was rock music, which is one of the reasons for the decline of the film musical until it was revived recently with "Chicago."

PS - I'm still waiting for the film version of Stephen Sondheim's "Follies" with Debbie Reynolds singing "I'm Still Here," as well as film versions of "Pippin," "Dreamgirls," "Promises, Promises," and "On the 20th Century." Probably not to be...alas! But there is "The Phantom of the Opera" coming for Christmas, which would be perfect for the RCMH as an exclusive NYC run. That won't happen either!

Simon L!

Did you know organist Raymond "Ray" F. Bohr, Jr. when you were at the Hall? A very good friend of mine was an Associate Organist there in 1955-1956 and it was through him I was honored to know Ray, whom I first met in January 1977, which was a time of trouble for the Hall. My friend and I visited Ray in 1978 and 1979 and we always treated like family. Ray would always show us some interesting part of the theater and standing on the platform at the top the fly tower over the Great Stage is something I will never forget, along with watching the movie from the orchestra elevator, lowered at the bottom of the pit. Of course, the organ was the special attraction.

Ray was the last full-time house organist (John DeTroy was part-time) at the Music Hall under the "old" format until 1979. The management there basically dismissed him. My friend and I kept in touch with Ray until his untimely passing in 1986. Ray knew the Mighty WurliTzer inside and out as he was also a trained organ technician, although he did not service the Music Hall organ. (He would always say, "Not my job!") Ray was from Nyack, NY.

Fortunately, the Music Hall organ is under the expert care of the same family since its installation in 1932. She's very lucky not to find the fate of other treasures, such as the Roxy's organ.

Robert if you read above we have disussed this many times like have a summer stage show as they do at Christmas (think of all the musicians and performers this would employ) and every week a different classic film.
Walter Reade just showed Birdie. This is one of the most amazing musicals to see on a screen with colors that will burn your eyes for days after.
For some reason this film never gets any kind of audience in revival. I am usually the only one there. To see it at the Music Hall (which you could have in '63) would be pop culture heaven.

PS - I'm still waiting for the film version of Stephen Sondheim's "Follies" with Debbie Reynolds singing "I'm Still Here," as well as film versions of "Pippin," "Dreamgirls," "Promises, Promises," and "On the 20th Century." Probably not to be...alas! But there is "The Phantom of the Opera" coming for Christmas, which would be perfect for the RCMH as an exclusive NYC run. That won't happen either!
posted by Ron3853 on Sep 22, 2004 at 11:37am

"Dreamgirls" could easily be made into the type of musical that seems to work today where the musical numbers are part of a show or a dream sequence like "Chicago". People today seem unwilling to accept the break out in song numbers that all of the great musicals had. When the Trans-Lux east revived "Sound of Music" for it's 25th anniversary the audience laughed when Julie Andrews started singing "Something Good". That also happened with this years Cole Porter biography "De Lovely". It's actually sad that people cant just sit back and escape. Movies were never meant to be total reality. The incredible films made during WW2 were to give people two hours of escapism during those trying times. I for one find movies relaxing and want to get lost in the story. Give me stair case full of chorus girls any day.

Robert I think you are talking about the Gotham(I believe that was its name.) My audience there was well behaved. I also saw El Cid there in revival.
I'm still hoping for 40th anniverary 70mm presentations for SOM and MFL. Let see how the audiences today respond to entertainments made for audiences of mid twentieth century America. Or do most people today consider them camp?

Your right, I just always thought of the Gotham as the Trans-Lux. Did you manage the theatre? Creative Entertainment got me the passes that night. I was horrified when Fox released that moronic sing along version of The Sound of Music and would not go to see it, even though it would have been nice to have seen it at the Zeigfeld. It's my favorite movie and I still have the program from when my parents took me to see it at The Rivoli. The last time I saw MFL in a theatre was in the 70's when The Cinerama played that 70mm Broadway Salutes Broadway series. The print was pink but the sound was unreal.

I too remember the sound of MFL at the Cinerama. I went twice. There was enormous presence and warmth. At one point I walked around the theater to the various speakers to hear the separation. We will never hear it that way again. And no one but us will know.

For "Organized": Although I never met "Ray", the theater staff was often able to tell the difference in musical style between him and Dick Liebert and Ashley Miller. Liebert, who played mostly the evening shows was very big with special effects i.e. bells and whistles; Ashley was fond of show tunes and Ray seemed to like bright marches and was the best at exit music. What a treat to hear them at the twin consoles at holiday time. The biggest problem was getting the audience to leave during the break music, as many stayed to applaud and then leave as the curtain rose on the film credits.

Hello SimonL,

Thanks for your comments. You are quite right about theater staff knowing who was at the organ at the Music Hall! At the time my friend was an Assistant Organist, Leibert, Miller and Bohr were indeed the primary organists. I have a number of recordings of all of them, and Liebert's style, to me, was a bit "dark" sounding. Leibert did the "Supper Shows" and Bohr usually opened. (At least that's what Ray told me.) Leibert studied the organ at the Peabody Conservatory of Music here in Baltimore. Miller, who still lives in New Jersey, holds a Master's Degree in Music and Ray Bohr studied the organ with New York organist Harold Friedell. All were artists in their own right. They had to be ... the Music Hall organ is a difficult instrument to play due to the location of the consoles in relationship to the pipes (in the ceiling).

Check this website out: www.atos.org/Pages/Journal/RadioCity/RadioCity.html. It's a great story of the Mightiest of all WurliTzers at the Radio City Music Hall and I know that you will enjoy it. The picture of Bohr and Leibert at the Prompt Side console (thank God the rear-view mirror and clock were removed when the consoles was totally rebuilt} is great. Let me know what you think. It gives a good argument that the RCMH organ is a Kimball-designed organ will two WurliTzer consoles, all built by WurliTzer.

Cheers!

PS: As I write this, I am already planning my family's annual pilgrimage to see the Christmas Spectacular. Who cares if it's been changed from the "Old Format?" At least the show does go on.

Lets start a letter writing campaign to have a 70mm screening of The Sound of Music here next year. It's the 40th anniversary.

Yes!!! That's an excellent idea. There's no reason why Cablevision ought not consider screening it in Summer 2005. It seems to me there were filmings during the summers in the 80's at the Music Hall.

Imagine it with The Hooray For Hollywood show that accompanied Bullit in 1968 :)

While I would much rather see SOM in a 1500 seat road show house(The screen is much more head on) RCMH showed SOM in '75 or '76. The presentation was suberb. An immaculate, brilliant 70mm print with sound that was great(during the wedding I could have sworn they were playing the Music Hall organ.)
It was so empty however that between showings the lights were kept very low so as not to embarrass the scattered patrons.
And while I hate the idea of an SOM sing-along I went to the finale night at the Ziegfeld and it was one of the best cinema experiences I have ever had. The audience was totally demented-cheering and roaring its approval at every iconic moment. With Andrews first appearance on screen it could have been Jagger. And when they escaped into the Swiss Alps(well who cares if the actors were really heading into Germany) I thought we were going to blow the roof off the Ziegfeld.
Absolutely exhilarating.

Vincent has a point about being in a largely full movie palace and hearing an appreciative audience laughing, cheering, applauding or even singing along to the movie; it IS an exhilarating experience not at all akin to the noise of a sports or rock concert crowd. I last experienced it in 1970 when the shortly-to-be-split former WARNER here in Milwaukee was filled for the movie "Airport" and all 2500 cheered when the old lady slapped the hysterical guy, and laughed as one at other appropriate times. You didn't feel isolated as a lone viewer as you do nowadays in the multiplex screening rooms regardless of what is showing. Occasionally I can still feel that audience response as when our ORIENTAL has an organ show with a silent film and a stage act, but not otherwise anymore.

Airport at the Music Hall.
March 17th 1970.
In the afternoon St Patrick's Day Parade.
6 PM The Music Halls Great Easter Show followed by Airport in Todd AO.

Maybe next summer we can look forward to track and field events at the Music Hall? But perhaps this is too elitest. I suggest to the Cablevision execs hip hop topless female mud wrestling sponsored by Hilfiger, Diesel and Swatch with Barney and the Rugrats in the lower lounge for the family members under 4.

Yes but mud wrestling accompanied by the mighty Wurlitzer. So sad isnt it?

Seems that they used the Grand Organ to provide live music for the New York Liberty this past summer.

Jim: I've heard that the Oriental is quite a gem. Its organ, a Kimball, is said to be a twin, as originally built, to the one that was here in the Stanley Theater in Baltimore. I understand that the Oriental Kimball was orginally installed in the Warner (Center) Theater. If you look at the page for Baltimore's Stanley Theater, I posted a story about the theater and its organ.

Lucky Milwaukee to have the Oriental!

Organ-ized: Your comment about the ORIENTAL here in Milwaukee is right on the money; it is perhaps unique in its approach to 'oriental' as being East Indian, rather than Chinese, Indo-Chinese, or Japanese. There is a group of photos of it here: http://www.cinematour.com/tour.php?db=us&id=4035 but none are of the auditorium, unfortunately. The CT page about it is at: http://cinematreasures.org/theater/443/ and this may help others to learn of its special place in America's theatres. I must bow to your conclusions about the organ, though I too had heard that it was a twin to the one in the STANLEY, though it is now up to 38 ranks and growing, from its original 28. It is indeed a sweet sound, especially the strings! And you are quite right that it was originally in the WARNER/GRAND here ( http://cinematreasures.org/theater/1903/ ) and while it may have helped re-use the WARNER had it stayed there, it is now ironic, given what happened to the theatre, that it was best that it was removed.

Your story about the STANLEY's organ is sad to read; greed so often destroys beauty, but at least you have a recording of it before the end. If you track down the author of "Exit", Robert Headley in the Baltimore/DC area, you might have a wonderful conversation, since he was also often here in Milw. and could no doubt tell you much.

And lucky Baltimore to have the restored HIPPODROME ( http://cinematreasures.org/theater/1264/ )..

Jim:

The Hippodrome is gorgeous. My wife and I attended the opening show, The Producers. The Hipp also had an organ in it ... a transplanted M.P. Moller church pipe organ, installed UNDER the stage. (Yuck!) It didn't last very long. (Mercifully.)

Kimballs are/were real beauties. W.W. Kimball continued to build church pipe organ up until W.W. II and always built instruments of the finest quality. My organ professor in college studied on a large late Kimball in Denver (St. John's Episcopal Cathedral) and he always told me it was not to be forgotten. Of course, the Radio City Music Hall's Wurlitzer, built to Kimball specifications (ranks and scales) benefits from the design, so that it's a pretty versatile organ.

So you know about the famous Kimball string pipes? (Their reeds and most flues, except Tibias, weren't slouches either.) The largest collection of Kimball strings is not in a church or theater organ. It's the String Division (88 ranks) in the Wanamaker Organ in Phildelphia. Standing in the middle of that organ chamber was inspiring.

What ever happened to the huge Kimball that was in the Minneapolic Civic Auditorium and in storage? It had a five-manual main classic console and a four manual theater console. I heard it's up for sale. I think it has 110 ranks, part classical, part theater.

I think Robert Headley lives in DC. He's been asked by local here to republish his Exitbook, but so far, won't do it. :o( . BTW, I only have a 60-minute drive to hear and play the Dickinson Theater Organ Society's Kimball organ, as I am a member there and do some volunteer work for them. geocities.com/dtoskimball

Hello, Organ-ize: It is kind of you to reply to my message, but I will not dwell long on a reply here since it is not good for us to go too far off-topic on the RCMH page. I would have written you directly had you listed Contact information on your 'Profile Page' which is accessed for anyone on this site by clicking on their name in blue at the bottom of a comment. You will find my E-mail address in that way.

Just because I am geographically closer to the Minneapolis Civic than you are doesn't mean that I know anything of its organ -- or of the Civic Auditorium, for that matter, sorry to say. That place is about 400 miles from me. You are privileged to be part of that giant Dickinson Kimball installation. There are classical organs of that size in both the Marcus Performing Arts Center and the Cooley Auditorium of the Vocational School here, but no such huge theatre instruments survive (or were ever built here to my knowledge). I am not an "organ nut" per se (architecture is my specialty) but I do enjoy a good concert on a pipe organ, especially by such as Lew Williams who knows how to use the toy counter and percussions to great effect, or Clark Wilson who can make an organ sing.

Questions for all you organites.
Why does the organ at the Music Hall sound so wonderful and yet the organ at what may have been the greatest movie palace in the world, the Chicago Paradise, was considered a disappointment? Also why do classically trained organists sneer at movie palace organs? Is it the music played on them or are they inferior to church instruments?

The Chicago Paradise reportedly had bad acoustics, which might have been the fault of its atmospheric design. It was a problem not only with the organ, but also with the movies and stage shows presented there.

The ornamentation and auditorium decorative draperies so usually seen in movie palaces was not just for show; it was essential to absorb and deflect the sound waves coming from the stage and organ/orchestra so that only one sound wave struck the listener. When sound hits an essentially smooth surface --such as the ceiling of an 'atmospheric' (stars and clouds) theatre-- it is focused by that surface upon a single broad point in the audience, effectively amplifying the sound to those there, but dimming it for those elsewhere. Not only will others outside of that point not hear as much volume, but worse is the echo that develops as the main sound front hits the listener, followed by the delayed sound front reflected off the ceiling a split second later. Many smaller atmospherics had smaller effective reflective ceilings where the flanking false building fronts were closer to the surface and these absorbed or deflected much of the sound. In the over 3,000 seats in the PARADISE ( http://cinematreasures.org/theater/344/ ), the vault of the ceiling was just too vast to have any ornament or draperies near enough to counteract the reflection(s); remember the laws of physics: the angle of incidence equals the angle of reflection/refraction. Thus when the sound front hit the ceiling, it crashed onto the audience mid-floor, AFTER they had heard the other sound fronts from the stage and elsewhere. During music this may just cause muddled sound, but speech can be rendered unintelligible. How could the great architect Eberson miss this fact during planning? I don't know, since acoustics was not an unknown science even then. It may be that the owner put too much pressure on him for a triumphal spectacular, which he achieved, as opposed to a good concert hall. After all, 'he who pays the piper calls the tune.'

AS to organists and organs: snobbery exists in all levels of society, but more so in the arts, where egos dominate. There are those who believe that the Theatre Organ was a crass warping of the 'classical' sound of traditional organs, and with their sound effects in addition to a distinctive sound such as the "sobbing" vox humana voice, the Theatre Organ was more than many 'classicists' could endure, especially if they saw multitudes going into a theatre to hear its organ while a pitiful few attended classical or church concerts. That theatre instruments were expected to also play the latest ballads of the day also made them declass in the ears of the classically trained 'elite.' It boils down to taste, or the lack thereof. The late Ben Hall well covered this matter in his chapter on organs in his landmark book: The Best Remaining Seats: The Story of the Golden Age of the Movie Palace, 1961 and later editions at most libraries, via Inter-library Loan, or at www.Amazon.com

Continuing on the subject of sound were the Music Hall stage shows miked when it first opened? Were many of the movie places miked? Or else how were the voices and instruments of the stage shows heard with any impact? If they were inititially mike free when did miking start?
I believe to the end of the movie/stage show era the orchestra at the Hall was not miked.

"Miking" started with radio, of course, and was largely perfected with the arrival of sound movies, but most theatres were not "miced" until the late Twenties or after that. The arrival of sound depended upon the arrival of practical amplifiers, and Western Electric was the pioneer in introducing sound service to theatres with the first vacuum tubes (called electronic "valves" at the time), and it was not long thereafter that sound 'systems' were introduced to theatres on a limited basis. Prior to that, actors were trained to 'throw' their voices out into the reaches of the theatre, which is what limited earlier theatres to smaller audiences due to the limitations of the human voice. Many a would-be actor/performer failed on the early stage due to the inability to throw their voice. Early microphones, such as the carbon and the taught-band types were large, heavy and inefficient, and thus introduced much 'noise' into the amplifier to mix with the noise created by early amplifiers and speakers themselves. For this reason, there was no such thing as the portable, personal mics that are now clipped to a costume, nor were overhead mics practical until the 30s, and then only in the movie studios on huge boom cranes. With the advent of efficient sound reinforcement and electret miniature microphones in the 1950s, the tradition of the 'thrown' voice faded away as performers learned that they could speak in normal volumes and be easily heard anywhere if properly miced. The untoward affect of all this was the presence of ugly speaker clusters in our theatres since no one could hear the people these days without them.

But think of the large movie palaces in the 20's like the Roxy and the Capitol. Were performers throwing their voices in 5,000 seat theaters?
I also wonder wonder what the first miked Broadway musical was.
Today even the orchestra at the Music Hall is miked making it sound like a an over produced recording. It distances the audience. Well, nobody seems to notice but me.

Were the stage shows at the music hall miked or pre-taped? I remember the later shows in the 70's seemed to have the look of the performers lip-synching.

Jim: I second what you have to say about theatre organist vs. classical organists arguement. There was as many bad classical organists and theater organists as well as good ones. As Ben Hall states in the his Best Remaining Seats:[i] "It [the Mighty Wurlitzer] was, after all, capable of producing honest music of compelling emotional force when [i]properly played and, in the hands of an expert, could work musical magic far beyond the limitations of any other instrument. Without it, the moive palace would have been souless as an armory." (Italics are mine.) The chopter to which you refer in Hall's book is, The Apotheosis of the Mighty Wurlitzer, page 179. Having played both classical and theater instruments, the theater organ, IMHO, is more challenging to play.

The Music Hall organ sounds great in its environment, but it depends where you sit. Since the chambers are situated fairly high on either side of the proscenium, the lower level of the third mezzanine puts the listener at approximately the same level of the organ chambers. There are places in the orchestra where the organ is terribly muffled especially since it, to my knowledge, is no longer miked, particularly the percussions and the piano.

Vincent: The first Broadway show to use a stage mike was Rodgers and Hammerstein's "South Pacific" in 1949. It was a decision made by the composers out of town before New York and was thought quite innovative. The first body mikes were subsequently used by Lena Horn in "Jamaica" (1957)and Anna Maria Alberghetti in "Carnival." (1961)

RobertR,

You hunch is correct! Wow! According to the late Ray Bohr, RCMH's last full-time organist before the change of format in mid-1979, perfomers did lip sync. The reason was for this was because of a cold/flu/epidemic that made its rounds one time through the performing staff and many came down with laryngitis which had a catastrophic effect on the currently playing show. So, the performers were recorded live to prevent future mishaps.

Vincent finds it hard to believe that they didn't have mics in the huge movie palaces, and that is hard to understand from today's perspective when almost everything is miced. Firstly, movie palaces were mostly built for silent movies, not the live, spoken word. Such speech as one might hear there under normal situations was only choral singing, where the aggregate volume was sufficient to penetrate to the rear of the auditorium. While a few of the largest theatres apparently did have rudimentary mics working off of a rudimentary amplifier, most did not, and so live, spoken word was NOT the norm at all. Few famous opera stars would sing at too large a hall for the simple reason that it could damage their voices if they were expected to project or 'throw' to the farthest balcony. This is one reason that few large palaces were then suitable to becoming opera houses. Today, virtually everything is miced, both because of our now customary reliance on technology, and because it lets the producers and sound men have more control over what the audience hears, as well as sometimes making up for the limitations of the acoustics of the hall.

Vincent implies that they over use microphones these days, even for the orchestra, and in some measure he is right. Sound reinforcement is not as pure as the source, no matter how much money is spent on good equipment, but the temptation to have more control and the electronic power to dazzle and even cow the audience is something irresistible to them, but sad to say, this is often abused. We must also not forget the profit motives of the merchants of such who persuade venues that powerful amps and speakers on several planes are essential to versatility, if not verisimilitude. As to lip-syncing to recordings: it is to be expected these days, since it can compensate for an out-of-condition performer, and does not include the noises of the stage, so it is rationalized that the crowd hears a more 'clean' sound track. Whether or not such constitutes a truly 'live' performance is up to the listener.

I read this was one of the reasons Al Jolson was such a beloved performer, his voice could be heard all the way to the rear balcony.

I heard Burton Lane speak once. He said the nicest man he ever worked with in the entertainment industry was Astaire(one of the Music Hall's favorite film stars)and the greatest performer and most wretched human being was Al Jolson(The Jolson Story was one of the Music Halls biggest hits.)

I have heard many similar stories about Jolson over the years. Fred Astaire will always be remembered as a "class act".

Vincent: Record breaker for both attendance and gross "The Jolson Story" played Loews State, as did "Jolson Sings Again."

Simon, it first played the Music Hall and was quite a sensation. There is a very nice picture in Betty Garrett's book of her putting the letters of the title on the Music Hall marquee with her husband Larry Parks looking on.

SimonL and Vincent are both right -- "The Jolson Story" premiered at RCMH on 10 October '46 and ran until the Xmas show "'Till the Clouds Roll By" opened on 5 December -- a long eight weeks. It then moved to the State, where it was accompanied by a Vaudeville show, as the State in the mid-to-late '40s was wont to take films after their openers elsewhere. (Earlier in '46, at the age of three, I saw--and still remember-- "Glida" at the State after it had moved from RCMH: my parents took me because the Vaudeville presentation featured a puppet show that they thought I'd like-- quite a pairing to lure young tots and their folks to that seductive film-- I have hazy memories of the puppet show set against a green backdrop, but can never forget Rita in stunning black-and-white.) After the State, "The Jolson Story" moved to the Fox in Brooklyn, where I remember seeing it; then, on to the nabes. "Jolson Sings Again" opened at the State on 17 August '49, and never played at RCMH. By that time, Larry Parks's reputation was tainted by Communist allegations, no? (It's awful to remember all this trivia--the dates come from "The NY Times Directory of the Film."

Amazing to think that Jolson opened at the Hall on 10 Oct and didn't make it to the burbs until when? How long did people in the boroughs have to wait to see a hit film that wasn't hard ticket?
Interesting that such a sexually suggestive film like Gilda(it's still pretty hot) played the family oriented Hall and then the State with a puppet show! I remember years ago TV used to cut the film for reasons of good taste rather than time.

I remember when Larry Parks died the Ziegfeld revived "The Jolson Story".

The first Broadway show to use microphones was the 1940 edition of "Earl Carroll Vanities," which opened in January of that year. Newspaper critics expressed outrage and the practice was not resumed until after WWII, when new technology was able to produce a more "natural" sound.

Part of the vaudeville stage show at the State with "The Jolson Story" was a new comedy team by the name of Martin and Lewis! Both men developed quite an appreciation for Jolson's music from hearing it backstage in their dressing rooms between shows.

Joe Franklin has often mentioned his accompanying Jolson on the Loew's Theaters tour for "Jolson Sings Again." Does anyone know which theaters Jolie visited on that tour?

Robert was this the 70mm version? Did anybody see it? What was it like?

I am doing a paper on Dick Leibert who was Senior Organist at Radio City for over 40 years. Recollections about hearing him play or any other information about the Radio City organists would be greatly appreciated.

Henry

It's worth mentioning that when "Gilda" played RCMH, they had no policy regarding children as long as they were accompanied by an adult. However, when "Gilda" went to the nabes, it was a different story. I remember my aunt being turned away by the manager who stood by the boxoffice at the Ritz Theater in Elizabeth, N.J. I remember him saying to her, "Sorry, this film is for adults only." We did go to see "Forever Amber" at the Roxy, because she was afraid she would be turned away at Proctor's in Newark, if she had me with her. (I had one of those wonderful aunts that mold your life) Nabes were much stricter about whom they sold tickets to.

Henry,

According to a Westminster recording I have, Leibert at Home, "Dick Leibert studied the organ at Baltimore's Peabody Conservatory of Music. He was from Bethlehem, Pennsylvania and attended the Moravian Prep School there. He began to play the organ professionally at the age of 14 when he got a job as a theater organist for Loew's in Washington, DC. Later, he toured for the Loew's curcuit and played for two years at the Brooklyn Paramount. Against stiff competition, he won the auditions for the permanent post at Radio City Music Hall."

It has been said that Leibert waited last to be auditioned for the Music Hall job. For his own audition piece, he improvised a medley of everything played by those before him. A friend of mine was an Associate Organist at the Music Hall in the 1950's and told me that Leibert did the "Gala Supper Shows."

During his tenure at the Music Hall, he lived in Westport CT. When he retired in 1971, leaving the position of Chief Organist to the late Ray Bohr, Leibert moved to Florida and continued to make appearances. I am not sure but I think he passed on around 1976.

Some of the music Leibert composed was Rosa Maria, Jasmine, English Lavender, Waltz to a Princess and Papa Won't You Dance for Me? Although I never met him, his style at the Music Hall Grande Organ was his own. He know the instrument intimately and his style could be characterized as being "dark."

I have also been told that Leibert and Bohr would spend time playing another Rockefeller Center organ before it was removed ... the Center Theater's. This organ was a 4/34 WurliTzer, a scaled down-version of the Music Hall's (with many of the same ranks of pipes with the same type art-deco console, finished in natural cherry). The Music Hall organ wasn't the only organ Leibert opened. He was loaned to the Rainbow Room to open its 3/10 WurliTzer (a residence model organ). I recently read that in Dan Okrent's book, Great Fortune which is about the building of Rockefeller Center. He mentions Leibert a couple of times. Leibert more than likely used the Plaza Sound Studio 3/14 WurliTzer which was in Radio City Music Hall. (The organ, a custom model with a scaled down version of the big console downstairs, is in storage.)

I hope that you can used this information. Also, I hope you consider writing about the Music Hall's last Chief Organist under the "old" show format, Raymond F. Bohr, Jr. Ray was an extremely talented organist and kindness personified. Ray passed away in 1986.

Many thanks for the information about Dick Leibert.

Does anyone recall a Walt Disney Company stage version of "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" that opened at RCMH in October, 1979? It must have run so briefly that it escaped my notice.

Warren
Thats so funny because two nights ago I came across the program from this show. This was one of the first live shows after the movie format was dropped. I can give you the dates when I get home.

Warren
The live show proved so popular in October 79, that it was brought back for an encore run in February of 1980 for 6 more weeks. That is when I saw it. The tickets were $8- $15.

The Music Hall seems to giving out so many free and steeply discounted tickets for the Christmas show that the people who run the place should seriously think about revamping the thing.(Like throwing out the junk with the midgets, the worst Nutcracker on the planet and the Las Vegas inspired Nativity.)

The Rockettes could use a new act as well. Of course, I know this like beating a dead horse but a movie would be nice.

The 70MM version of "The Jolson Story" did not premiere till August 22, 1975 and it opened at the nearby Ziegfeld Theatre. This was the first time this picture was released in the 70MM format. It was like what MGM did to "Gone With the Wind" in the mid 60's, by cropping the picture.

What exactly "saved" Radio City from being demolished? I remember the hoopla back in 1977 (or 78?) when it looked like it was going the way of so many other theaters. It was in the papers EVERY SINGLE DAY. And I remember thinking, "no way...they can't get rid of that." And they didn't. But I was too young to pay attention to the specifics as to how they managed to save it. Can someone fill me in?

Also, does anyone know how it's doing these days, financially speaking? I work really close to this place and it's almost always booked with something (HEY! Yanni's coming on January 21st!!!!! Should be a sellout!!) so I assume it does OK at least.

Finally, (and this is such a stupid question) but...from looking at the theater from the outside (I work "above"it, so to speak) I just can't seem to grasp "where" it is. From above, it just doesn't seem that big but I know it is. Does the theater itself go into the ground or something? Because it just doesnt' seem that high from the outside. Please don't think me stupid but it's stumped me for years. It's probably a question for an engineer.

The Christmas show is again featuring the 3-D ride. I wondered if anyone knows what method of projection is being used. I know
IMAX 3-D is projected with two (left eye, right eye) 70mm prints.
It is oustanding.

I came across a curious booking for RCMH in 1933, the first year of its operation. When Fox's "Cavalcade" opened at RCMH, it was a second-run engagement, since the movie had just finished a long run at the Gaiety Theatre on a two-a-day, hard ticket scehdule. I wonder if this ever happened again at RCMH?

Warren, over Roxy's dead body, I'm thinking.

Warren:
According to Charles Francisco's bok "The Radio City Music Hall-An Affectionate History of the World's Greatest Theater" (1979) the next time that RCMH played a movie that wasn't first-run there (after Cavalcade in 1933) was in early 1975 when it played "Gone With the Wind"

Cavalcade is a great but mostly forgotten Best Picture winner, and there's no shame in it moving over to RCMH! It still runs on the Fox Movie Channel (talk about moving over) so try to catch it if you can.

The "Cavalacade" booking was during the Easter holidays, so management might have thought it could get away with a second-run booking. It was for "Holy & Easter Week," but I don't know if that was one or two weeks. In those first years, movies rarely ran for more than one week at RCMH.

Guys,
Before Cavalcade for Easter there was DeMilles Sign of the Cross(which presented on stage a march of the gladiators and a chariot race!) which like Cavalcade was hard ticket on Broadway first. Obviously the Music Hall was more flexible back then(King Kong was shared with a theater a block away) which I wish it had become during the 60's considering the dreck they started playing later in the decade and the musicals they could have played like Thoroughly Modern Millie, Half a Sixpence and Chitty Chitty Banb Bang. Though if not great product(I happen to think the first two are wonderful) would have been better and bigger draws on second run than stuff like The Bobo, Sweet November, Hail Hero and the Brotherhood, and The Christmas Tree on first.)Also Oliver for Christmas '69 would have been 10x's better than A Boy Named Charlie Brown.
The first film revival was Mary Poppins in '73 and when I read that earlier in that year I thought well now the Music Hall is getting a watchable movie.

"Cavalcade" (Opened April 6, 1933 and closed April 19) was the first film to be held over for a second week at the Music Hall. It grossed $110,000 in its second week (Easter week) topping the first week gross of $105,000. It was the highest grossing film up to that point. The previous top week was "Topaz" (Feb 9-15) with the help of Amos and Andy in the stage show. "Cavalcade" held the record until "Little Women" opened on November 12 and grossed $118,000 (with a slight hike in the top admission price from .99 to $1.05. and played an unprecedented 3 weeks. No film came close to the record until "Top Hat" opened on August 29, 1935 and grossed $134,000. It also played 3 weeks. No other film came close for many years. In general, attendance at the Music Hall was very spotty (many weeks in the red) until the start of World War II. The boom years lasted about 18 years from 1942 to 1960).

Right--Previously "Cavalcade" ran at the Gaiety (aka Victoria, aka Embassy 5--I never got used to that last name), where it had opened on 5 January 1933--so the film's original run wasn't more than three months. Less for "The Sign of the Cross," which had opened on 30 November 1932 at the Rivoli and then on 2 February at RCMH. Its predecessor there was "State Fair" (Will Rogers!), which had opened on 26 January, and its successor was "Topaze," which opened on 9 February. Charles Francisco mentions an on-stage chariot race, but does not link it to any specific film. If so, management was clearly experimenting with format. DeMille next took over its screen on 26 March '42 with "Wake of the Red Witch" at the start of the boom years, finishing with a till-then record of five weeks, and next with "The Greatest Show on Earth," opening on 10 January '52 and running until "Singin' in the Rain" dislodged it eleven weeks later for the Easter show at the middle of the boom years. Both "Wake" and "Greatest Show" used the MagnaScope screen for the climactic octopus and train-wreck sequences. (Simon: thanks for the tip about widescreenmuseum.com--the posse has finally retrieved me.)

Wasn't the octopus in Reap the Wild Wind?
I think the boom years ended at the Music Hall in '55 which I've read was the last year it was in the black. It seems as well at that point that the quality of product became inconsistent though not as bad as it became in the latter 60's after the success of Barefoot in the Park in '67.
Also the Hall started holding films a lot longer than they should have to avoid the costs of new stage shows. I'll never forget how often the house was empty for Robin and Marion even before Easter.
I still can't figure why anyone there saw this as a holiday film.
What a depressing, grainy, washed out, mediocre film( I won't even go into the stage show.) Well that was the thinking that was going on in the exec offices of Rockefeller Center at the time.

Vincent-- right, it was "Reap," not "Wake."

Yes, Wayne battled an octopus in both "Wake..." and "Reap..." The only difference was the former was in black and white and the latter in Technicolor.

My mother loved books and movies about "The Old South," so she took me to see "Reap The Wild Wind" at RCMH. Unfortunately, when we arrived, there was a huge waiting line that stretched around the block and beyond, so we went to the Roxy instead and saw "To The Shores of Tripoli" and stage show..."The Wake of the Red Witch" never played RCMH. In fact, I don't recall any Republic movie being shown there, though they might have considered "The Quiet Man."

or Johnny Guitar

I doubt that the Music Hall would have played Guitar but Quiet Man would have been a great choice. John Ford had a couple of good movies at the Hall in the 30's. They should have continued to show his films like they did with LeRoy, Wyler, Donen and Hitchcock. Does Mr. Roberts count as LeRoy or Ford?

Nice article to enjoy in today's New York Daily News at this link: http://www.nydailynews.com/city_life/big_town/

I've seen exactly two movies at Radio City. The first was "Robin and Marion" in the 1970s. My father's cousin took me. It also featured a Rockettes show. The second movie was in 1989; the 50th Anniversary of Gone with the Wind. Since the movie was filmed in a smaller aspect ratio, the screen at Radio City was perfect for it. There's not a bad seat in the house. THe last time I was there was 1991, for a Joe Jackson concert.

I saw Gone With the Wind here the time they blew it up to 70mm.

Although "Johnny Guitar" eventually became regarded as a "cult classic,' I seriously doubt that it would have been accepted by RCMH's screening committee, or that Republic would have even submitted it for consideration. It had its NYC opening at Brandt's Mayfair, where Bosley Crowther, then the most influential film critic in the USA due to his affiliation with The New York Times, gave it a scathing review that ended with "Let's put it down as a fiasco. Miss Crawford went thataway."

Today Crowthers reviews are pretty uninteresting but he did write a Sunday essay in the Arts and Leisure section of the NYT's after the opening of The Happiest Millionaire as the Christmas attraction in December of '67. He found the film so bad and the product at the Hall so poor that he wondered what was going on with the selection committee. Well things were only going to get considerably worse.

Bosley Crowther's reviews are some of the worst of all time. Check out his review of "Bonnie and Clyde" (you can read it online at NY Times.com). The guy sounds like a wind bag. But he did like "Citizen Kane" though which I found interesting...

Vincent, I know I'm a little lazy but do you have a link to that Crowthers' Art and Leisure piece?

I read it years ago on microfilm. If your library has the Times on microfilm I believe you'll find it in the Sunday edition after Millionaire opened. Maybe these old articles are available now on line? Also try to find Canby's article on the Hall presentation of Singing in the Rain in '75. One of the best cinema experiences of my life as it was the first time I saw the film. I was seeing it exactly as people saw it in '52 and after seeing some truly bad early '70's musicals at the Hall(it was as if they were made that bad on purpose. It couldn't have been by accident) it was like being shot out of a canon.

Speaking of Bosley Crowther, it is interesting to note that he was selected to write the Introduction to the late Ben Hall's landmark book THE BEST REMAINING SEATS, THE STORY OF THE GOLDEN AGE OF THE MOVIE PALACE. Maybe it was just because both Hall and Crowther worked for the TIMES, but then maybe Ben actually respected Bosley's opinion of the significance of such and his book. Perhaps this lends pespective.

The book is especially bittersweet as when it was written so many theaters were still standing in good condition including one of the 3 greatest the SF Fox. The epilogue of the book if I remember correctly is titled "An End to the Slaughter." Well there was no end it just continued leaving us very few and some of those in perhaps non salvageable condition.

Ben Hall worked for Time Magazine, not for The New York Times, though he did write some free-lance articles for that newspaper. Crowther seemed a logical choice to do the intro of "The Best Remaining Seats" because he was the most powerful and influential film critic in the USA at the time.

Answer to RobertR's post this past September concerning films that played normally at the MH but were roadshown elsewhere. Add MGM's 1960 "Cimarron" to the list. Played, to indifferent results, at the Hollywood Paramount (now El Capitan again) and Philadelphia's Stanton, a Warner house not previously known for roadshows.

This is late notice but I just learned that there is a special one-hour program about Radio City Music Hall on WOR-TV (UPN network) tonight at 9:00pm.

The RCMH's underground boxoffice was only open when seats were available. As soon as the theatre reached capacity, it would be shut down, and you had to go up to the street and wait on line to get to the regular boxoffices. Underground, there was a mirrored corridor with a ticket taker at the end of it. You then entered into the theatre's downstairs lounge, adjacent to the checkroom.
posted by Warren on Nov 22, 2004 at 4:19pm

I took my 8 year old daughter to see the Christmas show on Friday. We got to the theater a little early and went downstairs to the lounge. It seems a lot different than I remember it. Not as big but they did have these temporary partitions blocking off large sections of the lounge area. Behind them, they were storing the overpriced souvenirs they were hocking down there.

Anyway....regarding Warren's comment about the passageway that led from the lower concourse to the lounge, it's still there and I found it. It's on the far side (southern) part of the lounge. It's concealed by these temporary partitions and behind it are those souvenirs. I managed to work my way around them to get a decent look. It's all still intact right down to the mirrors that Warren mentioned. The only thing is that at the far end, it does look sealed off except for a single door. So obviously the corridor is still intact just not used at all. Very interesting.

Just another thing: my daughter was VERY impressed with the Music Hall. She could not believe that at one time they regularly showed movies there. And she made one point that was good for an eight year old. She asked why they have those awful looking hanging speakers and light holders above and to the side of the stage. Once she said that, I had to totally agree. There's one huge set of speakers that comes down from the arch directly above the stage. I know they had to do that for sound and the concerts but it looks awful and kills the effect of the sunrise (sunset?). Either way, my daughter loved the place and especially the two organists. That was a neat touch. I didn't know they still used the organs.

I saw about a half hour of the self congradulatory special last night. It was all I could take. The head of the Rockettes goes on and on about what wonderful troup they are. And so they are. But you can only see them once out of the year and only in the lousy Christmas show. Maybe she needs to think about when else they can be presented in New York. Once a year at the holidays just isn't professional performing and an insult as well to a great NY institution. Also they need to find a stage producer who knows the capabilities of the stage. Having speakers throughout the auditorium is such a symptom of the stupidity that the current managers get away with.

Well, I was there on Friday for the show and I hate to say Vincent's right, but he is. They're treating the place like it's Madison Square Garden now. It's still grand looking but it's unique aspects that I remember (like the beautiful lounge) is not like it was. It's got some of the art deco furnishings and such but whole areas are kept behind these partitions to store the overpriced krap souvenirs.

BUT....I think you have to understand the realities of a place like this now. In order for it to survive in some form, they have to do whatever they can to keep it going even if it means cheapening it's heritage. Entertainment is not what it was 40 or 50 years ago. People don't go to the movies like they used to even 20 years ago. Yeah, it's a little nauseating when you think about "Dora the Explorer" playing the Music Hall and such. But it pays the rent and keeps the place alive. That is what we have to be thankful for.

If only there was a fair balance between the "crap" and classic movies.

"If only there was a fair balance between the "crap" and classic movies. "

On that note, I will completely agree with you. I don't think it would be difficult to imagine the Music Hall filling up if every now and then they showed worthwhile. And I don't mean just classic films. My feeling is that if they had been able to premiere and show, say, "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" (very epic sized) it would have done pretty well. I for one would've loved to have seen it there. There are many times during the year where the offerings at RCMH are slim (not sure if it's ever dark, though). But what movies do you think could or would fill up the Hall enough to warrant this? I don't know anything about bookings and such so it would be hard to figure whether or not they'd be able to either make a profit or at least break even.

Since Radio City is no longer the exclusive movie house it once was, they could most definately play a film like "Lord of the Rings", "Spongebob" or any Disney feature when it opens for general release. Put a stage show with it and charge $20.

Judging from how mediocre the Christmas show was, I could not agree with you more.

How amazing it would've been to have seen the shortened one that I remember so well (and saw every year when I was a kid) along with "The Spongebob Movie"!!! My daughter would've had a REAL treat.

Though she enjoyed the show overall, I could tell after 45 minutes or so, she was getting "itchy" as was I. Since there's no story or anything, it's hard to keep interested in one "spectacular" production number after another. There were at least three parts of it that I remember from when I saw it as a kid. The rest was filler to make people feel like they were getting their money's worth.

They could do this for the Easter show and during the summer. Cut the stage show back to 45 to 50 minutes cutting out a lot of the annoying filler and utilize the old set designs and the old staging(if anybody around still remembers it.)At this point I assume all the old sets have been destroyed and all the old lighting charts as well. At Christmas of '69 the Colorama magazine in the Sunday Daily News had a two page color spread of the Nativity. It was one of the best photos I've seen of it. The powers that currently be should get a hold of it and see how it's supposed to look. Their own poverty of imagination would stun them.

It's hard to believe we now pay $100 for what we used to spend $5 for with a movie.

Robert I hate to tell you this but when I saw Scrooge with an elaborate Christmas show if you got there in the morning before 12 I believe it was $2 on a Saturday. A first run movie at the time was $3. Movies are now $10.50. That's less than a 400 percent increase. Today to see the Christmas show it's $100. That's a 5,000 percent increase. And back then you could stay and watch it all over again! So the price of a Music hall ticket today is 10x's more than it should be at current price standards.

There are lots of cut-rate deals being offered. The Long Island Rail Road, for example, has one that gives a discount of 20% on RCMH tickets, plus FREE round trip transportation on the LIRR.

Warren: not to sound cynical but the cut rate deals are often for off peak dates and/or times (typically before Thanksgiving or if after, for unpopular times like 9:00 AM or so...). I believe that after a certain point, every show is Peak and the discounts mean you get the dregs of the seating like the rear of the orchestra to the far right or left. I paid premium for the tickets because I used a certain credit card and was assured that they were great seats. They were mediocre at best. I can only imagine what the cut rate folks got.

Like RobertR says, during the 70's, you could see the show any number of times for around $7. (I'm not sure of the exact price but I'm sure it wasn't anything near to what I paid...)

I think that when I saw The Promise in 1979, it was $5 for eve shows. I was there the last day.

No CConnolly, $7 would have been considerd an outrageous admission price. Top general admission,including all of the orchestra from 70 to 76 would have been from $3 to $4. The Music Hall while still in its movie phase prided itself on popular prices(when was the last time you saw that term used?)

Sadly, there is nothing 'popular' about todays prices...... the term usury comes to mind.

Vincent: hey, I was a kid and Mom paid admission so what did I care, right? In my mind, the Christmas show back then was excellent. It was a great thing to go see. We never got reservations and always got great seats OR we'd move to another section after the first show (or movie) to see it again even better. Best deal in the city by far. Yeah, I had to sit through some less than desirable movies ("Slipper and the Rose" stands out in my mind as one of the worst I had to endure) but the show and the Music Hall made it all worthwhile.

People today have asked me what I thought of the show and all I could think of was that it seemed like one of those shows you see at Disney World or such with much more exhorbitant admission price.

I'm not sure how events are booked at the Music Hall these days but whom ever is doing it probably doesn't care about the quality as long as whatever the venue is, it brings in $$$. I know that it's somehow tied into The Theater at Madison Square Garden now.

I consider it a real loss that they don't do Leonidoff's Nativity any more. When the stage show started and the house darkened turning to a deep blue the orchestra rose with only the sound of chimes playing the opening of Silent Night. It would repeat going up an octave and the chorus dressed as Renaissance shepards and such would appear on the side flanks lit up as tableaux and sing the entire carol. Then the curtain would go up to reveal the night sky over Bethlehem and they would only descend when the angel would appear and start singing o Holy Night which they would all join in at the end. After the Nativity the orchestra would rise to its normal height and always play Sleigh Rise introducing the more secular part of the spectacle.

Are the weekly Christmas show grosses reported in Variety or any of the other showbiz trade papers? If not, they should be...Also, do Christmas show tickets ever turn up at the "half-price" booth in Duffy Square? I suspect that evening performances are less than sell-outs, especially on weekdays.

Vincent: YES! Thank you for that great description. THAT'S the Nativity I remember so well. That friggin' thing would give me goose pimples when I was a kid. And THE BLUE LIGHT!!!! That was one of the most amazingly beautiful things I have EVER seen and I'm not religous. It was dramatic and awe inspiring.

The show today is lame. Yes, the shepherds descend from the side flanks but it's near the end. Then at the end, they do this weird scrolling story thing about the glory of Jesus while a narrator recites what's written on the screen. I thought I was in the midwest (sorry.). One of the reasons I took my daughter to see it was that I assumed (wrongly) that it would be the same.

Why the HELL could they not have kept the original Nativity? Do you know when the one you and I saw was last performed?

Thanks again...

CC now you've really got me started. The narration in the current Nativity has to be proof positive of the non existence of God. I thought I was reading a poster in a Christian Right church basement. Whoever came up with that should have been buried in the foundation of the Times Square Mariott. And then they follow this with a Walgreen inspired creche! Fortunately when I saw it the midgets in the toy house popping out singing Fa la la la la la put me into such a state of shock that the effect was somewhat mitigated.

Imagine standing on line for 3 hours to see one of the best Christmas shows ever at the Music Hall and it only lasted 22 minutes. That was when "Sayonara" was the 152 minute feature. The Nativity was only 7 minutes long followed by a 2 minute overture. The Rockettes did their traditonal 6 minute routine as 36 tapping Santas,followed by the 7 minutes Underseas Kingdom finale featuring Kirby's flying ballet. How about .95 before noon; 1.25 noon to 6pm and 1.50 6pm to closing. 1st Mezzanine reserved seats were 1.80 matinees and 2.40 for all evenings and Saturday and Sunday. Eat your heart out.

Yes, the Christmas Spectacular is often at the TKTS half-price booth in Times Square; I'm not sure about the South Street Seaport location. Thanks for reminding me...maybe I'll check it out at half-price, and it'll be a good opportunity to explore the Hall again. I love going into the upper mezzanines and looking out over the lobby, or sitting in and watching the show from that extreme perspective.

Yup Simon, how well I remember those prices. During the 50s and 60s We went to every new show. New movies would normally open on a Thursday and we would get there before 6 for the matinee price of, as you mentioned, about $.90. Seats wee unreserved so you could sit anywhere you liked. Once inside we would head down to the front row of the orch, to watch the stage show, then rush up to the 3rd mezz for the movie, and sometimes head down to the front row of the 1st mezz to see the stage show again. As to those awfull speakers, I certainly agree they are an eyesore. The smaller ones hanging on the side walls and along the back walls are course for Dolby surround when ever a movie is shown, but I think they over did that, Seems to be an awfull lot of them. But at least they lok a bit better now, after the restoration, when a gold fabric was put on them.
Did they actually use the curtain much during the Christmas show? That beautifull curtain just sems to hang there much of the time these days and never move.

Simon talks about Kirby's flying ballet. I've read that they were also part of a 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea spectacle included in the '62 Easter show along with the film Moon Pilot. The entire secular portion of the stage show was produced by Disney and I once had a beautiful color photo of the finale. Did anyone see this?
I once saw the Undersea Ballet with the film Butterflies are Free which certainly fufilled expections though an usher told me it had been scaled down probably from its last appearance with Where Were You when the Lights Went 0ut.

CConnolly asked:

I don't think it would be difficult to imagine the Music Hall filling up if every now and then they showed worthwhile. And I don't mean just classic films ... But what movies do you think could or would fill up the Hall enough to warrant this?
**********************
The Music Hall showed Alfred Hitchcock's "Psycho" on a weeknight back in the 1990's as part of a classic film festival. There wasn't too much advertising for this event, but the word got out anyway. There wasn't an empty seat in the house. Man, what a thrill that was!

If the Music Hall could pick and choose what it ran, it would do fine. As an earlier post mentioned, "The Spongebob Movie" would've been great there as well as (even better!) "The Incredibles". What I would've given to see that WHOPPER in the Music Hall!!!! The problem is, movies lately are just not that great. Ok..so let's imagine they book the latest Harry Potter flick (for arguements sake...) or they had run "The Lord of the Rings" trilogy upon each of their sucessive openings (now THOSE suckers would've been sold out for WEEKS!!!). What about everything else? My opinion is that the Music Hall should be more of a mixed venue...concerts, shows, and movies. How often (if ever?) is the theater unbooked? I work within view of it's marquee and I never see nothing showing there even if it's Yanni in Concert (now there's a sellout show!).

Imagine if they showed the original three Star Wars films there again? Every single geek within 300 miles would be there in addition to more laid back fans. There's just no creative management running the place. What a terrific and totally underutilized place it is.

I had the pleasure of attending the world premiere of "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" at RCMH this past May. It was so cool to see a movie in that grand showplace again, and every seat was full. When the stars of the film were brought on stage, the cheers and screams were deafening. It's a shame the film couldn't have played its regular New York engagement there. I'm sure it would have been a smash!

Bosley Crowther had the old-fashioned notion that filmmakers had a duty to make films that showed socially responsible behaviors. He believed that it was not in the best interest of the culture to elevate petty criminals to the status of heroes. However, he consistently championed independent filmmakers and urged that outstanding foreign films be imported. He was instrumental in defending Joseph Burstyn in the Miracle Case that led to first amendment protections for films. Crowther's review of Bonnie and Clyde should be read both in the context of its times and in the context of Crowther's beliefs.

Bob Furmanek: why the hell they couldn't keep it there for a couple of weeks is beyond me. Yes, I think it could've/would've been sold out for that time. Again, the Music Hall's handlers probably have no concept of creativity except for making a buck. Pathetic. I can imagine what that movie must've looked like in the Music Hall. Awesome.

HenryAldridge: you are 100% correct about Crowther's review of "Bonnie and Clyde" and taking it in context. This was a man who lived during the time that the real Bonnie and Clyde "did their thing" so to speak so he may have been rightfully appalled that a film would actually celebrate their spree. He was "old" at the time but his review reads like the rantings of an angry grandfather. By the time of that review (1967) the old school of film making was dying and so were his views. I believe he retired not soon after.

The changes in film making that brought us "Bonnie and Clyde" were also effecting and would effect the great screen palaces in New York such as Radio City.

Saw a bit of the original Pink Panther on TCM last night. It hurt to see in letterboxed on a TV screen. It is one of my favorite films with Sellers giving his best Clouseau(not the caricature it became)and doing his slapstick with the incredibly beautiful and funny Capucine. Then there's Niven, Cardinale, Cortina D'Ampezzo, Mancini sambas, and the gorgeous 60's color in Technirama.
What this must have looked like on the Music Hall's screen in '64 must have been sensational.
Thank you Blake Edwards. Just wish I could have been there.

this is most beautifull theatre I seen ever I be here two times and enjoy very much

During some of our earlier posts on presentation at Radio City Music Hall and other theatres on this page, I referred to the Dorchester Cinema in Hull, England.
I have now added the Dorchester to Cinema Treasures. I have an exterior photo before it was demolished which will be submitted once the Add a Photo page is working again. I also hope to have some interior shots sent to me soon and I will make those available to anyone who wants to see them.

The last time I went to the Music Hall was to see Napoleon, the second time they presented it with the live orchestra led by carmine coppola, it was a wonderful event, and I too am sad that they stopped showing films there. Its crazy. The 1st time I went to the music hall was to see Friendly persuasion, and that theatre left a lasting impression on me. I loved Radio city the most of all the theatres in new york, and saw many many films there in my youth including Les Girls, The Pajama Game, The Days Of wine and roses, North by Northwest, How to Suceed in business, wait until dark, The spirit of st. louis, and many many others. In 1969 I did a "conceptual" art work (Im an artist) on the hall which was a booklet listing all the films that played there, I also reproduced a program and laid in postcards of the hall. I did a very small edition and sent it to artists, critics etc, and I sometimes I check on the internet for it, and see that some dealers are selling it for around 200 bucks. Andrew Sarris loved it and wrote me a nice note, it got me lots of notice. As a teenager I even applied for an usher job there, but think I was too short. I remember going down to the locker room area for an interview and recall the basement was in white tiles. I also did a slide presentation as a work on the hall in the late 60's and was planning to do an article on the hall for a serious art mag. but never got around to it. I also published a series of stories called 5 stories of the music hall which was published in a magazine put out by the st. marks poetry project. I too wish they would start showing films again.

I remember waiting on long lines for the Radio City Music Hall in the 50's. And yes, it was under a dollar before noon for a ticket plus you got a program with the cast of the film as well as the name of the live presentation. I believe on the cover it said "Showplace of the Nation"; I saved most of the programs, but I collect so many things, I'd have to really look hard to find. We saw "Charade","The Singing Nun", "Two For the Road", "The Band Wagon", "Funny Face", "Sayonnara", "The Teahouse of the August Moon","How To Steal A Million", "Love Me Or Leave Me", "Jumbo", "Arabesque", and several others. They seemed to favor Doris Day and Audrey Hepburn films.

"Showplace of the Nation" was a phrase that RCMH used for many decades in its advertising and promotion. In ads, "Showplace of the Nation" usually appeared to the left of "RADIO CITY MUSIC HALL," with "Rockefeller Center" to the right. At the bottom of the ads, the starting times of the movie and the stage show were always listed. Curiously, I don't recall any warm weather ads that mentioned that RCMH was air-conditioned, which was a common practice for theatres in the "old days." But I guess the public assumed that it was because of its modernity.

Ok, have found the RCMH site and now have it among my favorites...don't we all! So I will now read what has been written about this wonderful theatre which such history in the Big Apple! Thanks Vincent and others!

In spite of my preference for Cinerama-type theatres, I still must say the RCMH is my favorite of theatre of all. Can you just imagine that huge curtain coming down on the Gloria Swanson's final closup in "Sunset Boulevard"?
And, Warren, I wish i could locate this photograph. But at some time during the 40's or 50's I saw a theatre marquee - during hot weather - and the signage read "Who Cares? It's Cool Inside"

I have a RCMH story to relay. My husband and I were visiting friends on Long Island the year before 9/11 and our friends decided to take us into Manhattan. We toured the World Trade Center on an overcast day (will now always remember our special visit one year before tragedy struck our nation). We later entered the lobby of RCMH. I saw there was a line and figured it was for the Christmas Spectacular which it probably was, but the line was probably also for folks wanting to take the RCMH tour which is available on Sundays (the day we were there)! Our hosts didn't think to ask for us and so we left. On the way home the next day I was looking through my Fodor book on NYC and read that tours are available at RCMH on Sundays! :-((((

Patsy: you had asked on another theater listing about the Christmas "Spectacular". I took my 8 year old daughter on the day after Thanksgiving. I had VERY fond memories of the Christmas show when I was a kid in the 70's...very vivid especially of the Nativity.

Well, now the more I've thought and thought about it I realize what a complete, absolute RIP OFF the current show is. Just read my posts above to get an idea. To charge $77 and UP for what is basically a hyped up amusement park show is absurd. Yes, the Rockettes were great and they were one of the few things that kept my daughter very interested. But the rest was stupid story padding to up the running time to 90 minutes (to make people feel as though they got their money's worth). And the biggest disappointment of all was that the Nativity was not the one I remember and gave me goose-pimples as a kid. Again, if you read the posts above, you will see this.

To think that my Mom used to take me and my brother to see this every year in the 70's and we loved it and it cost next to nothing. And it was absolutely beautiful. And it's been replaced with this piece of crap. It's appalling.

The only thankful thing I can say about it is that it keeps RCMH alive and in use. At least when I walk by it now, I remember the Christmas show when I saw it as a kid.

I wrote this to Patsy on the Ziegfeld page but it really belongs here. Sorry for the repetitions but these things can't be said often enough.
Patsy,
Yes the page on Radio City Music Hall in Cinema Treasure has many posts and I have certainly contributed quite a few as I am crazy about this building(worked there during Robin and Marian) and grieve over the way it has been wasted in recent years.
Leonidoff was the stage show producer who Roxy brought from the his original theater on 7th Av to Rockefeller Center(literally a block away.)
Leonidoff along with greats like Russel Markert and Florence Rogge created the stage shows for which the Music Hall became famous and was responsible for the religious portions of both the Christmas and Easter shows. His Nativity was a Renaissance pagaent stressing color, spectacle, movement and tableau as imagined by a Medici.
Now it has been reimagined by a Walgreens middle manager on a weekend trip to Branson.

Vincent: I'm sure we've gone back and forth on this same issue on the Nativity but as far as I'm concerned, it can't be said enough. When I saw the Nativity as a kid, it nearly brought tears to my eyes and I was not a weepy kid. My heart would be pounding...it was truly awe inspiring.

But now? God it's so pathetic and lame it's not worthy to be discussed in the same breath with the original.

And as I walked around Rockefeller Center this afternoon and saw the hordes waiting on line for the "show", I thought about what a scam they are getting into. It made me feel so sad.

If they cut the show by 45 minutes, lowered the prices and returned the old Nativity, people would go bonkers for this thing. There is not a single person that has seen this new version who says they will ever see it again. To them, once is enough. So right now, the RCMH show is playing strictly to people's memories (like mine) and to people with little kids looking for a holiday distraction. But they're not going to get any return business. It's too expensive and totally not worth it.

Ugh. I'm getting into a funk just writing this.

CConnolly: I never thought that I'd get such response from fellow theatre buffs about the present RCMH Christmas Spectacular which I guess isn't so 'spectacular' anymore. If I ever got the chance to see it though, I'd at least go just to see the beautifully restored hall and those wonderful Rockettes. I always sit and watch them in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade...it's not the beginning of the holidays for me until I see the 'old world' Santa and those Rockettes...then and only then does the turkey get put in the oven! If you're in NYC, walk by the Christmas windows for me on 5th Avenue. My favorite Christmas movie is White Christmas, but a close second is Miracle on 42nd Street with Natalie Wood. Who played Santa in that movie and Natalie's parents? Didn't Maureen O'Hara play her mother?

Patsy: don't get me wrong about the Rockettes. They were wonderful and my daughter LOVED them. Each and every single time they came out and did their "thing", which was not just them lining up and kicking their legs (which they did) but a lot more, she got very into it. It was all this nonsensical filler in the show that made it so lame and LONG. And the Hall itself awed my daughter but she did make the impressive remark about how the speakers on the side and especially down the middle of the arch marred it's look (very observant and accurate for an 8 year old).

When I saw the show last in 1977, there was none of this filler in the show. It started with the AWESOME Nativity, then then the Rockettes doing their leg kicking thing, then the Santa Clauses, then the Rocketttes as the Wooden Soldiers...then there was an ice skating thing...my mind gets hazy here...I remember they used the turntable to make it look like people were skating and "snow" would fall. I believe there was maybe one or two more scenes and that was it. Quick (about 45 minutes), dazzling and incredibly satisfying.

You'll get more Christmas spirit by walking around Rockefeller Center and 5th Avenue than you would or will seeing this show. And you'll save a bundle.

CConnolly: Thanks for your RCMH memories! Your then 8 year old sounds like quite the lady...another Natalie Wood in "Miracle"!

Patsy, the movie you're thinking of is Miracle on 34th Street, with Natalie Wood, Maureen O'Hara, John Paine and Edmund Gwenn as Santa.

So what's up with the Rockettes?
Why does their director know what she is doing while her colleagues are 100 percent clueless? It makes no sense.
By the way the wooden soldier routine was not done every year. I saw most of the Christmas shows for the late '60's to the mid 70's and the only time they did it was for the film 1776. It was a special event not to be overdone. It was done under the large lower branches of a Christmas tree and they came out of a toy castle.
People at the Music Hall today this is not curing cancer-it is simple showmanship. To have them now parade about in front of nothing but a cyclorama makes about as much sense as have them march about in front of the bare back wall.
Oh and by the way did I mention the midgets? It's like we're in some seedy presentation house in '32 watching vaudeville die.

Vincent: I truly hate to disagree with you about the wooden soldiers and I will bow to your memory but I swear I saw it more than once. Yes, I did see the show when "1776" played there (hated it...imagine a 6 year old sitting through a movie like that!). I think I saw it the last time I saw the show which was in 1976 or 1977 with a terrible movie called "The Slipper and the Rose". Look, I'm probably wrong. But I'm not wrong about the Nativity which we "discussed" here before. Do you know when they did away with the old one and put on the "new" Nativity?

I don't remember it with The Slipper and the Rose(awful) at all. But maybe you are right. The Variety review would clear that up. Still that would be twice in 10 years.
The movie for that Christmas show should have been Bogdonovich's
Nickolodeon, with the O'Neals pere et fille and Brian Keith, and Slipper should have been the following Easter Show. However Nick had major problems so they moved up Slipper.
I may be the only person in the world who enjoyed Bogdonovich's At Long Last Love. At least at the Music Hall it was visually stunning(the final moments alone worthy of Lubitsch.) And hearing Porter there was heaven. Yeah for the most part everyone sang very badly, the dialogue was strained and maybe today its unwatchable(anyone out there for a restoration-it was cut during the Music Hall run! I saw two different versions of it there a week apart) but seeing it as an Easter show in the mid 70's well what else could they have shown. Maybe visually it was the best new film I ever saw at Radio City.
And as regards 1776 imagine anyone sitting through that thing and I had loved the Broadway album as a kid! Though I believe it was the last film to sell out the Hall in the evening shows with people being told that the final stage show was sold out and they could only buy tickets for the movie.

I saw the Rockettes perform their wooden soldiers routine when I paid my first visit to the USA (and NYC) in 1976 and the R.C.M.H. Christmas Show was performed with the Richard Chamberlain movie "The Slipper and The Rose". I watched the film once but sat through the Christmas Show twice, I was so impressed.

According to Charles Francisco's book "The Radio City Music Hall -An Affectionate History of the World's Greatest Theater" (1979), the 1976 Christmas Show was a Peter Gennaro production. Leon Leonidoff's last production was 'Saluda a Colombia' on his retirement in 1974.

I know I saw the terrible "The Slipper and the Rose" (an absure "reworking" of Cinderella) in 1976...it was the last Christmas show I saw at RCMH. Like KenRoe, we loved the Christmas show so much that year that we saw it twice but exited before we'd have to sit through the movie again.

The first time I saw the Christmas show was with "1776" and it was packed. I was way too young to understand or like the movie. But I loved the Christmas show. Every year after that until 1976, we went to see the show and the movie. Funny thing is I can only remember one other movie besides Slipper and 1776 and that was "The Sunshine Boys" which must've been 1975. My parents laughed their heads off at that one but I didn't think much of it at the age of 9. Again, I loved the show. I don't remember exactly what was performed...the shows have all kind of morphed into on another.

Ironically, in 1976, for the Bicentennial, my school and (it seemed) all the other school districts in Nassau County saw a special screening of "1776" at the un-multiplexed Lynbrook. I can remember sitting in the high balcony and looking down at the "orchestra" seats and thinking how big the place was. God, that theater was, to me, the Radio City Music Hall of LI. I absolutely LOVED that place.

CC I hope you saw the Disney Robin Hood Christmas show as it was the last one with the ballet company and the Rockettes looking especially sensational much like in that great Kodak photo of them in red against a blue background. For me after that it was never the same. I guess it was right after Leonidoff left that they disbanded the ballet. For me the stage started looking pretty sparse and then they reduced the Rockettes from 36 to 30.(I think at the very beginning the Rockettes totaled 46 on stage. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

Vincent
You are so right, and every year the show got sparser and sparser. I remember by the late 70's people standing in front of the drapes singing with no backdrops or props for some numbers. The thing is I long for those days just beacuse seeing the movie and stage show was special. I have a question, was there any other theatre anywhere in the world that was still running a stage show and movie until almost 1980?

Vincent and CC: Boy, between the 2 of you I'm learning ALOT about RCMH and the Christmas Show over the years! Thanks!

I was surprised to read that the number of Rockettes on stage has been reduced! :-(

I have to say this once again: The Rockettes were as good as I remember them. If the numbers have dwindled, it had no effect on the presentation. They were outstanding. They did a finale where they were Santa's reindeer that was as good as anything I remember from the shows as a kid. It was the stuff before this scene and others that was appalling and worse, BORING and pointless (what the HELL was with that toy making factory set? Even my daugther said it looked tacky). If the show was simply the Rockettes "doing-their-thing" it would've been a winner. Less is more is definately the key to this kind of show. And that goes for the ticket prices too.

Vincent: I saw your hilarious posting about the Christmas show on the Ziegfeld site and you also say the same thing here about it's strange Christian Fundamentalist bent. I think what you're referring to (and we "discussed" this here previously) is that ludicrous speech at the end with it scrolling on the screen. It's message is so UN-subtle it's like getting hit over the head. That pushed me over the edge into out and out loathing of the "new" Nativity. The old shows may have morphed into one continuous one in my mind but they never did anything like that back then.

It's "message" is so heavy handed that they probably should send out a warning to the audience that all non Christians may want to leave the auditorium prior to the Nativity scene.

Even as a kid, I was not into religon and such but the Nativity I saw then could've made me relgious...it was that good.

Just one more thing (and I sincerely apologize for beating a dead horse here) but I wonder if the reason why the put the Nativity at the end rather than the beginning like the shows I saw was because people actually MIGHT get up and walk out because they were offended by the ending message.

Was the Nativity scene I remember always at the beginning of the Christmas show?

CConnolly

I think with the movies it always started the show. At least that's how I remember it. Rob

Always at the beginning. Leonidoff knew exactly what he was doing.

Not having seen the Nativity sequence I'm curious to know just what the 'message' is that the management is promoting (although I have my suspicions).

Sam_e: You took the words right out of my mouth...."I'm curious to know just what the 'message' is"! I know when we lived in FL and would attend the First Baptist Singing Christmas Tree it was and still is close to 3 hours in length. The reason being the program is done in 2 parts with an intermission. The first half is Toyland and Santa etc. and the second half is very secular with the entire story of Jesus, from birth to death on the cross...complete with the pounding of Jesus to the cross. I know that it scares some children and feel that the Easter story should NOT be a part of the Christmas story, but that's only my humble opinion. Our friends would ask us what we thought each year and I was never one to hold back my opinion though we usually went each year knowing full well that the format would probably remain the same.

The ending message that scrolled with narration basically praised Jesus as being the most remembered and greatest leader of all time even after 2000+ years. I wish I could get a transcript of it. Not only was it over the top but it went on forever. I kept thinking "who are they doing this for?" It was like something you'd see at a PTL fundraiser. It was creepy. And I'm not trying to offend anyone because I was raised Catholic and such. I just thought it was too heavy handed for the setting and especially considering the light stuff that came before.

I'm glad to hear that I wasn't wrong about the Nativity starting off the old show. If you think about it, it made sense: that's what Christmas is about, fundamentally speaking. And there was absolutely NOTHING offensive about it. It was simply beautiful.

Thanks for your comments as I figured it was heavily Jesus-based which is fine except that it sounds "too heavy handed for the setting" and in my opinion a bit "over the top" so will think twice about going to see the show mext season now! Is it me or is Christmas and the holiday season in general just not what it used to be? I mean in reference to all of this talk about saying Merry Christmas over Happy Holidays, etc. It was a more simple time back in the 50's, I think...now everyone's remark is examined and disected! The holidays seem to fly by and maybe that's a good thing! :-(

Having worked in retail in a large city in years past, I have adopted a somewhat jaded opinion of the Christmas season. Being bombarded by the insanity that the season seems to bring out in people I am now of the "let's just get it over with" philosophy. If I feel that I need an uplifting experience, I'll go to Lourdes or Palmyra NY and see the Passion Play. Let's see, they hold that about every ten years...that should be enough. RCMH might do better with a lighter touch. Oh, to be able to go back to a simpler time!

Answer to Vincent about the number of Rockettes: The Rockettes were traditonally 36 dancers, but 46 were on the payroll. Each Rockette would work 7 days for 3 weeks with the 4th week off. The extra ten Rockettes allowed for the rotation, plus illness etc. One thing that many of us remember from the old days was how versatile the Rockettes were. They were often brought back in certain shows augment the 24 member ballet company and were just as good on their toes as in their tap shoes. The reverse was true for the ballet company. Some shows boasted a company of 100 (check out some of the early newspaper ads), including the choral ensemble or glee club.

Truely when it was the Showplace of the Nation, in the heart of Rockefeller Center. :)

Question regarding The Rockettes: correct me if I'm wrong but the only time they seem to work as the Rockettes is during the Christmas "Spectacular". What do these women do the rest of the year? Or are the current Rockettes hired as new every year?

In the "olden" days (sorry...) did the Rockettes perform at every stage show?

Answer to CConnolly: To the best of my knowledge, the Rockettes have appeared in every show but one beginning in January 1933 (througout the golden "olden days") Leonidoff produced a one-hour version of the opera "Madama Butterfly" for two weeks in 1934. Obviously no spot for 36 tapping geisha girls.The first week of "Madama Butterfly" accompanied the film "Twentieth Century" May 3 - 9 and the second holdover week for the stage show played with "Change of Heart" with Janet Gaynor May 10 - 16. If anyone knows of another show with the famed 36, let me know.

Simon-I believe you meant without the famed 36 so does the strike of '67 count? I don't think there was even the ballet in that one. The film was Up the Down Staircase.
In the Madama Butterfly Jan Peerce sang 4 Pinkertons a day 7 days a week! And then 40 years later he was doing Tevya on Broadway!

wow! this website is wonderful and I will pass it on the Rockette alumni for sure! Mom-in-Law was a Rockette 1937-1942 and Dad-in-Law a violinist in the pit right from the beginning.. even have a book sent to the employees from Roxy because he couldnt invite them all to the grande opening.. ahhh... sigh.. to have been a fly on the wall during that era!
As a kid, living in Queens, I grew up with Radio City - every year the Christmas and Easter shows.. past memories/visual include the lil puppet inch worm -for some odd reason. Rockette mom was paid $50 week! and such hard work, pre-union
She was in 1936 Movie as dancer The Devil On Horseback with Ann Miller, did the Mexican Hayride show, a show at the Samoa, The Clover Club, Miami, Billy Rose shows, etc.
Great website.. I'll be back for sure!

Dorothy from Oz! What a real treat to read your post this brisk NC a.m.! When I read "Mom-in-law was a Rockette 1937-1942" I just about came out of my chair in front of this computer. And yes by all means.....pass thi site onto the Rockette alumni! I never miss a Thanksgiving a.m. without watching those Rockettes in Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade! This IS a wonderful site and many posts ago I started posting on the RMCH site and it took off from there with many posts about the Christmas show, etc. from several native New Yorkers. I grew up in New York, but at the other end of the state in Chautauqua County near the PA stateline so was 400 miles from the Big Apple! My husband and I hope to broad Amtrak next fall from NC and ride the train into Grand Central Station and stay in Manhattan over the long Thanksgiving weekend! I want to walk down 5th Avenue once in my life during the holidays and see all of the decorated windows i.e. Tiffany....can't forget Breakfast at Tiffany with Audrey Hepburn! Also, Rockefeller Center, the tree, the rink and the Today Show! If anyone can suggest anything that is a must see, let me know. Have always wanted to me in Times Square at midnight on the 31st of December, so maybe that too someday. Our thoughts and concerns will all be with Dick Clark this year as he will be replaced by Regis Philbin as host to ring in '05. I will have to say though that I won't miss seeing Mrs. Clark on camera for those few brief moments with her outdated hairstyle! LOL! Just a joke as I really don't mean to offend anyone. So, keep in touch Dorothy of Oz as I'm sure you have many Rockette stories to share!

Why thank you!
There is a Rockette alumni site and I'll ask if it can be posted here.I certainly don't see why not since it is already out in cyberspace for the finding. I have forwarded this site to the alumni
and I'm sure many have stories to tell as well.
p.s. mom is still with us! but..sigh.. her memory has failed considerably. She told some stories but have been able to piece together much of her history from her archives and friends all within the past year.. and boy she kept everything it seems... good for us lovers of this history!
In honor of their 75th anniversay the Rockettes were all sent a small red square to customize (and I helped with hers). Then it was all sewn together and put on display. Unfortunately we never got to see it when it was on display but we have a photo of it (gosh it looks huge)..and I'm told it is now stored in the closet. BRING it out again please RCMH

One of my early childhood memories is waiting at more or less the front of the line to get into Radio City Music Hall on a very cold day in the mid-1950s. Since it was near the front of the line we, obviously, just missed getting into the show and had a l-o-n-g time to wait out in the cold. At one point, the people behind us graciously saved our spot while my father took me across the street to Whelan's(?) drug store to warm up. (Maybe a hot chocolate?)

Of course I remember being very impressed with the theater (and have visited it a number of times since over the years), but here's one negative note -- I have to say that even from the very beginning as a child I felt that the tall lobby felt much too narrow for its vast height.

On a more positive note, I also couldn't believe my eyes when the orchestra rose from the basement, rolled back on the stage and disappeared.

Also loved the way the performers climbed up those stepped side stages and disappeared, and the way the bands of light illuminating the auditorium would magically shift colors.

I also remember thinking at one point that the pile in the carpeting was so deep that my feet felt as though they were shifting a millemeter or two whenever I took a step!

Sometime in the 1960s, I believe, when the Music Hall was still in its heyday, there was a wonderful article about it in Reader's Digest that went into all the superlatives about the the theater and the way it was run. Looking back, this article in Reader's Digest really goes to show what a place this theater has in American culture.

To briefly answer a question asked by someone above about what the Music Hall was saved from. Sometime in the late 1970s(?), Rockefeller Center (which was still owned in part by members of the Rockefeller family) planned to replace the theater with office space -- the way the Center Theater had been replaced with office space in the early 1950s. There was such an uproar that they decided to explore other ideas -- including the idea of using it the way it is used today.

Although I can't say I am as throughly familiar with the theater as some of the previous posters (with their really fascinating time capsule posts!), I can say that I had a really wonderful unusual Radio City Music Hall experience in the Spring of 2000(?) when I worked as an office temporary / word processor for an event that ABC held at the theater for its affiliates(?) and/or advertisers.

The original plan was for people like myself to type in stuff for the teleprompters, I believe. But they over-ordered the office temporaries and only four or five people (who had done this work before) were actually asked to do this work. The rest of us, maybe fifteen or twenty people?! -- this aspect of the event was, happily for us, very poorly organized! -- just lounged around with full run of the auditorium AND THE BACKSTAGE FACILITIES. It was an amazing experience.

Although the theater had supposed had a top to bottom refurbishment, much of the backstage area was apparently untouched. For instance, we were based in a dressing room that had obviously been carved out of a hallway leading from the wings. There were wires etc. still on the walls for things from the 1930s, 1940s that were no longer functional.

We also had access to the cafeteria, which had apparently only been superficially remodeled. (There were free meals and a free buffet between the meals!)

Sadly, there were some parts of the theater that were very much in need of repair that had obviously been untouched by the renovation. For instance, the locker room and showers that I suppose were for the ushers were a "slum" with missing tiles etc.

But what I really loved about this experience -- and feel privlidged to have experienced -- was the time capsul aspect of it. Not only did I feel like I was backstage at the Music Hall in the 1930s or 1940s, but I felt I was transported back to any big city movie palace of the 1930s or 1940s -- that I could be backstage in Cleveland, Philly, Chicago, etc. (In my mind I could see the old-fashioned luggage of the traveling performers, and imagine the old railroad stations. Here the talk about upcoming engagements on the radio and in hotel ballrooms, etc.)

It was really unbelievable that they just let us wander about like that (obviously this was pre 9/11!). And it was funny too, because after a certain hour, say 6:00 p.m., they did indeed become very strict and wouldn't even let us a few feet out of our assigned space without a special pass. But before 6:00 p.m. you could wander on the stage (and watch them rehearse from the wings) or below the stage (and watch the elevators go up or down), etc.

Almost all the stars of the upcoming ABC season were there rehearsing their lines, and as they left the stage they all would file past our dressing room "office." (You'd see them leaving the stage on the monitor and then five seconds, or so later, you would see them filing past you.

(One enterprising office temp [a young college student] decided to become an impromptu guide/usher for all the stars who were getting lost backstage trying to go under the stage to get back to stage right[?] from their exit at stage left. So he got to personally meet and guide almost all the stars at the event [Heather Locklear, Regis Philbin, Barbara Walters, etc.].)

Two other random notes:

The grand lounge / waiting area and men's room in "the basement" is really just a shadow of what it once was. This has been true for quite a while, however -- before the most recent renovation, but I don't remember exactly when they began carving it up. So anyone visiting the Music Hall today should be aware that these areas were VERY different in the Music Hall's heyday.

If I recall correctly, the lighting system under the marquee has also been changed and "cheapened." Orginally they had naked light bulbs with half the bulb "painted" to provide a built in light shade. These lights fitted nicely within the honeycomb underside of the marquee to provide a simple but striking lighting effect. I'm don't recall exactly what they've done with it, but I vaguely remember being disappointed when I saw it. (I believe the Whitney Museum has places where they still use this lighting effect.)

Benjamin
Thanks for all this great information. The only time I was ever backstage was during one of those tours. You really got an insiders look. One thing about those light bulbs, I remember they used to be sold with the bottom painted so the light shined upward. I dont know if they still make them but I have seen them up close years ago.

The light bulbs you are referring to are called "SILVER BOWL LAMPS" and as late as 1986 the Westinghouse brand was listed as selling seven versions of them in both medium and mogul bases. They ranged from 60 to 1000 watts. The 'silver' was sprayed into the inside of the glass of the bowl. I am not sure if these are still made, but various dealers around the country still have stocks according to today's search for them on google. They were once common in 'moderne' ceilings and displays where they were often centered in grids of reflector tiles in ceilings, but like all incandescents, they have short life spans and are expensive to operate at today's rates since only 5% of the energy they consume comes out as light.

Regarding the grand lounge in the lower level of RCMH, when I went there for the Christmas show this year, I thought it was MUCH smaller than I remember it. Now you'd think this was because the last time I saw it was as a kid but it wasn't. I was there in 1986 for an REM concert and I remember the downstairs area being HUGE. And what's more, the men's bathroom used to have more, well, facilities....I remember going there at the concert and thinking "Geez...I never saw so many urinals in my life!". Excuse the bad taste but that's what I remember. What the HELL did they do to the lounge? Where did the rest of it go?

Finally found the Westinghouse lamps catalog on-line and they still make at least four versions of what they now call "1/2 chrome" lamps up to 100 watts. These are sometimes also called "half silvered" and maybe the Music Hall doesn't want to invest in this short lived lamp any longer. It is a pity, for the effect described must have been classy.

The lamps you're referring to have /SSB in the stock number, the SSB indicating 'silvered bowl'. They came in several versions, with the /SSB type having a mirror-like bowl that concentrated the reflected beam, while other styles had a dull silver finish that diffused the beam slightly. I used to have track lighting with reflectors that used this type of bulb. Likely you won't find them at your local Home Depot or hardware store these days. About the only place that would stock them now would be lighting supply houses. In addition to Westinghouse, GE, Sylvania and Osram made them too. Still, if they're available, you'd think the management would make the effort and relamp with the proper type.

CConnelly: The Men's Lounge on the lower level was restored back to its 1930's look. The mural on the wall, "Men without Women" by Stuart Davis was brought back from Museum of Modern Art, where its was sent to in the early 1970's.

The Grand Lounge was always that size, although for a number of years, previous management used the space near the elevators to display artifacts from the Music Hall's past.

Perhaps someone who is familiar with Rockefeller Center can answer a question for me. Many years ago I saw in a book, the name of which I can't remember, a photograph of a theatre in, or very near, Radio City- a third theatre, besides the Music Hall and the small news theatre which I believe was later called the Guild. This third theatre was a good sized place- 1500 seats, if I recall. It was closed long ago, and the space it had occupied was filled in with floors of offices.

I've looked through the New York City theatre listings on this site and can't find it among them. I don't remember the name, but I think it must have been operated by RKO. Does anyone know anything about this vanished theatre? I think that its men's lounge was decorated with aviation-themed photographs by a famous photographer of the 1930s, but that's about all I can remember of it. Did I just imagine the whole thing?

Oh, OK. I only read Benjamin's recent comment after I posted this question. D'OH! There is my answer. The Center. I'll be sure to read the latest comments in a thread before posting questions in the future.

Answer to Joe Vogel: The RKO Roxy opened on Dec 29. It was soon renamed the Center Theater following a law suit between the orginal Roxy Theater at 7th Ave and 50th Street and the new management at RKO Center (what we now know as Rockefeller Center). The Center theater had 3,700 seats and was operated as a presentation house i.e. film and stage show. The opening attraction was "The Animal Kingdom" starring Leslie Howard and Ann Harding and was a great success grossing $71,000, $60,000 and $40,000 during its three week run. (Most films that opened at the RCMH during the first couple of years rarely went past one week. However all subsequent films died at the Center Theater when the RCMH switched to films and stage shows beginning January 11, 1933. (It was also the Depression).It's interesting to note that the Center Theater with almost half the seating capacity of the RCMH drew bigger crowds during its opening weeks than did the RCMH. For whatever it's worth, here are the admission prices for the Center Theater. Prices changed at noon and 6Pm. Mon-Fri $35; $.55; $.72 Saturday $.83 $.94 $.1.10 and $1.65 for mezzanine reserved seats for evening shows.

For all you trivia buffs: "King Kong" played day and date at the Center Theater and the Radio City Music Hall for it first week only. It grossed $88,000 at the RCMH and then played exclusively for the next two weeks at the Center Theater. The grosses there were $35,000; $35,000 and $33,800.

Did you know that "Flying Down to Rio" with Fred and Ginger was the film that accompanied the first Christmas stage show in 1933. It opened on Dec 21 and played two weeks through January 3. It grossed $98,000 and $100,000. Very fine, but it didn't break the previous house record of $118,000 set during November by "Little Women." Ittle eber the previous Easter week by "Cavalcade." Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all of you.

It's amazing that Little Women would beat out Rio by almost 20k. I would have thought that Rio would have played to capacity for both holiday weeks. And considering how cheap seats were that's a lot of admissions.There must be some reason for this. Extra perfs perhaps?

Don't forget that that in 1933 this was the very first Christmas show and was not yet a traditon, nor was the holiday time off as extended for school children and workers as it soon became. Also Fred and Ginger didn't even get top billing in "Flying Down to Rio." The stars were Raul Julian (?) and Dolores Del Rio. They didn't sell tickets on their own until "The Gay Divorcee" opened in 1934 and grossed "$96,800 and $80,000 in its two week run Nov 15 - 28. "Roberta" was their next hit there..also two weeks $99,000 and $90,000 (March 7 - 20, 1935). "Top Hat" went through the roof in 1935 with $134,000, $115,000, $98,900 from Aug 29 - Sept 18. Nothing came close in attendance or gross for many years. "Follow the Fleet" and "Swing Time" were also mammoth 3-week hits in 1936. Getting back to "Little Women," it got raves and was a classic with a waiting public. There were no extra performances, however mornings and afternoon shows were always sold out due to large family attendance. Sorry about the last line in my note above. "Cavalcade" also was a huge hit during Easter week of 1933 grossing $100,00.

I think I read in Variety on microfilm years ago the the crowds for Top Hat were so enormous that extra morning perfs were added accounting for 134k. The excitement at the Hall in those days must have been incredible. It's hard to imagine today the Music Hall being full and having lines around the block all day long during the week.

My RCMH interest and subsequent questions have certainly stirred up alot of commentary which is great so I thank all who have contributed to this theatre page as there is only ONE Radio City Music Hall! And if anyone is with 100 miles of the Fox Theatre in Atlanta the place to be on December 26th is THAT theatre for the special open house to commemorate the Fabulous Fox's 75th anniversary! If anyone does go, please post your thoughts on the Fox page as we'd all love to read them! Thanks.

Thanks to Ron for bringing back memories by putting a list a films shown at Radio City. I often visited as a boy and fondly remember many of those films with my family. Somebody posted that Greer Garson had more films than any actress at the Music Hall, but it would seem that either Doris Day or Audrey Hepburn had the most films. Also, I remember seeing "The Bridges at Toko-Ri", "The Teahouse of the August Moon", "Friendly Persuasion", and "Sayonnara" there. The films shown as revivals I don't count as we are interested in films that premiered at the RCMH. I haven't visited RCMH for 20 years now that movies are not shown anymore and the prices are outlandish. Also, I dislike reserved seats because if you get noisy families next to you, you cannot change seats and I don't have a good time. In the 50's and 60's, you could change seats at will. Also, there were once lights at every seat so you could read the program.

"There were once lights at every seat so you could read the program." A very interesting bit of RCMH trivia! Thanks Myron and to all who have contributed their RCMH memories!

My last trip to Radio City was to see Ringo Starr and the All Stars perform! Stood outside the side stage door to meet the artists. Took awhile but they came out eventually. Ringo & wife Barbara Bach (a Bond girl) had already dashed out super quickly at the end of the last song. Guess he didn't have to wait for me or an elevator.
(giggle)

Thanks Dorothy from Oz for your interesing RCMH Ringo story! The Wizard of Oz was recently on TV and I just happened to catch the part where Judy G. sings Over the Rainbow...a very special moment in a very special movie!

A little OT- a friend sent me an oz pic not too long ago of Dorothy and the 3 lollipop kids.. well the one lollipop kid, Jerry Maren, who handed Dorothy the lollipop was 17 when he did the movie and it is autographed ;) as my friend wrote to him to get it
Jerry went on to became littlest chef with the oscar meyer wienermobile and was Buster Brown of Buster Brown shoes...

p.s Ringo is expected to tour again next year so a visit to RCMH may again be in order. Obviously I am a fan!

Thought I would share this letter with you that was sent to my father in law who was one of the very early violinists in the pit of the RCMH and was with them for many years to follow:

Rockefeller Center Inc
50 Rockefeller Plaza
New York

May 28, 1940

Dear...

When the final rivet in Rockefeller Center was driven last November, signalling the completion of steel construction, Father and I were disappointed that lack of space made it impossible for us to ask all our employees in the Center to be present at the ceremony. Because of this we want you to have as a souvenir of the occasion a book just published by the Columbia University Press.

We trust that the reading of this book will give you the same pride and inspiration that those of us who attended the ceremony received on that occasion.

Sincerely yours,
Nelson A Rockefeller

Mr...
Radio City Music Hall
1260 Sixth Ave
New York, N.Y.

The book is entitled "The Last Rivet"
The story of ROckefeller Center, a city within a city, as told at the ceremony in which John D. Rockefeller, Jr. drove the last rivet of the last building, November 1, 1939.

Really enjoyed the Rockefeller letter! Thanks!

Also enjoyed the photo story as I didn't know that Jerry Maren went on to become Buster Brown! More neat trivia!

This one might last forever!

Radio City Music Hall Bulletin
Published Fortnightly By and For the Employees
Vol. III Wednesday, Nov. 1, 1939 No. 30

SURPRISE PARTY

One day recently - and it was not a Friday, when the usual Music Hall executive luncheon is held up on the Studio Floor - one Music Hall-ite had a real surprise. Informed that he had an engagement with a certain film company executive, this ranking member of the theater's legion was ushered into our domed dining room to the chorus of a "Happy BIrthday to You" by more than a dozen Music Hall departmental heads.
The recipient of this impromptu party was, in case you haven't already guessed, our own Mr. Van. And the only person not present-that certain film executive with whom he had been told he was to lunch.
Needless to say, all of us at the theater join with the round table group in wishing our Managing Director many, many happy Music Hall years.

Other headings (followed by text) in this bulletin include:
Spotlight and Sidelights by S. J. Brody
News Notes and Comment
Max!
Service Staff Stuff by the Chief Usher
From the library
THe Glee Clubroom
Projection Room Murmurs

want to read more?
Don't know the interest of the readers here but we do have a few of these old employee Bulletins.

When the marquee of the Radio City Music Hall was renovated several years ago, the letters, which originally were lit in bright red, were changed to hot pink. To this day, it bothers me to see the sign in pink letters ,when the original letters were red. Was this an oversight when they restored the theater?

I wouldn't know this bit of trivia, but think I would prefer red letters over pink letters.

I hope someone knowing the details of the neon change of color comes forward, but it may simply be that the exact shade of red that preceeded it has fallen out of production. A number of colors that originated with neon in the 1920s, are not now made, since it has been found cheaper to make subsitute colors. For example, there was a "Uranium green" but it was never made after a new use was found for uranium and the price of the ore thus shot out of reach. Maybe someone at the sign company making it will know the details and tell the truth of the matter, assuming the exact choice of color was theirs.

I have now decided to attend the Fox Theatre/Atlanta open house from 1-7 tomorrow December 26th and can't wait! I plan to wear a nametag that says CINEMA THEATRES. ORG with my name underneath PATSY! Should be fun! I will post my day at the Fox on the Fox Theatre page on Monday or Tuesday!

Regarding the previous posts about "Airport" at RCMH, does anyone know what other theaters in the U.S. showed 70mm prints of this film. I've always heard there were very few. If you answer, please give your source.

On my first trip to New York in May, 1977, "Smokey and the Bandit" was playing it's first run. However, I was so excited to see the big apple on my first of only 3 days, we went ONLY to see the Rockettes perform. I ordered a box of popcorn in the lobby and recall that the poor salesgirl had to repeat herself several times since I had never heard a thick Bronx accent before and could not understand what she was saying to me. I felt so bad for her, but she was very kind and finally spoke very slowly so I could get her message. The stage show was about 20 minutes, then there was a short subject and some trailers. When the film started, we left to continue exploration of Times Square. I still have not seen the film!

I remember how incredibly massive everything was around me, and though worn and old, it was still very beautiful. Thank God the owners have lavished some money and time on one of the greatest of all Art Deco structures.... and it's worth a visit to New York JUST TO SEE THIS THEATER!

Regarding the changed neon colors on the marquee.The first week when it reopened after the recent restoration I took the tour. Speaking to the very knowledgeable guide, he informed me that over the years the colors had changed due to manufacturing techniques. Just like Jim Rankin suggests.

Over time the blue had become a more royal blue and was returned to at the original turquoise blue that was more eyecatching. The red had become a screamingly bright orange-red and was returned to a rich true red.

I also took the oportunity to puchase the brochure for the grand reopening gala which they were selling in the shop. It has a 3" x 5" swatch of the original gold stage curtain fabric attached to a spectacular photo of the curatin in action. Shame they can't seem to operate the curtain's 13 motors they way they used to anymore.......

It is good that Porter Faulkner chose to mention that brochure for the grand reopening with its swatch of the contour front curtain preceding the restoration, since it is a good visual record of the fabulous place today. I too bought a copy, though on-line from their 'Gift Shop' at their site: www.RadioCity.com where they sell it via credit card payment only, and via UPS shipment only. For those outside of New York area not able to meet those terms, one could write to its publisher: Radio City Entertainment, Two Pennsylvania Plaza, New York, NY 10121-0091 USA. The 48-page glossy softbound is titled: "RADIO CITY MUSIC HALL: A Legend Is Reborn" and while having a poor glue binding, and being focused more on what occurred there over the years than on the building, there is that invaluable swatch as well as a spectacular vintage painting/drawing of the understage area via a cutaway view that shows just how those three giant stage elevators work. As a side note, the woman who wrote the brochure should have done better research, since right in the photo of the famous contour curtain can be seen to those knowing how such things work, that it was a 15-point suspension, not 13 as she claims in her caption on page 20. She forgot that there are also lines on each end of the curtain off stage that help pull the entire mass up out of sight and into storage in the apparent 'ceiling.'

It is a shame that they are evidently not using the curtain at every performance, since I know from seeing it move in filmstrips, that were I a tourist there visiting the place, I would definitely want to see that lustrous 'waterfall' of drapery rising and descending as no other curtain of such size any longer does on these shores. If Porter did not see it move when he paid to go in there, then he was cheated, as will be anyone else denied this spectacle!

Jim, yes they do raise and lower the curtain as part of the tour regularly. What I was referring to with the curtain motors is that when the curtain was replaced they were not able to re-instate the way it had operated in the past. It still rises and falls in the most majestic way but it is uniform. It used to be possible to operate each of the 13 motors randomly to form patterns as the drape rose and fell or to suit a particular stage act. Originally there was an entire part of the stage programme called "Symphony of the Curtains" where the curtain changed shapes whilst the twin organs and orchestra accompanied it. What a thrill is must have been and thats before the show had even started!

Does anyone remember the stunning tapestry-like "Cherry Blossom" curtain - a gift from Japan - that was also featured in many shows during the 1950s?

Yes, representing cherry blossoms against a golden backdrop, with abstract tree branches and blue birds in flight, it provided a setting for the Rockettes in the show accompanying "The Chalk Garden" in Spring '64, no? I forget the music accompanying the dance routine, but I believe the orchestral overture offered a suite from "Madame Butterfly." The occasion marked international cooperation upon the opening of the '64 World's Fair. If Japan presented the gift in the '50s, I'm straining to recall when I might have seen it then. It must have been for a springtime show, huh?

BoxofficeBill is right. I remembered it (incorrectly)as part of the stage show (the film was Executive Suite)whose theme was Cherry Blossom time in D.C. and featured the corps de ballet.

Yes, "Executive Suite" played in May '54, but I didn't see that film there then, so I can't comment. A '50s Pictorial Program that my parents purchased when we saw "The Greatest Show on Earth" in Jan '52 displays a b&w photo of the Ballet performing "an enchanting divertissement in a scene inspired by cherry blossom time in Eashington D.C." The more-or-less realistic set shows trees in blossom, with the capitol dome in a dusky background. The dancers wear Martha-Graham-inspired flowing shifts and are joined with hands raised in the air bearing blossom branches. No doubt a revival of this ballet accompanied the show in May '54. I don't remember ever having seen it.

SimonL--You once asked about RCMH shows without the Rockettes. In addition to their absence during "Madama Butterfly" in '34, they left town for a couple of weeks in Summer '37 to perform in Paris in the Exposition Internationale des Arts et Techniques dans la Vie Moderne. The week of 27 June was designated for Exposition des Dances, so perhaps that was the interval? Films at that time were "Ever Since Eve" (with Marion Davies, opening 24 June) and "New Faces of 1937" (with Milton Berle, opening 1 July). Can you picture those seventy-two legs kicking down the steps of the Palais de Trocadero/Chaillot? I believe I've seen a photo of it. The best way to check on this would be to consult NYTimes microfilms for those dates, but it's late and my library is closed.

The cherry blossom curtain was used again for the revival of The Sting in the mid 70's(too bad it didn't open there. It looked and sounded,without visible speakers, terrific at the Music Hall.)I can't believe they didn't restore the motors for the curtain. What a bad joke! So it doesn't cascade up and down?

From Porter's comment it appears that it no longer drapes in changeable patterns, merely goes down with a horizontal line along the bottom swags. There is a photo in MARQUEE magazine of the Theatre Historical Soc. of Third Qtr. 1999, page 23 showing the original crossbar-and-peg pattern selection switch matrix, and if such could be done in an electromechanical method, it could certainly be done today with electronic stepping motors via computer or push button. They were just too cheap to do it, apparently.

The curtain can raise in two styles only now; in an arc, echoing the arch of the proscenium and, alternately, horizontal across the bottom edge. Both styles still allow it to festoon/cascade as it rises and falls.I have seen them use both to great effect at the Christmas shows and also for concerts. What seems unable to happen is the use of any of the 13 motors to operate individually to allow for anything more irregular.

BoxOfficeBill - we have some pix of that along with an autographed Paris Expo Certificate as they won! wish I could upload them here

At the beginning of The Glory of Easter pageant, the curtain used to rise minimally at two spots equidistant from the arches to enable a procession of altar attendants to emerge bearing lit candles. As the attendants proceeded to climb the choral staircases, some member of the audience would inevitably express a fretful prayer that the curtain might not catch fire (each attendant was careful to cup a hand around the battery-powered wick). The two openings would close momentarily and then, after some verses of "Kamenoi Ostrow," the entire contour would rise on the flower-bedecked altar and radiant stained-glass windows. At length, the in-house nuns would appear and form their blossoming cross, but you could get the full effect only if you sat in the exact center of the auditorium or in the mezzanines; otherwise, your perspective would distort the transversal.

Nothing could distort those magnificent Rockettes on the steps of the Trocadero/Chaillot. I wish we could see those pix too, Dorothy.

On the choral staicases were lit religious statues which the attendants would flank giving the entire auditorium the atmosphere of a church. It was quite beautiful. The last year these were used was in '76(though they were fewer than in the past.) I guess they were tossed along with the original Nativity sets and the Glory of Easter altar and windows.
Both of these pageants though religious in tone were never offensive but highly theatrical. Much like walking into a beautiful European church that can be appreciated on its own terms as an expression of human art and hope.

Does anyone remember the "Ave Maria" prologue that the Roxy Theater presented each Christmas season? Of course, it could not compete with the Music Hall's more spectacular "Nativity," but it was (almost) a tradition there.

I have just found the programme that was handed out on my first ever visit to the RCMH.

Here are the details:

Week beginning Thursday November 11, 1976

1. Music Hall Grand Organ - Raymond Bohr, John Destroy

2. "The Slipper and the Rose: The Story of Cinderella" Richard Chamberlain, Gemma Craven.

3. "The Nativity" Rebecca Alford, Soloist. Entire Music Hall Ensemble

4. "Snowflakes" Produced and Directed by Peter Gennaro

A. "Build a Snowman"
B. "All Skating, All Singing" Barry Busse, The Caroleers & The Skaters
C. "The Penguin Ho-Down"
D. "March of the Wooden Soldiers" The Radio City Music Hall Rockettes
(Choreography by Russell Markett) (Directed by Violet Holmes)
E. "Santa" featuring Barry Busse
F. Finale: "The Christmas Tree" The Entire Company

As I stated in a previous posting on here, I stayed in to see the show twice, I was amazed and had never seen such a spectacle or use of stage facilities in my life! Two organ consoles playing together, an orchestra pit which rose up onto the stage and 'disappeared' into the flys, to be replaced by a real ice rink and skaters on stage. Those wonderful Rockettes and even real-live camels, sheep and donkeys too! Pity about the crap movie. I normally keep ticket stubs as a souvenir, but up to now I haven't located it, but I'm sure it was not more than $4 admission.

Also on offer was the Rockerfeller Center Guided Tour
Adults: $2.15 Children: $1.35

Daily tours from 9:30am - 5:30pm at frequent intervals

'This one hour guided tour of the 21-building business and entertainment complex, covers the Center's history, its principle skyscrapers, its open plazas and rooftop gardens, its maze of shops underground and on street level, its comprehensive artwork and a glimpse backstage of the famous RADIO CITY MUSIC HALL.

Among the sites are the props and sets, the giant motion-picture screen and the massive stage elevators, a marvel of theatrical engineering.

Every tour terminates on the OBSERVATION DECK atop the 70-storey RCA building and you are invited to remain there at your leisure after the tour'.

I decided not to take the tour on this occassion, after all, I had seen the film, the show and the theatre. It must have been in later years when the tour concentrated on the RCMH totally and I have done this one several times.

Yes, at the Roxy a choir in an enormous elevated pulpit, flanked by sparkling Christmas trees, intoned "Ave Maria." Programs on screen included such holiday fare as "The Prince of Foxes" (with Orson Welles as Valentine Borgia, '49), "For Heaven's Sake" (with Clifton Webb as an angel, '50), "Anastasia" (Bergman's comeback, '56), and "Peyton Place" (all about sex, '57).

Thanks BoxOffice Bill. However when "Anastasia" played there, the house had already converted to an "all ice" program sans Ave Maria. However the stage show at the time Anastasia played was quite lovely and featured a Christmas in Japan finale that featured a stunning backdrop of Matsumoto mountain.

Right, SimonL, as you well should know, since last 15 July, 1 September, and various times in-between you wrote vividly about your ushering at the Roxy in '56-'57. (Anyone skiming this post who hasn't read those contributions should scroll back to them immediately.) I'll meanwhile continue my current comments about the Roxy on that theater's site page.

Yes, I remember the "Ave Maria" at the beginning of the Easter pageant.It was amazing! Performers, each holding a lit candle would appear all around the audience with the organ music playing. It was awesome! We saw "The Singing Nun" with Debbie Reynolds. Anyone remember that each seat had an individual light, so the program could be read? The lights were later turned-off; I guess people complained it was annoying! On a different note, I think my deceased mother saw "Butterflies Are Free" with Goldie Hawn at the Music Hall, but I'm unsure.Is there a complete list anywhere of ALL films shown at the Music Hall?

Charles Francisco's book, "The Radio City Music Hall," has a claimed "complete" list of all movies from opening through July, 1978. However, I found at least one omission ("Mr. Lucky" in 1943), so I don't know how "complete" it really is. "Butterflies Are Free" was shown in 1972, preceded by "Between Men and Women" and followed by "Last of the Red Hot Lovers," according to the list...I wonder how the author and his editor decided on the title? I think that "Radio City Music Hall," or even "The Radio City Music Hall Book," would have been better than "The Radio City Music Hall."

That book for me was a great disappointment. The photos of the stage productions look like they were taken by a tourist with an instamatic(they probably were) and there are so many factual eras that it was truly a wasted opportunity. A coffee table book in conjunction with the Hall is needed.
I saw Butterflies at the Hall(on a weekday morning I couldn't get a seat in the orchestra!) One of the best programs of the '70s with the last appearance of the Undersea Ballet.
'72 was probably the last year the Music Hall showed films of any quality.

Warren--As a kid in the '50s, I heard people refer to this theater as "the RCMH," much as one would refer to its rival as "the Roxy." On his "Toast of the Town" TV review, for example, the stolid Ed Sullivan would introduce celebrity guests as "starrrs of a fffine fffilm nnnow playing at the RCMH." The particle nonetheless struck me as funny, since none of my family used it in that way--we always omitted it in deference, perhaps, to the theater's exceptionality: "We went to RCMH" (often just "Radio City," without "Music Hall," but sometimes "the Music Hall" [particled!] without "Radio City"--gotta assign a linguist to this case). I remember a neighborhood kid who wrought a splendid inversion: "Radio Music City Hall." (Fatefully, she is now married to a world-class musician and is herself a great political activist.)

Vincent--Through a quirk, I too had seen "Butterflies Are Free" at RCMH, and I vividly remember the Rockettes' routine: the thirty-six of them (still thirty-six in '72) opened their act on center-stage, then filed out onto the narrow (what-do-you-call-it?) runway that rimmed the orchestra pit to perform their high kicks. I was sitting in the third row, and could only hope that one of them might dropkick a shoe into my lap--just as in '40s Hollywood musicals would happen to a perplexed old geezer in the front stalls.

But BOB did they do that in this stage show? I seem to remember them doing an Hawaiian number in grass skirts. Maybe I'm just dreaming it.

Right--the setting was Hawaiian, and the routine concluded on the runway. I should've stayed through repeat performances 'till I caught a shoe.

By the way I remember that during this run of Butterflies in July there was what seemed like a 20 minute trailer for the Christmas attraction 1776.(Interesting because Blythe Danner created the Goldie Hawn role but was in 1776 instead.) And I remember seeing Cool Cool Considerate Men. But when I saw the film at Christmas the number didn't exist at all!

That's right too--Even though I was a thirty-year-old presumptive adult at the time, I marvelled that Hollywood could advertise a yet unfinished and certainly unedited movie six months in advance of its scheduled opening--a marketing marvel. That, by the way, was the first time I'd seen coming attractions at RCMH. In the '40s and '50s, as Simon L has so eloquently described, the announcement of the next attraction unreeled as a b&w film strip, home-movie-style, in minuscules running bottom to top against a cross-hatched mesh background, while the grand organ played a pertinent melody (minor key for drama, major for comedy), always at the end of the newsreel and before the orchestral overture. In '72, I was shocked that RCMH was showing coming attractions, just as the local dives did. Before "Butterflies," the previous picture I had seen there was "Up the Down Staircase" in '67, and even on that dark day there were no coming attractions. Sometime in-between, something had happened.

BOB Why do you say "on that dark day?" Is it a bad movie or was this during the strike?

bad movie, poor stage show, just days before strike.

Good movie with wonderful Sandy Dennis, but maybe wrong for the Music Hall.

I think by the 70's the Music hall had no choice but to run regular coming attractions. One of the main reasons was that some of the family films they booked were so obscure people would have no idea what they were.

I'd been under the impression that RCMH shuttered temporarily soon after the disastrous opening night, but that's not true. The original policy continued through January 10, with the switch-over to movies/stage the very next day. The operating policy with stage show only had been two performances daily, with doors opening at 1:30 PM and 7:30 PM for shows starting at 2:15 and 8:15. On New Year's Eve, there was a third show, starting at midnight. All seats were reserved. All evening performances, as well as matinees on Saturday, Sunday and holidays, had seats priced at 99 cents, $1.50, $2, and $2.50. Weekday matinees were priced at 75 cents, 99 cents, $1.50 and $2. Management blamed those high prices for part of the policy's failure. Many people, especially family groups, came to the theatre, but turned away when they realized how expensive it would be. The new film/stage policy of four continuous shows per day (five on Saturday, Sunday and holidays) had all seats priced at 35 cents from opening to 1PM, 55 cents to 6PM, 75 cents to 10:30 PM, and 55 cents to closing...In his review of the opening movie, "The Bitter Tea of General Yen," New York Times critic Mordaunt Hall noted that the projection booth had been part of the theatre's original construction, but that the screen was installed only after the decision to present movies. According to Hall, the screen was 70 feet wide by 40 feet high in its full, unmasked dimensions.

Speaking of coming attractions at RCMH, the 40th anniversary DVD of "Mary Poppins" includes a trailer announcing the film's return to RCMH to launch the film's reissue in the early 1970s.

The restored film should have been shown with an abreviated Christmas show in November to launch the DVD. That way people would have been able to see the film as it was mean't to be seen(they would have been stunned.) and there would have been enormous publicity for the Hall and the DVD.
Why are the powers that be so obtuse? Can somebody please tell me?

Vincent -

It's sad, but Disney does not currently offer Mary Poppins for regular theatrical bookings. I tried to get it last November for my Big Screen Classics series and it's out of circulation. Disney *should* have had an East Coast re-premiere of the film (they did so at, I think, the El Capitan in LA), but it's not the RCMH's fault if they didn't show it.

Vincent wrote:
"The restored [Mary Poppings] film should have been shown with an abreviated Christmas show in November to launch the DVD. That way people would have been able to see the film as it was mean't to be seen(they would have been stunned.) and there would have been enormous publicity for the Hall and the DVD."

THAT is a great, grand idea. But the folks who run Disney and the Music Hall aren't creative types interested in booking unique things. They want their $$$ and run with it.

We bought the Mary Poppins DVD for our children and they could not sit through the entire thing at home. I anticipated this because people don't remember that the movie is a surprising two-hours and fifteen minutes long. When I saw this in the theaters (at Green Acres in Valley Stream) at the age of 8, I was in a captive audience meaning that I couldn't just get up and walk out. So you're kind of forced to sit through it and either get into it or not. And yep, I got into it BIG TIME. That's the problem with DVD viewing at home, especially with young children. If and when they bored, they can simply get up and walk out and move onto something else.

Having seen this years Christmas show (read my comments above concerning this dismal thing..) it would've been truly awesome for my daughter to have seen "Mary Poppins" there. She, like I, would've been captive and would've LOVED it.

And if they had re-issued it at RCMH, I would've made it a point to take her to see it there. It's one of the best musical films ever made.

I'm sure that even if it had occured to anybody at Cablevision or Disney(not that it would) the powers that be would not have seen any point to it. When I worked at SONY years ago they didn't see any reason to release the soundtrack to My Fair Lady because they already had the Broadway cast album out. It took them years to put it on CD(of course all that time it was available in Europe.)
Ah, to make a lot of money sucking up to the right people and making bad decisions.

Just came across some old wooden hangers with names:

Radio City Music Hall Taylor Shop
Roxy Clothes Stores in Principal Clothes

can anyone shed some light on these?

(father-in-law was violinist in orchestra pit during opening followed by many years at RCMH)

I went by the Music Hall a few weeks ago to take a closer look at the underside of the marquee to figure out what it was that bothered me about the changes made to it during the most recent renvation.

Now that I've looked at it more closely, I'm wondering if I remembered correctly when I thought it originally had those "silver bowl" lightbulbs that Jim Rankin so kindly looked into in his December 17 posts. There seems to be mixed evidence about what the underside of the marquee was like:

On the one hand almost all of the recesses (coffers?) in the grid currently have plain reflector tiles (which appear to be metal pans coated with enamel) which give no indication that original light sockets had been filled in. Did the renovators actually reproduce all those pans, but this time without light sockets, for the renovation?

On the other hand, there seem to be about three or four very rusty light bulbs sockets scattered amongst the hundreds of plain coffers in the grid, which would seem to indicate that "silver bowl" lamps were indeed part of the original lighting scheme and that the renovators did indeed replace the old reflector pans.

But then again, at least one of these light sockets was plainly off-center -- so maybe these three or four light sockets were just ad hoc additions to the original reflector pans?

The interior ticket lobby has a ceiling scheme that is similiar to -- but actually different than -- that of the "silver bowl" scheme I thought the marquee had. Maybe I confused the ticket lobby's scheme with that found at the Whitney Museum?

I think either the "Godfather I" or "Godfather II" has a scene with Al Pacino and Diane Keaton that was done on location beneath the unrenovated marquee of the Music Hall. I wondered if one can tell from this scene what the underside of the marquee was like?

- - - - - - -

Whatever the case, one of the strong negatives about the renovation is that the reflector pans now reflect ugly, cold bluish florescent light -- instead of the warm, fire-like incandescent light which I'm pretty sure was there pre-renovation.

Two other changes that lessen the original effect:

1) There are now obtrusive (but, sadly, necessary) security cameras hung from the underside of the marquee.

2) There are also lots of electric heaters hung from the grid. While these are certainly welcome, perhaps they could have been hung slightly differently to work better with the aesthetics of the grid, rather than to damage its original handsome effect.

While I realize all of this is not major, I think the cumulative effect of all these kinds of little changes (like the addition of those ugly pedestrian barriers on Sixth Ave. and the addition of blaring outdoor speakers) really distorts the original beauty and dignity of the theater.

It is sad if today's remodeling of the soffit of the marquee is not being done to the standards with which it was built, but one can understand the replacement of the incandescents with fluorescent lamps, even though they are 'colder' in appearance than the "fire-like' bulbs. Fluorescents are much cheaper in the long run, and that is how the accountants of the management are responsible to look at it. The Hall is not owned by a charity, but by businessmen who intend to make a profit, else they will abandon the whole thing, and then once again, the Hall will be in danger of demolition! The odd light bulb sockets Benjamin does see now, may well be the remains of the 1950s trend of adding Goose Neck lamp holders to project on occasional banners under the marquee or even one sheets or standees. These did the spotlight job cheaply, but they also rusted out over the years and now many a marquee bears scars of where they once were, often with eye screws poking out of the metal with remnants of the hanging wire that once went down to the PAR-type bulb that was in the gooseneck lamp holder to keep it in the curved position. Just a little speculation on my part, but I have a hunch that it is true.

In 1970 Look magazine had a one page article where one of its writers talked about his experiences of going to the Music Hall starting with Swing Time. He recalls that one of the biggest audience responses to a film were the cheers that followed when in Blossoms in the Dust Greer Garson says "Bad girls don't have babies."
I had no idea what that meant and why people would cheer. I still haven't seen the film but of course now understand the line. I wonder though today how people would respond to such a declaration.

Is that an accurate quote from "Blossoms in the Dust?" It seems to me that it would have been "Good girls don't have babies." Greer Garson portrayed the owner of a home for orphans and foundlings.

I think "bad" is correct(not sure because I read the article 35 years ago and as I've said I've never seen the film.)Think about it in the context of a woman trying to eliminate the stigma of illegitimate children and unwed mothers. Then it makes perfect sense and would cause a strong reaction from people. It would today as well, though not all of it positive unlike those 6000 people(well the adults anyway) sitting in the Hall in '41.

This reminds me of the classic Summer Place when Sandra Dee asks Troy Donahue if he's ever been "bad" with girls. Kinder, simpler times.

"Bad girls don't have babies" doesn't make sense to me unless it possibly means because they practice birth control. In the "old days," it was the bad girls who usually had babies, not the good ones. The next time that "Blossoms in the Dust" turns up on Turner Classic Movies, I will try to watch it for this dialogue. I did see it about four years ago, but don't recall anything but how radiant Greer Garson looked in Technicolor.

But if you think about it it does. A woman working to give dignity to young mothers without husbands would never say "Good girls don't have babies."
Speaking about Garson(who was also radiant in black and white-Random Harvest, Pride and Prejudice you name it) I obtained a Music Hall program for Blossoms and there is an article included which discusses her Titian Hair in technicolor.
She was actually crowned at the Music Hall in a ceremony celebrating the success of her films there. I suppose the tiara is gathering dust in Texas somewhere.

Warren, maybe this will help. Back then the woman in Blossoms was a heroine. Today in the movies it is Vera Drake(yeah right she was performing abortions because she was a deeply sympathetic and concerned woman and it didn't have anything to do with money. Is this a true story or was it made up by one of today's idiot screenwriters?)
This was a way the screenwriter in '41 could broach such a sensitive subject and make his heroine a staunch foe of it. Today the movie would be picketed by the women's movement.(I'm pro choice by the way but I do think it's a great line.)

Re: the underside of the marquee

The main point of posting about the change from incandescent to florescent was really to alert first-time, post-renovation visitors that, despite the vaunted "restoration" of the Music Hall, there are actually a few changes from the original that have diminished the original effect of the theater's wonderful architecture.

And while none of these may be big things, a lot of little things (e.g., the heaters, the loudspeakers, the pedestrian fences) do add up to give the visitor a different (and, unfortunately, less impressive, in my opinion) experience when waiting outside, or entering into, the Music Hall.

This was also the reason for pointing out in an earlier post that the grand lounge had been radically re-designed. (I must admit that I'm skeptical that the lounge has been restored to its original grandeur, as one poster seems to feel. I'm not sure, but I think I did visit the grand lounge on my last visit in 2001, and I believe the alterations to the grand lounge had been "prettied up" a bit, but not undone.)

While one certainly doesn't expect the owners of the Music Hall to jeopardize its financial viability by refusing to cut corners here and there, it's also kind of interesting to look at, and to note, what corners the owners of a building choose to cut and what corners they choose not to cut -- as it ultimately shows the values that are placed on various things.

For instance, I doubt the owners of the Music Hall would replace interior incandescents with florescent. So apparently the marquee incandescents were seen as an expendable part of the Radio City Music Hall "experience."

Chapter XIII of Carol Krinsky's book, "Rockefeller Center" has very detailed info and lots of great pictures about the history and development of both Radio City Music Hall and the Center Theater.

The portion of the chapter dealing with the Radio City Music Hall, pgs. 164 to 187, has two photos of the early clay models that were used to judge various proposed designs for the interior of the auditorium. It also has a photos of some early theaters, and drawings of proposed theaters, that may have influenced the ultimate design of the theater (five photos). There are (very small) reproductions of a cross section of the theater and the floor plans for the ground floor and first balcony levels. Plus there are photos of Roxy's studio/reception room, the grand lobby (one photo looking north; one photo looking south), the basement lounge, the side/back of the auditorium, the men's smoking room, the women's powder room that has painted murals, and the women's powder room that is encircled by mirrors.

Some interesting tidbits from the chapter:

Edward Durell Stone (an architect who later became famous and controversial) was in charge of the designs for both Radio City Music Hall and the Center Theater (pg. 180).

Donald Desky won a limited competition to decorate the interiors of both theaters (pg. 183). (If I understand her correctly, because he could not do all the work for both theaters, he apparently subcontracted out the work of the Center Theater to Eugene Schoen who shared a similar interest in contemporary design.)

Krinsky challenges the Roxy story that he conceived of the idea of a radiating sunburst design for the auditorium after seeing a glorious sunrise or sunset while at sea. She says that he did not even embark on the trip in question until six days after the model for such a design had been photographed (pg. 180).

Krinsky says (pg. 180) that shortly before the theater opened, Roxy "entered the auditorium to demonstrate its acoustic properties" and discovered that the sound was unsatisfactory. So, according to Krinsky, "several stretches of auditorium wall had to be moved, and their fabric coverings rewoven in time for the opening night."

Krinksy claims (pg. 180) that certain publicity photos (like the one shown on page 175) that show the auditorium with a stage show in progress are, in reality, composite photos that show the Rockettes and the performers behind them to be bigger on the stage than they really are (so as to make the stage not seem so far away). (I think as a kid I suspected this.)

The David Loth book, "The City Within a City," also has lots of interesting info about the Music Hall.

One of Loth's most informative interviewees when he did the research for the book seems to be G.S. Eyssell who ultimately became president of Rockefeller Center, but started out with Rockefeller Center in the Radio City Music Hall organization. So there is lots of info in the book about the business of running the Music Hall (the problem of finding movies for it, etc.), especially during its tumultuous early days.

For example on pg. 85 he says that "The president of RKO . . . had talked to Eyssell reservedly about the Music Hall's problems only a few days after the debut. A few days later, he invited Eyssel to work out of his office at RKO as a troubleshooter, and the first trouble to be shot was finding pictures for the Music Hall."

He also mentions (pg. 78) that after RKO went bankrupt (about a month after the Music Hall and the Center Theater opened), the leases on Radio City Music Hall and the Center Theater were "automatically terminated. Claims for damages as a result of this liquidation went in and out of court for the next seven years before a complicated settlement was finally reached in 1939."

Some interesting tidbits:

Loth claims (pg. 127) that about twenty pounds of chewing gum a day, on average, was removed by hand from underneath the Music Hall's seats!

The Music Hall was closed for five days early in 1965 for a thorough cleaning (pg. 158). (Maybe this is when that very laudatory article about the Music Hall, that I read in Reader's Digest, came out?)

Benjamin: Thanks for all the expert info you've contributed. About those publicity composite photos that show the Rockettes as bigger than members of the audience or orchestra: the contour curtain at RCMH drapes at fourteen folds when fully raised (as it was for film presentations). But most (all?) stage productions that I remember from the late '40s-'50s would raise the curtain only in its twelve center folds and not to full height. (Even as a kid, I figured this out as I tried to analyze the illusionistic transformations of space in those great spectacles.) For small-scale specialty acts, the curtain rose in even fewer folds. The expansive proscenium simply did not open to a performance area that filled its entire width. To compensate, many productions deployed some stationary scenery on the apron in front of the curtain at either or both sides of the arch: snowy pine trees at Christmas, statuary altar niches at Easter, a lighthouse and some fish nets for the often repeated Underwater Ballet, etc. As a result, for publicity photos that aimed to display the contour curtain in its complete fourteen-fold glory, the composite artist needed to blow up the shot of the Rockettes et al. taken in their twelve-fold setting. These pictures, even the best of them, look contrived and out of proportion.

BoxOfficeBill: Thanks for the fascinating info about how the RCMH contour curtain was used. I wish I had thought of observing and counting the folds like that!

I'm not sure, however, if that is what the touch-up artist did in the photo that Krinsky shows and comments upon in her book -- but, then again, maybe it is? Let me describe the photo.

First, a brief description to identify it: the photo in the book, and on the back cover, shows 36 (I counted!) towering Rockettes lined up before scenery that . . . well, is hard to describe. On stage right, there seem to be three enormous circles (hula-hoops?) covered in flowers. (The hoops are about twice the size of the people standing infront of them.) On stage left, there seems to be the top three quarters of a rising moon that is just a bit taller than the performers in front of it. And in the background there seems to be an elevated swan boat. Above the scene there appears to be two floral moons connected by a garland of flowers (or lights) hung from the sky, with more flowers (or lights) in some sort of pattern in the background.

In this photo the contour curtain has 10 "genuine" folds that are fitted within the portion of the arch that contains 9 of the radiating grilles (sunbursts). This is about three-quarters of the way up the arch -- which I suspect is much higher than the curtain would really go?

To the left and right of the 10 "genuine" folds, there are very elogated, droopy folds that appear to me to be painted in! Behind these painted in folds, there is a traveling curtain, that also looks to me to be painted in! (For one thing, they seem to be "lighted" differently.) Also the end Rockettes on either end of the line seem to be partially cut off by the traveling curtain.

The clues for me in this photo that the Rockettes are larger than life -- and the performers BEHIND the Rockettees make the Rockettes themselves look as big as large dolls! -- was that the end Rockettees on stage left(?) not only seem much, much larger than both the people in the orchestra pit and in the audience just in front of them (and closer to the camera, yet), but they also look a bit too big to fit behind those curtains on the stepped stages going up the side of the auditorium.

(By the way, I didn't notice how large the performers behind the Rockettes were [!] or that the curtains seem painted-in until just now.)

As a kid, I use to love to look at the movie stills outside a theater (there never seemed to be enough of them), and I remember wishing that RCMH, in particular, had more photos (and a greater variety of them) in the display cases along 50th St. I also remember being disappointed that this one photo of the Music Hall's interior (or a similar photo) seemed to be the one and only photo of the interior of RCMH that they ever showed in the display case -- and actually the one and only one of the interior of RCMH that you ever seemed to see anywhere.

Looking at "this" photo as a kid, I wanted to be overwhelmed by the giganticism of RCMH and its stage and was thus disappointed that the performers were so big and that the stage seemed so "small" (judging by the way the performers so easily filled it up) for such a large theater. Examining the photo as carefully as I could, I could sense that something seemed wrong about "the" photo, but couldn't put my finger on it -- couldn't find the smoking gun, so to speak.

It's ironic that the management of RCMH specifically wanted the performers to appear large (and thus have the stage appear "small"). I suppose they knew what they were doing, and perhaps my kid's mentality was the exception. But I would think that most people going to RCMH were not going to see live performers up close, anyway, but were going for the spectacle of it all -- enormous scenery, large crowd scenes, etc. -- in which case a stage full of tiny scenery and tiny, tiny performers would seem to me to be an asset in a publicity photo rather than a liablity.

To bring in another example: when I was a pre-schooler, and before I ever went to visit the Empire State Building, I remember being thrilled by the tales told to me by my slightly older friends who had been there. "The people on the sidewalk are so tiny, they look like little ants!" When I finally went to the Empire State Building, however, I was disappointed because the people on the sidewalk really didn't look all that small (and the Empire State Building, itself, didn't really look all that tall either)!

There are certain experiences where you want to be overwhelmed by enormous scale of things -- so seeing large crowds of tiny people, in these instances, would seem to me not to be a liablity but an asset! (At least if the sound applification was good enough for you to hear what is going on.) Now if RCMH management chose to enlarge the image of a movie screen in a photo of the interior, that would be a different story!

I don't know, from what I've read here and experienced at the Hall, a small screen and bad sound don't add up to much of a movie-going experience. But I still love the place!

P.S. -- Of course I could understand the management wanting the audience to think that they could see performers up close when RCMH was truly a "music hall." But, of course, RCMH was a true music hall only for a few weeks when the theater first opened.

- - - - -

Finally got around to re-reading the early posts in this listing -- great to see that RCMH listing has so many posts!

Especially loved reading the July posts from SimonL (explaining how the theater operated, and the practical difficulties of moving people in and out of a 5,945 seat theater), BoxOfficeBill (on the way the curtains were used to present a movie), and the post listing movies that played the Music Hall that was compiled by Ron3853(?) (which helped me remember when I saw certain movies there).

If I remember correctly, when I went to see "Crossed Swords" at the Music Hall (another poster mentions seeing it there in 1978) it was after it had been announced that they were considering closing the theater for good. It was such an emotional experience each time that the Rockettes came on -- everyone thinking that this might be the last series of shows that the Rockettes might ever do.

Around 1978 and 1979, I was a tourgroup leader who used to escort out-of-town tour groups to see the movie and the stage show at RCMH as part of a multi-day NYC tour package. If I remember correctly, RCMH was ususally scheduled for Sunday evening (the last evening of a multi-day visit), and it was great because there was actually very little else that one could do with a tour group in NYC on a Sunday evening.

I believe I saw "The Promise" with Kathleen Quinlan with one of these tour groups. Didn't realize that (according to another poster) this was the last regular movie shown at RCMH.

I think I also took a tour group to the first edition of the Christmas Spectacular after the Music Hall switched to its new format. I remember thinking to myself that the show wasn't all that good -- or, at least, that it needed a lot of work (although I was, of course, rooting for it to be good enough to "save" the Music Hall).

Perhaps the show wasn't that good, but to be fair perhaps I was also overcritical because I so wanted it to succeed. (My tour group liked it.)

One very strange "act" in the first edition that I believe they did drop though: at one point in the first of the new Christmas Spectaculars, they had a singer dressed as a homeless bag lady come out to sing a ballad. The idea, I assume, was to make a poignant statement about the disadvantaged at Christmastime.

I thought this was strange scene for the RCMH Christmas Spectacular, however, in part because homeless bag ladies were relatively new in New York City (with the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill in the mid-1970s[?]) and I didn't think out of town tourists would really get what was happening. (If I remember correctly, the one or two people in my group that mentioned this scene didn't really know what it was supposed to be about, but more or less got the general gist -- rememember the disadvantaged at Christmastime, too -- anyway.)

I also thought it seemed to be too severe a departure from the tone of the rest of the show.

- - - - -

Re: why the Music Hall doesn't look so big from outside

I've wondered about this too, and here are some thoughts:

1) Some of the theater's public spaces are concealed in the office building fronting on Sixth Ave. (the ticket lobby and the lounges, etc. above it);

2) Most of the great size of the auditorium is in it's block long (200' wide) width, rather than it's length. And since the theater's width is concealed by the office building on Sixth and the office building on Rockefeller Plaza, you never really get to see from the outside how wide the theater is.

3) The theater has a plain exterior and the two buildings that bookend it also have the same plain exterior which blurrs the dimensions of the theater -- where does the theater begin and where does it end?

4) I'm not sure about this, but I believe RCMH has a somewhat sunken auditorium that lessens the apparent height of the theater.

Explanation: when I went by the theater the other day, the door to the loading dock that leads onto the stage was open and you could see onto the stage. If I remember correctly, this loading dock was flush with the sidewalk, which means parts of the auditorium are below street level.

The same holds, true, by the way with the Hudson Theater (which I'm more sure of). The loading dock to the stage is only inches above the sidewalk, which would mean the the first rows of the orchestra level are probably below sidewalk level.

(This is also common, I believe, in atheletic stadia [when a low water table permits it]. The playing field is below street level, and when patrons enter the field boxes from the surrounding street, they find themselves going down to the level of the playing field. Otherwise a lot of stadiums would be much taller -- like Shea Stadium with its high water table -- than they are now.)

5) The size of the theater might be camouflaged a bit by the beautiful grills that cover the firescapes and by the windows (to the executive offices and the dressing rooms) which, again, might help blur the difference between where the theater ends and the other buildings begin.

Benjamin: Your description of Krinsky’s photo seems weirdly familiar, and I’ll check it out on Monday. The most familiar photo of the Rockettes in full proscenium is Herbert Gehr’s, taken for Life Magazine in ’42 and reprinted in Charles Francisco’s “The RCMH.” The set depicts a WWII aircraft carrier, on whose deck the full-thirty-six kick up a storm in sailor-suits. (I have memories of this routine from my first visit to RCMH in Sept ’45 to see “Our Vines Have Tender Grapes” at the age of three, but that would take paragraphs to explain and verify geometrically.)

RCMH devoted one display case to “Camera Highlights of the Current Stage Show.” It was located among the front doors, second case from right on the 6 Ave side. (Francisco’s book provides a picture of it in the first color photo insert, third page verso.) If you went to the opening Thursday of a new production, that case would be bare: the pictures were likely taken during the early-morning dress rehearsal and were evidently still in the developing room when the first show let out at 1:15 pm. Unlike the other display cases that exhibited pictures only in b&w, this one offered color.

On 16 Jan. you mentioned the scene in “The Godfather I” shot in the lobby as Pacino and Keaton exit from the Christmas show of ’45. The film was “The Bells of St. Mary’s” (I saw that there too then, but it would take paragraphs to. . . my strongest memory of it has my grandfather laying a few bucks in the hand of an usher who then smuggled us inside through the 51 Street doors; whoever said the entire white-gloved platoon was incorruptible?). Coppola got the display cases right with their b&w stills of Crosby and Bergman. That’s exactly the format followed in those years, as those of us who stood on long lines around the block remember. About the marquee light bulbs, I know nothing, but a glance at the DVD might help answer the question.

Thought you might like to see the program from the opening week of the hall. I'm an out of print book dealer dealing in mostly film.

I don't think the 'sunken auditorium' Benjamin describes is at all uncommon- how many theatres have you been in where you have to step up into the lobby or orchestra level? I can't think of any.

While I think most theaters -- especially large older ones -- probably try to use a "sunken" arrangement, I can quickly think of quite a few theaters (in New York City at least) that, for one reason or another, haven't.

The two that come to mind the quickest are the main auditorium of Carnegie Hall and the now demolished Helen Hayes on 46th St. I believe in both of them you had to go up a steep, but small flight of stairs to get into the theater at the orchestra level (the back of the orchestra). Since both of these theaters also had box offices in their very small "stairway" lobbies, it made for very lobbies that were awkwardly memorable. (The renovation of Carnegie Hall somehow did away with the awkwardness -- can't remember exactly how.)

Plus there are two big old Broadway theaters (from the 1920s?), the Majestic and the Richard Rodgers, that have early versions of stadium seating in which the back of the orchestra level is a between a half-story and a full story above street level. (I believe in the Richard Rodgers you first go down a few steps to get into the lobby and then you go up a full flight of stairs for the back of the orchestra). I believe the Virginia (which used to be called the ANTA?), also from around the same time, has a similar set-up. Plus there are the more modern Broadway theaters (the ones that were built as part of office buildings) that really only begin after you get one or more flights off the ground: the Minskoff, the Uris, and the Mariott Marquis (correct name?).

Getting back to movie theaters, I think in the current Ziegfeld Theater, the entire (single screen) seating area of the theater is on the second floor. Plus in Manhattan and all over the country there are all those small multiplex theaters, probably very few of which are sunken.

But generally speaking, putting the back of the orchestra level at the same grade as the surrounding sidewalks does often seem to make the most sense, especially for a large theater.

Whether or not a theatre was "sunken" (having a rake to the floor) was often determined by local ordinances especially if they adopted the IFPA standardized building code into law. Obviously, the two primary criteria for an auditorium is that the audience be able to see the performance, and that the traffic patterns therein be swift and safe especially in an emergency. The best means to accomplish these objectives in a theatre of a single level of seating was to 'dish' the floor so that it sloped to some permissible extent, sometimes in the front as well as the rear. This also allowed the patrons to enter from grade at the sidewalk elevation, and gradually descend into the auditorium to preserve the sightlines for the audience. In many photos of theatres one can see the ramps or steps going up to grade in those exits at the front of the auditorium. In those auditoria with the 'stadium' plan of seating with a bank of seats on risers at the rear, the depth of the curve was even more important to allow access and good sightlines for all. Much of this is diagrammed on page 4 of the 1927 book "American Theatres of Today", sometimes still available as the 1977 reprint in one volume. While most theatres had stairs to some extent, every architect knows that they are a hazard, especially to the young and the elderly, so are to be avoided if possible, thus the impetus to avoid them at grade, and only employ them as an option for those who prefer the balconies. While wheelchair access was not usually thought of in early years, it turns out that the use of slopped (raked) floors was very beneficial to wheelchair users to this day.

As to the apparently odd photos that Benjamin mentions earlier, I wonder if he wasn't looking at skillful process prints which where there to promote the stage attraction, not the theatre. We visitors here are primarily theatres buffs, but the management of a theatre usually is not. They are businessmen charged with the task of turning a profit, and whether they manage a great theatre or a grocery store is often immaterial to them, since they are usually MBA types that see the same business principles as applying to both. So no, the theatre did not figure large in the viewpoints of such men, and if one wanted to see the theatre, then they expected one to buy a ticket for that privilege and not get a 'freebie' by viewing large photos of it. Also, if an outside producer were involved, you can bet that he didn't want his production to be dwarfed in the photos by the immensity of the Music Hall. He would therefore supply agreed photos to the theatre that he probably had made specifically to emphasize his people, and not the Hall. Process photography and expert retouching were commonplace even before the age of computer manipulation of images, so distorted views having a preferred, or 'enhanced' image were not unusual.

Does anyone know if the steam curtain is used anymore? I remember it so well as the jets, set around the perimeter of the stage apron, started to hiss and spout steam, and before you knew it the entire proscenium opening was hidden behind its billows. A dazzling effect when lit from the front or behind. I remember too the stagehand in a dark outfit slealthily scooting a mop over the nozzles after the effect was over...funny how the details of certain images stay with one over the years...

For the past several days now, whenever I go to the listing for RCMH, the page goes much wider than other entries, making it harder to read. Can anyone explain this phenomenon?

This has happened to me on a lot of other pages here too, and yes it is annoying. Maybe Pat Crowley will read these words and offer an explaination, if not a cure. :)

Yes Warren, it's been bugging me as well.

Well, someone up above must have heard us, as it seems to have gone back to "normal," or at least in my case. Many thanks!

The reason why the page was not displaying correctly was because earlier, someone had posted a link which was far too long for the comments area. When that happens, the page is thrown out of alignment and will push the borders out too far. I've fixed the link. Just as a hint, it's helpful when sharing a long link to use the formula url=www.alonglink.com]alonglink[/url to avoid making the page look funny. In the real formula, you need to have a bracket in front of the 1st url and behind the last url but it won't display the formula if I do that here. Thanks!

Bryan Krefft
Cinema Treasures

Thanks Bryan, It's nice to know someone is out there watching over us as we stroll along memory lane thru your magnificent website.

My second to Vito's comments. One of the great pleasures of this site is the extreme care with which it is maintained. Thanks again!

Thanks guys for the kind words!

Refering to comments above about the size of performers in relation to the size of the house if one reads the Variety reviews of the stage shows in the 30's even then in an era used to large presentation houses critics complained about the size of the Hall and how distant and small the performers seemed. I remember one review that described the ballet as an army of red corpuscles battling the white.
Also the line from the Rodgers and Hart "At the Roxy Music Hall"-Where the actors seem to be a lot of midgets.

Vincent here hits upon the old dilemma which confronts all owners and builders/designers of theatres: at what point are more seats facing the law of diminishing returns? As more seats are added the owner may get greater income, but the audience will see less of the performance since they must be seated farther from the stage. The old opera houses of the previous centuries were galleries not only because they did not have the steel to create cantilevered balconies, but because the stacks of galleries kept the audience closer to the stage so that one could see the performers in some reality of size. And the human voice can only project so far. With the advent of motion pictures, the scale of image and the force of sound were much larger and it was then possible to cram lots more people into roughly the same foot print of land, thus making the potential profit on greater attendance much greater. This is why Radio City M.H. and a few other 'pageantoriums' like it cannot really be called 'theatres' in the traditional meaning of the word; they are beyond the size of realistic use of the human voice without amplification, and seeing someone on the stage --as opposed to one the screen-- means looking at dwarfed images that make the experience a parody of the real thing. With these concerns, RCMH faced a unique situation in that it was more of a civic auditorium than a traditional theatre or opera house, so one can easily see why special photos were made to enhance the performers rather than the hall.

Yes-- red corpuscles and all! Benjamin has mentioned Carol Krinsky's 1978 book on "Rockefeller Center," which I've just examined. The composite photo on p. 175 (recalled from a 50 Street display case) is an at least double composite, with Rockettes superimposed upon a crowded stage superimposed upon an open proscenium. Writing on the eve of the theater's change of policy, K refers to "giantism" as "the fatal flaw of the RCMH" (p. 180) and speculates about its future as "some sort of multi-purpose structure, or even a department store" (p. 183) (!).

For me, the most interesting visual in K's book is the theater's full floor plan and section cut on p. 169, showing the rake below street-level and the various scene docks and stage assembly rooms. What I had never encountered before is the small protruding room at the rear of the stage, elevated to mezzaine level and extending into the Associated Press Building behind RCMH. It appears to be labeled "projection room" (?) and was used for rear-screen projection?

To those who miss the combination film and stage shows at RCMH: wouldn't the upcoming film of the stage musical version of "The Producers" ---scheduled for release in mid-December---be the ideal Christmas attraction for RCMH? I know, wishful thinking.

Oh Eric, what an interesring idea, I think Mel Brooks would love to see that happen. Perhaps we should write him about it. Of course it could not be exclusive, too much money to be made in a wide Christmas release. I like your wishful thinking, it would make a grand time for Christmas in New York.

But guys even if the Hall management would want to do this(yeah right)is this a Christmas family film? Better a revival of Meet Me St Louis or Singing in the Rain.(They blew Mary Poppins big time.)Of course then I would have to go in and completely redo that wretched stage show.

I am curious about the great steam curtain that was used for special effects many times and was wondering if it is used any more. Jets, set around the perimeter of the stage apron, started to hiss and spout steam, and before you knew it the entire proscenium opening was hidden behind its billowing cloud- it literally obliterated the whole front of the auditorium. A dazzling effect when back or front lit to be sure. Also, I remember the hapless stagehand in a dark outfit slealthily scooting a mop over the nozzles after the effect was over.

Re: Stadium seating vs. the sunken, gradual rake of RCMH

One of the interesting benefits of a stadium seating design, at least as shown by the current Ziegfeld (movie theater), the Majestic, the Richard Rodgers and the Virginia ("legit" theaters), is that a very steep rake allows a theater's builder to save space and use his/her land more efficiently by tucking the theater's lobby beneath the rear of the theater's orchestra level (or its equivalent) seats. (The orchestra level then rakes downward, so that the front rows of the orchestra level are at or near ground level.)

In the case of at least two of these "legit" theaters (and perhaps all three), one actually first steps DOWN into the main lobby, before one must ascend a full flight of stairs again just to access the orchestra-level seating! And then, remember, all the "legit" theaters with stadium seating have balcony levels too, which involve even more stairs. Speak of being inconvenient! (And, as far as I know, none of the OLDER [pre-1960s] Broadway theaters [or concert halls, opera houses, etc.] -- even the more conventional ones -- had passenger elevators or escalators for ticket holders to use! Speak of being inconvenient for everyone -- let alone inaccessible and inhospitable to the handicapped!)

So I think one reason this design didn't catch on more in NYC, even in the pre-accessibility for the handicapped era, was because it did involve the introduction of a lot of stairs at a time when escalators (also, not seen as very classy) and elevators (in those days, with attendants!) were probably seen as being unnecessarily expensive. (As compared to the newer Broadway theaters and, I believe, the current Ziegfeld, which depend on escalators to get almost all patrons into the theater.) But I suppose, for certain theaters in the "old" days, where they really wanted to put a relatively big theater on a very small site, such a design probably was the only economically viable way to go.

In Radio City Music Hall, on the other hand, because of its enormous seating capacity (especially on the orchestra-level), the importance of its grand foyer to its overall presentation, the economic feasibility of elevators for grand movie palaces and the relative availability of a large parcel of land, a sunken and more modestly raked orchestra level was, quite understandably, a better way to go.

Re: photos of the interior of RCMH

The photos that I'm referring to, do not just show stage show, but also include a good deal of the "telescoping" interior of the auditorium PLUS the stage show. While these photos may have changed weekly, I'm guessing that this wasn't the case, as it was probably too involved to do every week. So I'm guessing that the "Camera Highlights" that BoxOfficeBill refers to was probably more of a photograph of what was happening on the stage and didn't include the auditorium with hundreds (thousands) of people filling the orchestra-level seats.

When I say I wished they had more photos of the interior of the auditorium, I am talking about a "greedy" little kid. (Same holds true for the wish for more movie stills, in general.) I'm just explaining why I think I so closely poured over the few photos that were available.

Of course, there is very little economic reason for the owners of the RCMH to provide more than just one stock shot of the interior (to acquaint those, who are otherwise unfamiliar with the theater, with its spectacular auditorium). For most potential customers, however, this one stock shot was probably sufficient to make them interested -- if they had any interest in the first place -- in seeing the theater.

It seems to me that in her book Krinksy (pg. 180) is implying that this photo, and others like it, are the work of the Radio City Music Hall publicity department -- meant to show off the theater rather than the stage show. In any case, as far as I know, almost all the shows produced at RCMH were done by RCMH itself, anyway. (The one exception that I can think of is I believe Disney was invited one time to put on a stage show to accompany one of his own films.) So I don't think the photo was altered to highlight the glories of a particular production. (Plus even with the enlargement, the photo doesn't really tell you much about what is happening on stage anyway.)

Although it is true that enterprises like RCMH are often run by MBA types rather than theater people, etc., I think this is very much more of a current day phenomenon -- something that wasn't true as much when Roxy "built" the theater, and probably wasn't all that true even when this photo was re-touched either. Reading various things about the history of RCMH, the history of the movies (with a lot of garment entrepreneurs become movie titans) and the history of business in general (prior to the 1960s), a surprising number of "big-time" businesses in the "old" days seem to be entrepreneurial operations (with non-college graduates running the show) or even "Mom and Pop" family operations.

Although RCMH management may, indeed, have been making the right decision regarding enlarging the Rockettes and the stage shows in these photos (my feelings could be the exception), it seems to me that they were being misguided and somewhat overly sensitive. To the limited extent that the photo makes any difference in the first place, I think they would probably be attracting more potential customers than they would lose.

Aside from being "fake" and "inauthentic" such photos seems to rob RCMH of some of its wonderful grandeur. How disappointing that, in the photo the world's largest stage, it is barely big enough to fit all 36 Rockettes! (It looks like you can squeeze in an additional two Rockettes on stage right and one more on stage left -- but that's it.) It would be like having an interior shot of the RCMH auditorium where they take out some of the seats and enlarge the rest of them to fill out the space!

Also, it seems to me that the kind of stage shows they had -- especially the ones that were the most effective -- did not depend upon theatergoers seeing the faces of the performers up close. Now my memories of these stage shows are a bit fuzzy (it was a long time ago and I was just a kid for most of them), but it seems to me that the actual appeal of the shows was in their overscaled pageantry -- something that is enhanced not diminished in a photo of a gigantic stage brimming over with spectacular scenery and dozens upon dozens of costumed performers.

Actually, as much as I know I enjoyed the stage shows at RCMH, I remember only one specific scene from, maybe, the five to ten shows I saw at RCMH: the Rockettes falling down like dominos during their "March of the Toy Soldiers" routine. (As far as I know, I never got to see gems such as the "Underwater Ballet" mentioned in previous posts.) So I don't think of these shows as conventional shows -- something to be seen, heard and understood -- but rather as shows intended to entertain through spectacle.

I hope those older than myself will correct me if I'm wrong. But aside from the Rockettes and some other clever and truly theatrical spectacles, it seems to me that the live shows at RCMH were bright, cheery, melodic and insipid (genuine) entertainments. While the shows were genuinely entertaining in the 1950s and 1960s, they were an entertainment world equivalent of 1950s and 1960s "comfort food"! (As was much of show business in the 1950s?!) The shows at RCMH were kind of a fancifully done up, spectacularly presented, feast of "Campbell's Chicken Noodle Soup," "Wonder Bread," "Peter Pan Peanut Butter," "Welch's Grape Juice" and "Hostess Twinkies" all presented in an unparalleled environment! I don't think such entertainment, "suffers" from being seen on a giant, far away stage, but actually is enhanced by the theaters vast spaces, its echoy sound, its warm glow, the boomy rumbling organ, the mass of fellow spectators, and the giant, far away stage with tons of scenery and a virtual small town of costumed performers.

By the way, I suspect that this was true of the Music Hall in the 1930s as well as the 1950s. As mentioned previously there is a wonderful 1938 Rodgers and Hart song, "At the Roxy Music Hall" which is an affectionate send-up of Radio City Music Hall. The Lorenz Hart lyrics say that you don't have to read the ads to decide whether or not to go to the Roxy Music Hall:

"It's always worth the dough.
Any week you go,
It's the same old show!"

This lyric can be heard by the same performer who introduced it on Broadway on track 19 of the "Ultimate Rodgers & Hart, Vol. II" which is produced by the Pearl division of Pavilion Records Ltd. in England. (I got it at a local chain store.) But I noticed in the published version (from the "Complete Lyrics of Lorenz Hart" by Hart and Kimball, Knopf, 1986) that there is even more that isn't on the CD.

"The ballet that you saw is called "Othello",
though it might as well have been some other fellow.
The stuff's been here so long it's good and mellow."

Hart says that on the stage of RCMH you can see the Grand Canal and the Bridge of Sighs of Venice -- "They do Venice swell, and without the smell."

He also says:

"Where the spectacle goes on ad infinitum, and the picture is a second item."

Hart got that last line wrong. Even back in the 30's the success of a week at the Hall depended on what film was being shown.
Also the song from I Married an Angel(the whole musical is wonderful but would be too expensive to revive today and I would be the only person in the audience in any case)introduced a Balanchine production number which was the highlight of the show. From what I gather it was very funny including a Rockette line of 2 and an Undersea Ballet terrorized by a sea monster.

Also the photos of the stage shows alluded to above and placed in front of the theater were quite wonderful and I believe taken by a company called Impact. What I liked were the photos of old stage shows which were on 50th St. These were more spectacular as they were from the 50's and 60's. I'd like to know what happened to them as they are an invaluable record as to the what the shows actually looked like. A few can be seen in souvenir books from the era but there were many more.

While I agree that the picture was not the second item at RCMN -- that, for most of the year at least, people usually went to RCMH depending on what movie was being shown, and not depending upon what was in the stage show (the true details of which they probably didn't know about most of the time anyway) -- I think it's important to remember that the Rodgers and Hart song is an affectionate send-up with a lot of teasing "zingers" along the lines of a Friar's Club Roast. He's joking about some of the "awful" things that make RCMH so "wonderful" (the performers twirling on their digits with the balconies so high that they look like midgets, etc.)!

In a sense, Hart even contradicts himself, saying that while the show is "worth the dough" one shouldn't even bother looking at the ads -- since the show is the same every time anyway. This would hardly be true if "the picture is a second item."

- - - - -

Regarding the Roxy Music Hall Scene in "I Married an Angel." As I understand it (from either Richard Rodgers' or Joshua Logan's autobiography?), Hart originally got some flack for suggesting this scene, as it has nothing whatsoever to do with the storyline of "I Married an Angel" -- which takes place in Hungary(?)!

But Hart said it would be a fun, light-hearted, satirical diversion, and he was right -- people did enjoy it.

(Not only does it have a lot of great lines, the Rodgers' melody is a lot of fun too.)

By the way, how many other movie theaters/palaces have songs about them?

What about the line that goes something like-when you find yourself climbing up(to the 2nd and 3rd Mezz) and find the going hard
They are on their guard.
They send a St Bernard.

All this talk about the overblown aspects of theatres and stage shows reminds me of a joke I read in a 1920's joke book. (interesting that movie palaces were such a part of the public psyche that one could publish jokes involving them). Anyway..here goes.

A couple went to the movies on a date. During the presentation the young man got thirsty, so he left his seat and asked the usher if he could direct him to a drinking fountain "Certainly sir" was the reply, "just take the staircase to the left and walk through the art gallery, turn left and proceed down a row of potted palms. Then turn left... " and so the usher continued. After getting thoroughly lost, the young man finally stumbled into what seemed to be a forest glade with a babbling brook. In desperation he threw himself down to drink from the stream, and somehow found his way back to his seat. Seeing that the picture had started he asked his date "How was the stage show?" She replied "You ought to know, you were in it."

That's a funny joke Ziggy, thanks for posting it.

If you want to see a really prime cartoon with lots of great theater gags, check out the 1949 Warner Bros. cartoon "Hare Do." Elmer Fudd chases Bugs Bunny around a movie palace!

That joke, Ziggy, would go FLYING over the heads of everyone under the age of 50 or so. I'm 38 and I "get-it" because of my scant experiences and mostly due to my parent's descriptions of places like The Roxy and RCMH.

And yes, I know the "Hare Do" cartoon Bob speaks of. It's the one that culminates with Bugs Bunny leading Fudd through the darkened theater (he's actually wearing dark sunglasses) and it seems to take forever (at one point you hear the sounds of them walking through water!) and Bugs constantly saying (with an abrasive accent) "right this way sir."

Another funny scene that plays into the BIG theater theme is when Fudd is sitting in one of the upper balconies. When he looks down, he's so far up that the stage is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay below him.

And how the audience runs out of the theater to smoke up a storm in the lobby!

Very funny stuff and Thanks Bob Furmanek for brining that one up.

So CC I guess you were born in 66 making that the year I first visited the Hall(October.) I thought the stage show was spectacular and my mother, who hadn't been there in years, remarked that it was pretty disappointing in comparison to the ones she had seen in the 40s and 50s.
Amazingly enough I saw a program on ebay from 33 or 34 where the stage show included some of the same features or acts that I saw in my very first show! Also the stage show I saw with the Timothy Dalton Wuthering Heights in 71(the Rockettes did a thing called Bayou Rythym and it was one of their great numbers) was the same as with the film Picnic in 56. I guess as the years went on the thing that basicially changed was scale of the presentation.

Ok, the presentation of the stage shows might've changed but we're running the possibiltiy of re-opening the can of worms that was run into the ground earlier about the abysmal (sp?) Christmas Show.

Yep, I was born in '66 and that probably puts me in the LAST generation that remembers (fondly) single screen large theaters that were well maintained. My guess is that anyone born after 1970 cannot remember these theaters at all well.

I first the Christmas show in 1972 with "1776" (a thudding bore to a 6 year old). But the Christmas show? Fantastic. And I saw it every year after that until around 1978. Each year was great. And as I stated above, I took my 8 year old daughter to see it this year expecting her to be amazed by it like I was and I cannot tell you how incredibly, jaw-droppingly AWFUL the thing was.

I do not recall ever seeing another show at RCMH besides the Christmas show though. I might've but I don't remember them.

BUT...the Music Hall itself is still grand and I will take my daughter on the tour sometime in the future. She LOVED the place more than the insipid show.

I remember "Hare Do"! I always preferred the Warner Bros. cartoons to any others, even as a kid. Now I have nieces and nephews who just don't get it.

CConnolly and others have asked for the complete text of the Christmas message that was presented as part of the holiday show. I found it on the web.





One Solitary Life
Here is a man who was born in an obscure village, the child of a peasant woman. He grew up in another village. He worked in a carpenter shop until He was thirty. Then for three years He was an itinerant preacher.
He never owned a home. He never wrote a book. He never held an office. He never had a family. He never went to college. He never put His foot inside a big city. He never traveled two hundred miles from the place He was born. He never did one of the things that usually accompany greatness. He had no credentials but Himself...

While still a young man, the tide of popular opinion turned against him. His friends ran away. One of them denied Him. He was turned over to His enemies. He went through the mockery of a trial. He was nailed upon a cross between two thieves. While He was dying His executioners gambled for the only piece of property He had on earth – His coat. When He was dead, He was laid in a borrowed grave through the pity of a friend.

Nineteen long centuries have come and gone, and today He is a centerpiece of the human race and leader of the column of progress.

I am far within the mark when I say that all the armies that ever marched, all the navies that were ever built; all the parliaments that ever sat and all the kings that ever reigned, put together, have not affected the life of man upon this earth as powerfully as has that one solitary life.


This essay was adapted from a sermon by Dr James Allan Francis in “The Real Jesus and Other Sermons” © 1926 by the Judson Press of Philadelphia (pp 123-124 titled “Arise Sir Knight!”). If you are interested, you can read the original version . Graham Pockett

This is what is said currently in the holiday show?
Are they insane?
I had mercifully forgotten most of it.
Thank God Leonidoff is dead so as not to see this travesty. He would be aghast.
Maybe they can invite Mel Gibson to stage The Gory of Easter.

I say kill the Christmas show next year, it's time to put it out of it's misery. Let us have a big December release movie and a new holiday theme stage show, with the Rockettes, produced by someone who has the vision to start a new tradition. I want the steam curtain, the stage curtain going up and down through out the show, and the orchestra to come up from the pit roll to the rear of the great stage. What else do we want?

Oh, GOD...I did NOT ask for a transcript! Why did I have to read that! Again! I was appalled that the Christmas show would do something like that. Why would they do that? The one I saw as a kid was so subtlety affecting that it was a marvel. I've never forgotten it.

The only thing I can think of is that it's part of the roadshow version of this show. They play this Christmas show across the country and someone genius must've thought this would've been great in red states. By in NY? Oye.

There were plenty of movies that could've/should've opened at RCMH this year. "Lemony Snicket", though mediocre, would've looked great up there and it's essentially a family film. Christ, even "Meet the Fockers" would've been a huge sell out with Stiller's following COUPLED with Streisand's (the gay attendence would've kept it there for weeks).

I KNOW people my age are ready for a return to the BIG movie houses. Just look at how well the megaplexes are doing. Why? It's not just the stadium seating but the LARGENESS of the auditoriums and the screens.

I'm amazed by the relentless Christian-bashing by many on this page. Multitudes exit the Music Hall each December grateful for having the true message of Christmas presented. That includes many life-long NYC residents, of which I am one. My parents took me for the first time on my 4th birthday in December, 1969. I plan to continue to bring my family for many years to come.

We're not bashing Christians at all. Read my posts above and I state that the original Christmans Nativity scene (back in the 70's) was truly remarkable. What I object to (and I'm sorry if this sounds like Chrisitan bashing) was/is the rather over the top narrative that is scrolled at the end of the Christmas show.

The original Nativity was a model of craftmanship. It was a subtle gem. You didn't have to be a Christian to be moved by it. As a kid, it brought tears to my eyes it was sooooooooooo goood. And I was a non religeous kid to boot.

I brought my daughter to see the show expecting her to experience the same thing. And what did I get? The equivilent of an amusement park show with an underwhelming Nativity scene AND an over the top narrative to wrap it up. She, even at 8 years old, commented on how out of place it was.

I not bashing Christians. I'm bashing the present Nativity and Christmas show.

Leonidoff's Nativity and Glory of Easter were two of my favorite theatrical events.
The current show is a manifestation of current religious smugness and righteousness(and Christians are not the only perpetrators.)
If RH were not so quick to label us as Christian bashers(I was raised a good Catholic boy) he or she would understand that what we find objectional is the reduction of a great theatrical pageant narrating the story of Christmas using imagery from Rennaissance painters to a flattened out fundamentalist tract that does little to impart the true meaning of Christmas and only reinforces a tendancy to assume superiority.
Leonidoff avoided this while at the same time creating a thrilling sense of exhiliration. And he was Russian Orthodox!!!
What in the world has happened to us?
Christian bashing indeed.

I think the producers of the current Christmas show must realize that the Nativity scene has the potential to turn off viewers. Notice that it's now at the END of the show, not the beginning as it was before. I remember how the house lights would dim and that solemn, beautiful Nativity scene would begin.

Honestly, it was the highlight of the show. Yeah, the Rockettes were memorable but for me, after all these years (almost 30! Oye!) it's the Nativity that stays with me.

I was moved by the narration at the end and felt it was in keeping with the nativity scene. But I seem to remember it even back in the 1970s when I saw my first movie at the Hall, "Bedknobs and Broomsticks." So my question is, when exactly was this text added to the Christms Show?

Well, it was not in the Christmas shows that I saw in the 70's.

When I went to the Christmas show a few years ago, there were quite a few people that left when the Nativity segment began. I had a family of 7 or 8 right in front of me (with small children) get up and leave. It took them several minutes to gather their things, and they weren't trying to be too quiet about it either.

Needless to say, it was VERY distracting for those that wanted to stay!

Bob they did you a favor.
Yes there was a narration in the original Nativity. However it was more like the Linus narration in Charlie Brown Christmas which I happen to think is wonderful.
Banal pieties seem to have taken the place of eloquence and brevity.

At the risk of offending just about everyone, it would seem to me that RCMH might do better staying away from the nativity sequence altogether and stick with entertainment. Leave the religious aspects to those institutions recreating nativity scenes already and in surroundings better suited to it.

Vincent, perhaps they did me a favor. But at $100 a ticket, I want to see everything - good OR bad!

$100! Sheesh!
For $100 I expect to see My Fair Lady.
With the original cast.

Wouldn't [that] be Loverly?

http://www.epinions.com/content_86937210500

It's interesting that during all this talk about the Christmas show, no one has mentioned another seasonal and religious-oriented tradition: "Kol Nidre" that was presented every September (app.)during the high Jewish holy days. Like the "Nativity," it preceded a regular show with the Rockettes, ballet, choral ensemble and symphony orchestra. The traditional "Kol Nidre" melody was played by a solo cellist at stage left and sung in cantorial style by a solist (seen) the choral ensemble (unseen). The backdrop was simply rolling clouds. There was no accompanying narrative, but it was reverential, brief, and tasteful. I can't tell you when it began or how many years it remained a tradition.

Regarding sam_e's comment about doing away with The Nativity scene altogether, I'm surprised that they haven't done so yet. From a PC point of view, it might be considered too Christian (why not call it the "Radio City Holiday Show"?). I'm joking here...

During this whole "discussion" last week about the narration that I did not like, I thought EXACTLY as Vincent did of the beautiful Charlie Brown Christmas show and how nicely the integrated the story of the Nativity into the show without beating it over your head. It's graceful and, most importantly, subtle.

No one wants or needs to have ANY religon rammed down anyone's throats. What people DO like and appreciate is a story, even if it's religous, told in an intelligent and thoughtful way. THAT is what made the old Nativity so good. It didn't force it's message on you. It made you "feel" by it's subtle, beautiful and unforced presentation. Less is more...

How unfortunate today that things must be extreme. Just saw some of the Big Spender number from the revival of Sweet Charity on TV last week. The jaded dance hall hostesses of New York 1966 have become soft core Russ Meyer vixens circa 1973. In todays entertainment world your either a dogma thunping fundamentalist or an arrested development teenage prostie like Britney.
The Hall is just another symptom of todays cultural rot.

The underground boxoffice was apparently originally built for the convenience of shoppers at Rockefeller Center's subterrranean arcade, since there was no subway station when RCMH first opened. It was still the time of the elevated Sixth Avenue line. The underground Sixth Avenue station didn't open to the public until December 1940. When that happened, use of the RCMH underground boxoffice more than tripled, and an extra window had to be opened during peak times, according to report in The New York Times of 12/18/40.

The underground boxoffice was also very useful in that large prepaid -groups could be guided there to gain entrance to the theater and avoid conflict the patrons waiting in the street line. However, as far as my memory serves, the underground boxoffice was closed to individual patron ticket sales when there was a street line. As you can surmise, it would have been unfair to allow admittance to the theater by this little known route while others (possibly)were waiting in the rain and snow.

Re: Radio City Music Hall underground boxoffice

Thanks Warren for the fascinating info -- especially with the date of the article itself. With the date, it was a cinch to find the article to check it out. Given what I've read about Rockefeller Center in Krinsky and Loth, however, I'd like to offer a slightly different interpretation of what it says.

From the very beginning of the construction of Rockefeller Center everyone knew that there were plans for the Sixth Avenue elevated to come down, and for a subway to be built in its place. The underground concourse was planned with the subway in mind. The underground concourse was to provide a weather-controlled passageway between all the buildings of Rockefeller Center and the subway -- and the corridors would be lined with shops.

But as it happens, until the subway was actually built, Rockefeller Center had a hard time getting people down underground to shop there. Which makes sense, really, when you think about it: who wants to go downstairs a full-story below the street in order to shop in small stores along narrow dead end corridors -- and, especially during the Great Depression, when even more conveniently located street-level stores were having problems attracting customers?! (And what kinds of stores are going to be able to survive in such an inconvenient underground environment? With probably few store owners willing to risk it, there were also probably too few stores to attract shoppers -- a vicious cycle.)

Actually, even unto this very day the concourse has some trouble attracting people outside of "rainy day" traffic and people using it during the rush hours. This is one reason that the landmarks preservation community didn't raise a fuss (a grave mistake, in my opinion) when the new owners of Rockefeller Center decided to remodel large portions of it a few years ago.

The original (and much more severe) problem with the concourse was due, I think, to a combination of naivete on the part of the builders of Rockefeller Center (being pioneers, they didn't realize it wouldn't work at all without a subway) and the subway being built a little behind schedule (leaving them stranded a little longer than they thought they'd be). I don't have the Krinsky and Loth books handy, but I think they discuss the specifics.

By the way, the creation of the skating rink at Rockefeller Center is related to the problem of getting people down to the underground concourse. Originally the area was intended as a plaza / grand entryway to the underground concourse (which is why the pedestrian way from Fifth Ave. slopes down towards the skating rink). With the concourse attracting far fewer people than expected before the construction of the subway, the owners of Rockefeller Center decided to make it into a skating rink in the winter -- and the rest is history!

Getting back to the box office. My guess is that the box office was built and operated with the completion of the subway in mind. (Given the paucity of shoppers before the subway, it's hard to imagine them building and staffing it for seven years solely to catch the nearly non-existent shopping trade.)

I wonder if maybe the box office wasn't actually put into operation until maybe just a few months or so before the subway opened -- which, given the way things usually happen, probably opened later than originally announced. The article just says that use of the box office tripled -- it doesn't indicate, however, the period that they are comparing it to. So my guess is that they are comparing the period just after the opening of the subway with the few months prior to the subway opening (a period when the subway was supposed to be open, but wasn't).

"Use of the subway-level box-office in Radio City Music Hall has more than tripled since the opening of the Sixth Avenue subway, it was reported yesterday by the management."

So when was this box office permanently closed? From the very early 70's I don't remember it ever being opened. Also when did the Music Hall start letting group sales in by this entrance? I seem to remember that the Music Hall didn't start allowing group sales with preferential entrance privileges until about 1970. I believe Pauline Kael in her review of the 69 Christmas show writes about the groups of school children being forced to join the outside line which seems kind of strange.

I wonder if the Rockefeller Center management has some kind of plans for the box office. Not that long ago, a MAJOR renovation was done to the concourse area. Strange that they would leave the box office there. Either it has some kind of structural element, it's landmarked as part of RCMH or they have plans for it in the future...

I'm wondering if the RCMH patrons who had first mezzanine reserved seats could enter that way and avoid the crowds, lines and general chaos of the lobby. The Metropolitan Opera also allows patrons who have dinner reservations on the Grand Tier to use the entrance located in the underground shopping and garage area.

From street level that would not have been a problem as they could enter by the front entrance thereby avoiding the line on 50th St. However they then would have had to deal with the main lobby. If they enterd by the lower level they still would have to have dealt with walking across the lower lounge to get to the elevators.

More trivia: The executive entrance on 50th Street was also used by guests of the management, celebraties, and preferred patrons, who could walk down a few steps, be greeted at the desk then escorted by an usher on to the executive elevator and taken directly to the first mezzanine.

I took a quick look at the Krinsky and Loth books to see what they had to say about the underground concourse. I was kind of surprised to see that, at least from a quick glance, they really don't have much to say about it -- most of their comments are actually about the "entry plaza" to the underground concourse (the "entry plaza" is the area that was eventually transformed into a winter ice skating rink) and about the stores that were around the sides of this plaza when it first opened (where the restaurants are now).

It is with regard to these shops that they say business in the pre-subway years was bad. But I suppose it's fair to assume that the shops further into the concourse were probably even worse off -- as they were even more inconveniently accessible.

Some quotes:

Loth (pgs. 100-101) "On the whole, Rockefeller Center was successful in achieving its shop objectives [i.e., renting out to desirable, financially worthy tenants]. But the mortality of such establishments in the 1930's was high . . . . Not the least of the difficulties concerned the underground maze of corridors and concourse . . . . the concourse was planned to link up with the station of a new Sixth Avenue subway. But the rackety old elevated train still ran."

Loth (pg. 149) "[The Lower Plaza -- the site of the skating rink -- was] Orphaned by the long delay in the Sixth Avenue subway . . . [and] failed as a passage bringing pedestrians from the promenade into the shops that originally lined it. After a couple of years of hesitation and debate, the shops were replaced by a couple of restaurants, and the Lower Plaza [where the skating rink is] was no longer even a passage into the concourse."

- - - - -

As far as I can recall, I first visited the underground concourse in the mid-1960s, and I don't really remember the box office opposite the underground entry into Radio City Music Hall being used then (although the corridor into the Music Hall was apparently in operation). But, of course, it may have been open other hours, or maybe it was open and I just didn't notice it, or I noticed it and don't remember it now. But in my memories, at least, it was a "funny" presence in the underground corridors (like those