Mayfair Theatre

This is currently an eckerd, from a pic i have seen of this, it still looks like it a bit (best looking eckerd imo

THE THEATRE STILL STANDS. THE INNER LOBBY AND AUD. IS THE DRUG STORE. THIS THEATRE WAS NEVER TORN DOWN. IT'S LIKE A SHOE BOX WAS SLIPPED INSIDE THE THEATRE.

I worked at the Mayfair Theatre (always spelled "theatre", never "theater") from 1979 through 1983 as an usher, projectionist, and assistant manager. I met my wife there when she was hired to work in the candy stand in the summer of 1981. We married in June, 1983, and our kids are now older than we were!

Not 100% sure of this piece of trivia, but I believe Lincoln High School (2 blocks away) was almost named Mayfair High, but the thinking was that too many places were already named Mayfair.

Also not sure I agree that the theater had 1,000 seats. I think it may have been around 700, at least in the 70s and 80s.

Until 1980, the theater had a round ticket booth under the marquee, but it was removed when the thick curved glass broke and it would have been too expensive to repair. The official story was that it was broken when Phillies fans were celebrating the World Series, but the truth is that it broke when a boyfriend of a ticket seller punched the glass as a joke. A cheapo plywood booth was then built in the lobby.

Around 1981 the dual carbon arc projectors were replaced with a single projector and a Potts platter system. The owners fired the two union projectionists, one of whom had been there 50 years, and made the manager the projectionist. I got my projectionist license so the main manager could get a night off once a week.

There was small balcony box next to the projection booth, but it was not used by the public during at least the last 20 years.

The murals on the side walls of the auditorium were great, but water damage was a big problem by the 80s. I think my friend has photos - I'll try to get him to post them.

Finally, be sure to check out the 1937 film "It Happened In Mayfair", a tour of Mayfair businesses presented by the then manager of the Mayfair Theatre, Herb Shulman. It's a public domain film posted in several places on the web.

The Mayfair Theatre, after it closed, became a Thrift Drug. when JC Penney acquired Eckerd, they renamed all the Thrift Drugs to Eckerd. The theatre auditorium is still standing, but the lobby has been "Eckerd"ized

The one memory I have of the Mayfair Theatre has to do with when I took my word processor to be repaired at Steck Typewriter, which is just across the street from it on Cottman Avenue. This was sometime back in the early 1990s, and the theater had been converted to a Thrift Drug by then or some other crap. Anyway, I said to Mr. Steck, the guy who owned the typewriter place, how really sad it was that the Mayfair across the street was no longer a movie theater. And although he didn't come right out and say it, the look on his face said, "Well who the hell are you, buddy!?" He then did a really lousy job of repairing my word processor, not to mention charging me a small fortune for the really lousy work he did. I guess it was just his low life sort of way of getting back at me for speaking the truth about the Mayfair Theatre. For as a kid I used to love going down to Mayfair, and that theater itself was at the heart of it all. And it wasn't just me who felt this way. Back sometime in the mid '70s when the Flyers won the Stanley Cup, and revelers came out to the intersection of Frankford and Cottman the night they won, things got so out of hand that they were vandalizing things left and right. Store windows all around there got smashed, and a whole 66 trackless trolley was abandoned there at Frankford and Cottman, not to mention car windows being busted and so on. But the one thing I'll always remember is how the most prominant thing of all at that intesection -- the Mayfair Theatre, which back at that time was still a theater -- was completely untouched. With destruction of other things going on all around it, given how so drunk out of their skulls many in the crowds were that night, the love everyone had for that theater itself was so great that nobody dared touch it. And that is something I'll always remember.

well maybe the reason he reacted that way because you rambled on about the mayfair theater insted of dealing with him in a business like manner.

It is not the consumer's place to deal with a businessman in a business-like manner. This was a b to c relationship, not a b to b relationship. Back during Mayfair's best days, when the Mayfair Theatre was just as it should be, just as it was designed to be, to serve as a theater, all the businessmen throughout Mayfair understood how b to c relationships are supposed to work, which is why Mayfair was such an enjoyable place to go to back then. Now, however, Mayfair is like a charity where people go to shop not because they really want to, but out of shear dread that it will become even more blighted if they don't. And the only real reason why it's not looking more blighted right now than it is is because it's getting all these government bailouts (re: your and my taxdollars)so as to look halfway decent, albeit in a very propped up fashion. Don't believe me? Hey, see for yourself. Just look at that big sign they have along Frankford Avenue in front of the Mayfair Theatre that reads: "Mayfair, a Great Place to Work and Live," and then look down at the bottom left where it lists the name of three current politicians -- John Perzel, Joan Krajewski and Mayor Street. See, to me, a true businessman knows how to run a business in such a way that they don't require vast expenditures of your and my taxdollars to make it look like they know what the heck they're doing. And the businessmen of the original Mayfair were true businessmen. Then came the new breed, the Stecks and so on, all just in it for themselves and we the consumer be damned. And if you criticized this new breed in anyway they'd penalize you by not repairing your word processor right or what have you. Which is exactly what did happen in my case when I simply spoke the truth regarding the Mayfair Theatre to that Steck guy. When I got the word processor home, the damned thing didn't work, I had a college term paper I needed to get down for class that night, so I called up the Steck guy and made him come out to my house to fix it there. He did so, but only when I made it clear I'd kill him if he didn't (figuratively speaking, of course.) Several years later. when Bill Clinton, campaigning for president, made a stop at the Mayfair Diner, I remember hoping he'd see that Pennypack Theatre building and quicky point out to U.S. Rep Borski and others who were campaigning with him that day that it needs to get back to being a theater once more, just as any truly great presidential candidate would have done.

To better explain, did you ever see the movie, "The Last Picture Show"? In that film, the closing down of the town's movie theater in the film's finale is the ultimate symbol of the town's demise and death. Meantime, in Ambler and in Phoenixville we're seeing the exact opposite of this going on right now, now that their movie theaters are being newly brought to life once more. And yes, though they might be getting government grants to aid in the restoration (your and my taxdollars), at least in this case it's for something the people really want. But do I want my taxdollars being wasted on bailing out a businessmen who resents my love of movie theaters, not to mention resenting doing what I;m paying them my hard-earned dollars to do? Well what do you think? And just out of curiosity, what brings you to the Cinema Treasures website anyway, HDTV? For I get a sense you don't like movie theaters very much, going by your above commentary...

Oops! I meant to say "Mayfair Theatre" in that second to last paragraph above, not "Pennypack." Freudian slip I suppose.
For the Pennypack Theatre building up Frankford Avenue to Mayfair's north east is perfectly positioned to becoming a movie theater once more, given the sizeable parking lot it has -- the one critically needed thing the Mayfair Theatre building is totally lacking right now. And with no way of changing this without causing undue hardship to other businesses in close proximity -- including Steck (though, given the type businessman he is, he'd never appreciate my saying this.)

The Eckerd theatre that has taken over the former Mayfair theater lobby is closing in January of 2006.

Meaning that it might be open to being a movie theater once more? While I certainly would love to see this, I'm not sure that it could be done in the face of the fact that it has no parking whatsoever. Keep in mind that it came into being when getting around by car was far more the exception than the norm. And because of this it had a foothold of acceptance by the time the age of the automobile came into being. For the span of a generation people were well adjusted to the concept of not going to the Mayfair by car. "To the Mayfair you go by public transit or on foot." Nothing at all seemed strange or unusual about it. Because that was all many had been used to since birth. And to the generation before that, that had been the norm with everything.

And now here it is, 2005 heading into 2006, and we're all fully accustomed to reaching anything that's totally new by car. And though if the Mayfair were restored it would hardly be "new," it would indeed be totally new to anyone who never knew it as a movie theater. In other words, unlike how it is with the Pennypack Theatre, which does have parking, it would be a real challenge to breathe all new cinematic life into that Mayfair Theatre building again. And even I, who grew up with its being a theater, don't know that I could ever get back to using it frequently the way I once did. It's like that girl you love madly who dumps you, and after you finally get over her, it taking many years to do so, here she is, suddenly back in your life once more, begging you to take her back. But you're married to someone else now, and you love the one you're married to now, so it's like, what do you say???

But nonetheless, nothing would make me happier than to see others get hold of the Mayfair Theatre building and successfully make it a movie theater once more to bring the joy and happiness to the next generation the same joy and happiness it once brought to me. But see, in my mind, the Mayfair Theatre is so affixed as being a certain way, so much so that if I was overseeing the project I'd always be trying to make it that same way again -- which would be totally impossible now, given how much all the other factors of the over all gestalt have changed. The Pennypack Theatre on the other hand I never got to know as a movie theater, so my relationship to that is there's no pre-fixed conceptions.

As much as I'd like to see the return of the Mayfair Theatre for sentimental reasons, it'll never happen. The Fox brothers (the owners) will simply find a new tenant for the Eckert space. Unless, of course, someone comes along and offers them a pile of money for the building. But rebuilding the Mayfair is simply not economically viable.

To Jack Ferry:

Although what you say of it not being economically viable to restore that Mayfair Theatre building as a movie theater is valid, my feeling is that it's far more an attitude problem Northeast Philadelphia currently suffers from that ultimately prevents this theater building from ever being made a theater again.

Meantime, the design of the Mayfair Theatre is such that it literally screams, "I'M SUPPOSED TO BE A MOVIE THEATER!!!" when efforts are made to try to make it something else and with this misuse not being fully noticeable. As anyone who passes through Mayfair can readily see, it is clearly the centerpiece of all Mayfair, and so prominantly so, that it's hard if not totally impossible to do anything with it other than allowing it to be a movie theater without this putting a tremendous dampener businesswise on all other businesses that surround it. That theater building, as a theater, puts a face on Mayfair that it totally lacks otherwise. And there is something a bit blasphamous its being put to other uses.

As I'm sure you know, all Mayfair at one time had been the sizeable estate of the great 19th century stage actor Edwin Forrest. And even after his estate was cleared and Mayfair was created, it appears that there something in his spirit that persistently lived on there, evidence of this in the success of onetime Mayfair resident Sylvester Stallone, and more recently, Joanne Picutti (hope I spelled that right) who was literally born to play the part of Annie in the Broadway production. Only for Broadway to make the terrible mistake of pulling her from it.

And the fact that the Devon Theatre is now being restored to be a live performing arts theater in face of the fact that it stands on what once had been part of Edwin Forrest's estate is more than just mere coincidence. And subconsciously at least, I believe the fact that all Mayfair had once been Forrest's estate is why a theater -- in this case the Mayfair Theatre -- was chosen to be its centerpiece.

But there are certain decision-makers reigning over Mayfair now who are not getting it for some reason. And they're losers all if you really take the time to examine them more closely. And Mayfair citizens are allowing them to hold reign without question, even though I believe they would like to get passed them now -- only to be told, "Well, it takes money..."

Last October, when I was taking a walking tour of Holmesburg's main consumer business district with Holmesburg Civic Association head Fred Moore, we ran into the man currently in charge of restoring the Devon Theatre. We asked him how it was going, and he quickly replied that the effort was greatly short of funds. And it immediately blurted out of me before I could think of what I was saying, "It's a shame you have to think of the project strictly in terms of money." His eyes immediately darted to Fred with a look that said, "Hey Fred, your friend here has a great sense of humor!" Both he and Fred then both had a very good laugh over it. But yet there are times when lacking money is not the real problem. Rather, it's the absence of intelligent thinking. And that seems to be the biggest problem right now in Mayfair's case. To be sure, the intelligence is there, it's there as much as is the enduring spirit of Edwin Forrest himself, but the good folks of Mayfair are allowing monetary thinking to take precendence over it -- hence the number one reason why the Mayfair Theatre has not gotten to be a theatre since 1985.

Even though it does lack parking, it could work again as a theater if it were made a community theater. But it would require a bit of a revolution on the part of the people of Mayfair. A willingness to rise up and throw off the shackles of the John Perzels, Joan Krajewskis and others that now have it so locked down. I saw first hand that power Mayfair has once. I saw it in the Flyers Stanley Cup celebrations back in 1975. And as I say, the one thing I'll always remember of the many things that got vandalized that night, the one thing that loomed up in the middle of it but that didn't get touched in the least was the Mayfair Theatre. And that I look back upon now as having been a type of miracle. For all around it that night there were storefront windows getting smashed left and right, small fires of trash being set in the Cottman-Frankford intersection, a 66 bus halted there at Cottman and being totally torn to pieces, and so forth and so on. But while all this was happening I turned and looked to the theater, and it was if it had some sort of a special force field all around it. Not quite a glow, but something that seemed to say, whatever you do, people, spare this. And the drunken revelers that night did spare it. And I'll never forget that.

So with that said, despite all this money talk, I think the people of Mayfair come January should stand up and say, no, no, this is going to become our beloved theater once more. For there are times to say, hey, money is not all there is. And now I believe is one of those times...

CORRECTION:

Although the Philadelphia Flyers again won the Stanley Cup in 1975, it was in 1974 when the big riot I describe took place there in Mayfair. The celebrations that took place there the following year, 1975, were much more civil, and even more peaceful still the year following that when the Flyers failed to get the "Hat Trick in '76" that everyone had hoped for...

There is always a celebration at Frankford and Cottman when a sports team wins. Comcast SportsNet had live shots out there when the Eagles made it to the SuperBowl last season.

I gotta agree with Jack here. I have alot of awesome memories of the Mayfair theatre from my youth. Taking the 66 down. Having that and then the Merben down the street.

But as much as Id totally love to see the Mayfair theatre come back as a movie theater again, it is highly unlikely that will happen.

The economic climate doesn't dictate it. Lacking money is the big problem. How do you plan on getting the Mayfair back to its old form and renovations? Magic? The last time I checked renovations cost money. Then once it opens up, it takes money to keep it running by people supporting it.

I worked in the Mayfair near the end. There were lots of nights with 10 or less seats filled and hundreds empty. While the poor film selection was one factor, the sad truth is that the theater could not pull its own weight. If someone put in the hundreds of thousands of dollars it would take for restoration, I don't see how they'd ever get their money back out of it.

Still, maybe I lack vision. I have seen an old theater restored, revitalizing the entire community. In that case, someone literally put lottery winnings into the massive restoration project and it was a fantastic result. (The Allen Theatre in Annville PA.) Even then it was a smaller scale project given it was an existing (but closed) theater.

I agree that Mayfair needs a focal point and something to rally around. A fully restored Mayfair Theatre might do that, but for how long and at what cost?

There's one very feasible way I could see the Mayfair Theatre building becoming a theater once more, but it would require very bold thinking on all the businesses surrounding it. In my vision, the theater itself would be made a nonprofit, and all the businesses around it would contribute towards its full restoration plus its day-to-day operational costs thereafter. And they would do so to increase their own profitability. In other words, the money they would put into the theater they would not make back through the theater itself, but through their own businesses nearby being uplifted by it. Restaurants in the area would have a same day relationship with it, along with pizza parlors, coffee shops and so on. That is to say, these are the type businesses people would cater the same day they went to see a movie at that theater.

And then there's also what you can call separate day relationships. These would be hobby stores in the area, clothing stores, toy stores, etc. And in some cases even auto dealerships. In other words, someone would go to the theater and like the type of clothing they see a star wearing in the movie. And they'd like to buy clothes such as that -- but not necessarily the same day they see the movie. Meaning that one day they're there in Mayfair seeing a movie at the theater, and the next they're shopping in Mayfair clothing shops hoping to find clothes similar to what they saw a star wearing in the movie at the Mayfair Theatre the night before. Or shoes, or what have you. So in the separate day relationship the theater would be like advertising. And how much do businesses these days spend on advertising? Yet why spend it that way rather than by restoring the nearby movie theater? For movies put products in a special context, and far better than any commercials can. The Tom Hanks movie "Castaway" did far more to boost Fed Ex's bottom line than any commercial ever did! And let's not forget that the Fess Parker movie "Davy Crockett" back in the '50s did more to help the sale of coonskin caps than any commercial ever possibly could have.

And here's another thing to consider:

I've seen old b&w photos of the Mayfair Theatre where they had banners hanging beneath the marquee proclaiming how the theater was air-conditioned. And this at a time and in an area where few if any houses around were air-conditioned at the time. The technology was very new, not to mention expensive, so many were very skeptical of it. So by the Mayfair Theatre's being air-conditioned, it went a long way in erasing that skepticism. And I wouldn't be surprised if the Mayfair Theatre went a long way in selling people on the idea of wall-to-wall carpeting as well. That, too, being something totally new. And in today's world there's geothermal heating and cooling technology which is having a hard time catching on more. It's expensive to install, and many people are doubtful of it. Yet when you go straight down Cottman Avenue and get to State Road, there's a company right there at that corner that specializes in installing it, and nobody knows about it. But they sure as heck would if the Mayfair Theatre had it, and if everyone who experienced it there at the theater loved how well it worked!

Too often today businesses want to see immediate returns, and that, I fear, might be the biggest problem ailing Mayfair right now. Over time I believe they would get huge returns from their investing in the Mayfair Theatre's full restoration, but not necessarily right away. At the same time, they sure won't get that longterm return, not even close, if it's just made another ho hum drug store again.

I know from my own experience back when I was a kid I used to shop at that hobby shop there in Mayfair all the time. And was there a correlation between that and the theater? You bet! If I saw "Blue Max" at the theater one day, three days later or so I was there at the hobby shop buying the new model kit of the blue max plane. Or if I saw John Lennon wearing a turtle neck in the movie "Help!" I'd be at Fleet's several days later buying up turtle necks. Meaning that if the theater, and the businesses around it, are in sync, everybody gains from its being a theater. And an Eckerds drug store at that site can't even begin to have that same magical uplifting effect on all that's around it. That Eckerds was geared just to be stop and go. And that's just what people do. They stop there, and then they go on, given how it doesn't promote in any way anything that's around it. For how could it? It's just a drug store, not a theater.

Was the drugstore using the auditorium or just the lobby? Or the murals still visible on the side walls of the auditoriums? I hope Jack Ferry posts his photos!

According to Irv Glazer's hardback book Philadelphia Theares, A-Z, the Mayfair opened with 1009 seats.

Theaters don't reopen because of hot air on this website. They reopen because companies, or more usually, nonprofit organizations are formed to save & reopen them. And, with no disrespect meant, TheaterBuff 1 doesn't have a viable business plan to make that happen, not for acquisition or rental, not for renovation, and not for reuse.

The drugstore just used the lobby area. The murals aren't visable in the store.

While the drugstore just used the lobby area, I think that the stores along Cottman may have been expanded back somewhat to use some of the auditorium space. I'm not sure about this, but I know that the Wine & Spirits store goes back a lot further than it used to when the theater was open. There was also remodeling of the Ryan Avenue side of the theater. The exit doors used to come out on a ramp that went below street level. (At least for the northernmost exit door - closest to the screen.) The ramp was apparently filled in, and all the doors are now at street level. They appear to be used for deliveries to the Cottman Avenue businesses. Guess what I'm saying is that I doubt that the auditorium is still there, but the shell of it is still in place. I'm pretty sure I remember someone telling me that the seats had been removed during the remodeling.

I did find a photo of the art deco mural, but unfortunately this site is not accepting photos so I can't post it. I also have a photo of the marquee that says "HI JACK". A friend that worked there after me put that up while changing the sign, took the photo, then quickly changed the letters back to the current feature.

The picture I would love to have is the one that hung in the manager's office when I was there. They had the architect's pencil drawing of the front of the theater in a cheap Woolworth's frame. Even at the time I thought I should copy it, but never did. Not sure about this, but I think the owner came in one night and took it with him.

As I have with some of my theater photos, please open a free account on any website such as http://www.flickr.com/
post your photos there. Then, link your flickr site on a comment here, as I have with some of my photos of theaters, see http://www.flickr.com/photos/howardbhaas/
Linking other websites with photos is quite common for this website, and a good thing, since it won't overload this site. I am really eager to see your photos, if you will be so kind! Thanks.

Here's the mural. http://www.flickr.com/photos/99041851@N00/84183605/
I'll try to add the marquee shot once I get a chance to scan it.

Correction:

HowardBHaas's commentary saying I don't have a viable business plan for restoring the Mayfair Theatre is 100% misleading, as I never claimed I did, just the complete opposite. I would love to be able to see it happen, but due to its total lack of parking as well as other factors, his guess is as good as mine how it could be possible. Right here and now that is...

Jack Ferry-
THANKS! Wonderful photo of the Art Deco mural. Do you have more photos of the murals? Were there only two murals, huge ones on each side wall of the auditorium?
Loved your other photos, too, looks wonderful!

What I love about the mural is how it reveals how much freer and more progressive a world Northeast Philadelphia had been back when the Mayfair Theatre had been at its height. If a theater were built in today's Northeast Philadelphia and it had murals of that nature, all the morons that hold reign over today's Northeast Philadelphia would complain about it and prevail, whereby back when I was a kid it was simply art. And because of Northeast Philly's higher intelligence level back then no one thought anything twice about it. But in later years came the Steck type businessmen, and maybe this mural, which I myself had no especial memories of, explains why he glared at me so annoyedly that day when I expressed sadness that the Mayfair Theatre building across the street was no longer a movie theater. It's sort of like that "All In the Family" episode where Mike & Gloria are given this replica of Rodin's "The Kiss" and feel totally flattered to recieve such a gift, recognizing it for its inherent beauty, but when Archie gets home while Mike & Gloria are away, all he sees in it is pure obscenity.

Whatever the case, thanks for providing us with a photo of that wonderful mural, Jack, while I wonder if that one plus others the Mayfair Theatre contained still exist, given all these years now that Mayfair's been in the oppressive grips of America's "Taliban."

I just posted two additional photos of the Mayfair at http://www.flickr.com/photos/99041851@N00/85020767/ One is a 1937 screen capture from "It Happened In Mayfair" (I figure it's okay to post since in public domain) and a 1984 or so shot of the marquee.

Glad to hear you enjoyed the mural photo. Yes, there were matching art deco murals on both side walls that ran the length of the wall. Unfortunately, I don't have any other photos of it.

TheaterBuff1, it's funny you mention the "progressive" nature of the mural. I remember when I was a kid being amazed that they had naked people on the wall. It may have been the first art with nudes that I saw. I sort of remember thinking "how can they get away with that"?

Anyone know of any other photos of the Mayfair?

Random memory of the Mayfair:
When I was an usher there we wore the boring red formless mid-butt length blazers with thin black lapels, along with a tie, white shirt, and black pants. However, backstage I found a very old waist length purple jacket with gold braiding. Not sure, but I think it dated from at least the 60s or older. It was a great design, but too faded and worn out to actually use.
Random thought#2: I should also mention that there was a large room below the stage that we called the usher's room that was mainly used for drinking and other unsavory activities.

My childhood memories of the theater are so different in that my friends and I spent many a Saturday afternoon there at the matinees, but I cannot recall anytime ever anyone -- whether it was my friends, or anyone's parents or whoever -- saying anything unusual about the murals, other than they thought they were "pretty" at best, or at worst. It was simply art, and nothing more than that. That is, paint on plaster, not actual human beings. And when "The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie" was shown there in 1968 or so -- the first time I ever saw nudity in a film at the Mayfair (a brief shot of actress Pamela Franklin nude where she's posing for an artist) -- I have absolutely no recollections of anyone complaining about it. The scene did stand out, yes, but not as anything "terrible." Only that motion pictures were becoming more and more sophisticated, the "Moral Majority" and all that still lightyears away in the future. But regarding the murals, since all my friends and I had been exposed to them since birth, I suppose it was just that thing psychologists call "sensory adaption." That is, if you're exposed to a stimulus constantly it is totally unnoticable to you. But given the long hiatus it's been since I'd seen the interior of the Mayfair Theatre last, only now is it registering what had been nothing strange or unusual back when my friends and I were kids. But certainly not in such a way that has me now as an adult saying, "Oh now I see why they shut it down and good thing they did!" Given how that mural appears to be a great example of Art Deco era painting, something I know full well now but didn't have any inkling of back then, I'm all the more upset that America's "Taliban" came along to shut it down when it did. For America's Taliban is what needs to be shut down, not our classic neighborhood movie theaters! And nothing says it better than this mural does, hoping some of it -- if not all - still exists.

Found a few more shots of the Mayfair, including the murals.
http://www.philadelphiabuildings.org/pab/app/ho_display.cfm/91631

To Jack Ferry:

If you update your profile to include your e-mail address, or visit my profile page to get my e-mail address, I have 7 photos I took of the Mayfair Theatre building back on November 3rd of last year that I'd be more than happy to share with you to share with others. By rights, I should head down to Mayfair to get some more photos of it, and next time I get a chance to I will. These ones I have, meantime, just show various shots of it from the outside.

Meantime, have you or anyone else heard anything new regarding the latest on what hdtv267 claimed about Eckerds vacating it sometime this month? Or was it just a baseless rumor?

It is hardly a baseless rumour. There are signs in the windows of the store saying that it is closing on 1/12/06.

I was in the Eckert two weeks ago and they were starting the clearance sale.

So then it's now officially closed, now that it's Friday the 13th as it were?

Also, when you mentioned the Fox brothers as being its owners, Jack, is that the same Fox as in Fox & Soblosky credited in the documentary, "It Happened in Mayfair 1937"? Or no relation?

Hmm. I don't know. They owned it when I was there in the early 80's, and still own it today. According to city property records, there was a deed to them in 1977 for $476,600.00. I always thought they got their theaters (about a dozen, I think) from their parents, but that was probably just my assumption. So, I don't know if they're related to the Fox in Fox & Soblosky, but it's possible.

One thing I feel totally certain of is that with the right political leadership here in Northeast Philadelphia that building could become a classy neighborhood theater once more. Or, for that matter, if there were no politicians here in Northeast Philly at all. For I can't even begin to imagine being the owner of that building and not want to make it a theater again.

Jack, when you worked there towards the end and there were nights when 10 seats or less were filled and hundreds empty, can you remember specific movie titles from that period? For I can remember the transitional phase Northeast Philly was going through at that time. The senior citizens and retirees living around were like kings, and it was very tough going for anyone not in that category. And add to that, what were the movie releases like around that time? For all told it seems it was a terrible time to try to keep a movie theater going at that location at that particular point in time. The seniors and retirees seemingly had no special want or need for it, while those not in that category who did pretty were much discounted as "unimportant" -- politically most certainly. And making it into a drugstore was obviously in response to the high senior citizen population at that time.

But that demographic has shifted considerably now, hence why Eckerds timed itself to close when it did. And right now what's to become of the Mayfair Theatre building next is an absolute mystery. The great thing to do would be to push to make it a movie theater once more now that Eckerds has departed, but greatness is very much an orphan right now. For contrary to what hdtv267 thinks, it's not money that's lacking in this instance, it's greatness itself. A major and sudden political shift right now could change that equation. Or, if it can't be that, then a sudden waking up among the everyday people themselves. And right now in Mayfair's case neither is happening.

The Eckerd is now offically closed. The windows and glass doors have been covered over from the inside with butcher paper. I hope that it is butcher paper, well its brown in colour (that is the canadian spelling not a typo) and could be wrapping paper or just paper that they use to wrap boxes when boxes are shipped using the various shipping companies like USPS, FedEx and DHL.

The ECKERD lettering on the former marquee that replaced the words Mayfair have been removed as well. I am not privy to the knowledge to know where those letters have been placed. My guess is in a storeage facility, but again I don't want to post any unsubstaniated rumours (again Canadien spelling).

So yes indeed, the Eckerd is definately closed. Whatever ends up there in its place, I sincerely hope that it is a good fit for the neigbourhood and a success for owners and citizens alike.

Jack's photos of the marquee in 1984 look great. Today's movie theaters don't look so good in comparision. My guess is original marquee sign's letters are in a "storage facility" but one called a dump, unless anyone has a specific reason to think they were stored away somewhere.

My strong feeling firmly remains that it should become a classy neighborhood theater once more. For without its serving this vital role, there is really no "there" there when we speak of Mayfair as it is today.

However, it would be a huge mistake to try to running it as a business unto itself. For rather than a revenue generator, it should be seen as a "revenue generation enhancer" with regard to all the other businesses around it. And because I do believe it would go a long way in boosting the profitability of all the other businesses around it, all of which pay business taxes, the new revenues the city would realize from this would be tremendous.

Thus I would suggest the city should foot the cost of its full restoration and day-to-day operational expenses rather than any private benefactors or corporate sponsors assuming this cost. Why? Because the city, through its business tax collection, would be in position to make its money back and then some. And only the city is in that position.

And from the city's perspective, because of its unique position, the Mayfair Theatre would not be a charity, but an investment. And I would say an excellent one at that. For to be sure, it would both rescue and resuscitate Mayfair at the same time. And what shy of that, with regard to the Mayfair Theatre building's future fate, could achieve that?

The City has no money to invest, not even in the Boyd, because over the last half a century rocket scientists like you bled it to death by imposing high taxes. Even if the City had money, would you have it invest in typewriters, horses and carriages, and phonographs? Single screen theaters aren't viable anymore in most places, including most of Philadelphia.

I don't mean that no single screen theater is viable, as there are some I can think of that are making money. But, many neighborhoods can't support a single screen theater.

Just to correct Mr. Haas on two specific points here, single-screen theaters, operated in a classy manner, aren't supposed to make money in and of themselves. Rather, the money made, and that's needed to keep them in operation is this manner, is made by the businesses around them that are uplifted by those businesses being in close proximity to them -- just as is now the case with the Ambler Theatre out in Ambler, Pennsylvania and the Colonial Theatre in Phoenixville, Pennsylvania. Not to mention a zillon and one other single-screen theaters I can also name. And the second point that needs correcting is Mr. Haas's mis-belief -- when he compares single-screen theaters to typewriters, horses & buggies, etc. -- that single-screen theaters are somehow "inferior" to multiplexes and seeing movies on TV. If only he could grasp how insulting to the intellect that mis-belief he holds truly is! For even the most advanced high definition digital televisions of today haven't even begun to scratch the surface in terms of surpassing the experience of seeing a well-directed movie on a large screen in the context of a well-run single-screen theater! Not to mention that digital technology itself is in position to make the single-screen movie theater experience a thousand times better than when single-screen theaters were in prominance last.

And with regards to the Mayfair Theatre, I have yet to come across one single multiplex theater anywhere that can even begin to hold a candle to how wonderful an experience it used to be when seeing movies shown at the Mayfair Theatre! For seriously, it's like trying to compare dining at Center City Philadelphia's Le Bec Fin to eating at a Wendy's Restaurant! Mr. Haas, in his shear arrogance, keeps insisting that we're not supposed to notice any difference, rather than we ourselves being able to assert what it is that we prefer. And why is he doing this? Chances are it's because he himself is incapable of offering anyone anything of high quality and therefore doesn't want anyone else doing this either, lest we all see him for who he truly is.

Of course, the movie experience was superior in a single screen movie house! We are just not going to return to those days.

There were a few downtown movie PALACES that studios tolerated if they didn't make a profit, but any single screen neighborhood moviehouse, like the Mayfair, had to make a profit or CLOSE.

The Ambler isn't single screen. There are two "black box" (megaplex style) auditoriums carved within it, and the main, middle auditorium not yet restored or reopen will make a total of three.

The Colonial, which I frequent, is nonprofit and also has live events.

The choice for the Boyd was demolition or reinvention to being a viable theater, just as the choice was for so many nationwide. I've spent 4 years leading a group fighting to save it, see it properly restored, and working to include a film series, public tours, and exhibits of its history. Those four years are volunteer, and cost my income, savings, and free time dearly and the correspondent calls ME arrogant! So, far as I know, the extent of his effort is taking a
few photos of the exteriors of theaters, and ranting on this site.

With all due respect, Mr. Haas, the old adage "Look before you leap" apparently means nothing to you, otherwise you'd realize that I've done far more than simply take photos of theater exteriors and "rant" on this site as you put it -- which appears to be your second favorite word next to "unrealistic." Your whole approach, meantime, just seems to be one of concurring with whatever the Philadelphia political machine dictates without ever questioning anything. Er, I believe it's called "opportunism." Meaning that okay, in your case, using your approach, you get to save the historic Boyd Theatre building from demolition, but then for what purpose? For that's the way I look at things, and what I mean by "look before you leap." I see well directed movies exhibited in well-run theaters as a powerful means of raising awareness in people, of opening their eyes to how things could be much better than they currently are; to make them more attuned to how their lives are being greatly shortchanged by the current status quo. And to be sure, Philadelphia could use a healthy dose of that right now. For we are a very very sad city right now just in case you don't know. And made all the more so when the classic movie theaters we have in our neighborhoods are currently serving as drugstores or fur shops or supermarkets or what have you, and "authority figures" like you putting forth a hail of criticism when people like me try to think out ways they can be brought back to life once more.

For instance, Mr. Haas, I notice on your profile page how you don't list a single movie you like, even though that's ultimately what movie theaters are all about. By leaving that part of your profile page blank, you come across as a framemaker who doesn't think very highly of paintings. Meaning, what's your ultimate goal really? To restore the Boyd Theater in such a way so that the end result will be like an art museum with ornate but empty picture frames hanging on all its gallery walls? For if that's your goal, well good for you, but it's certainly not mine. With me it's all or nothing. I'm not into resuscitating classic theaters in such a way so that the end result will just be this very dead thing. For take a good hard look at the status quo of Philadelphia right now, Howard, Northeast Philly especially. We have losers on the top and winners on the bottom, but with few if any current Northeast Philly residents knowing any the better. And when they ask for better, such as the Mayfair Theatre restored as a classy neighborhood theater they are told, "No, you don't want that, you want a crappy chain drugstore there instead." And the best you can do in the face of this is toss around meaningless words like "unrealistic" and "rant." And all told I'd say that's a pretty worthless "contribution" on your part, and little to be impressed with.

I see up to 100 movies a year, and have too many favorites to list. I see them mostly at the classic moviehouses, and somehow I doubt you are ever there.

You are a minority of one in your neighborhood, spouting hot air while whatever happens to your theaters happens without you.
Whatever happens to your theaters, though, is not a "beautiful frame" but as you say "crappy" uses, and often such theaters lose more and more of their original architecture inside and outside, until demolition.

You accomplish nothing except to annoy people who are working- or volunteering- to make this City a better place!

Enough already.

Since the topic of this page is the Mayfair Theatre, as I understand it, Mr. Haas, you yourself have no viable plan of how it could be restored as a classy neighborhood movie theater now that Eckerds Pharmacy has recently vacated it. But what I fail to understand is how you go from your own lacking of such a plan to being harshly critical of those such as I who look for ways that it possibly could become a classy movie theater once more. You seem to think there's only one way of doing things, your way, and if those tactics won't work then that's the end of the story. Case closed. And if I or anyone else disagrees with you, then you accuse us of being "unrealistic," "ranting," and now the newest term you're tossing about is "libel," which of late appears to be your third favorite word. And quite frankly I feel that's about as Taliban-like as it gets!

For I just want to say to you, welcome to America, Mr. Haas, a country where we're free to do things a bit differently than how they're done in Afghanistan, Pakistan or whatever other oppressive country you're apparently so anxious to see Philadelphia emulate. We were a very great city once, and we can be a great city again. And why you object to that goal so much I have nooooooo idea. But I would very much appreciate if you'd focus you energies more constructively -- such as restoring Philadelphia's last standing movie palace, the Boyd Theatre, the right way, as opposed to misinterpreting to others various comments I've posted throughout this Cinema Treasures website. Thank you!

It will be interesting to see you convince the City of Philadelphia to provide "the cost of its full restoration and day-to-day operational expenses"

It would be equally interesting to see pigs fly.

Maybe we can all clap our hands and make it happen?

I think we should all gather together and hold hands while singing Kumbaya.

Agreed!

no, we need to put on the ruby slippers and click our heels three times.

Yes! That's a splendid way of using positive thinking to return the moviehouse to single screen daily operation as a "classy neigbhorhood movie theater" in our great city!

On 1-27-06 at the Ziegfeld page http://cinematreasures.org/theater/12/
Theaterbuff1 wrote "in no instance have I ever requested that merchants, Hollywood, or the City carry the burden themselves."

But, on 1-17-06 above, he wrote: "Thus I would suggest the city should foot the cost of its full restoration and day-to-day operational expenses...."

What the Mayfair Theatre building in its closed up state today says loud and clear is that this Mayfair community in Northeast Philadelphia today is overwhelmingly dominated by some of this stupidest people ever slither from mothers' wombs, with proof positive of what I'm saying being instantly seeable in the remarks of the last three commentators. But to see what I'm saying, you DO have to be intelligent. And clearly that's not Howard B. Haas, a man who has charge of Philadelphia's last movie palace but is at a total loss on how to restore it properly despite all the intelligent advice he has been given in this regard, hdtv267, who is too low I.Q.d to grasp the satire of and appreciate the humor when someone calls a Cold Stone Creamery a Stone Cold Crematory, and finally, Jack Ferry, the one of the three above commentators who totally surprised me. For Jack, you're one of the three commentators above who at least knew the Mayfair Theatre building back when it was still in opertion as movie theater. However, it's a shame you never got to experience it back when it was in its prime, that is, back when Northeast Philly residents like me were in the vast majority around here. The years when you worked there was when lowlifes from Kensington began overtaking the Northeast, led by the unintelligent leadership provided by the Mayor Frank Rizzo, Councilwoman Joan Krajewski and others. All told it was a very sad time indeed, as all this territory up here had been so beautiful prior to then. But boy, did those inner city lowlifes flooding up into here overwhelm it and bring it down in a hurry! In brief, I think of that 1980s movie "Gremlins" as the perfect allegory of what it had been like.

Anyway, the remarks the three of you made may play well with those with very low I.Q.s, but trust me, guys, nobody with any intelligence would be swayed by them.

And if it wasn't bad enough converting the classic Mayfair Theatre to a drug store to symbolize just how intelligent the Mayfair community had become, at least in terms of its majority, now we're really seeing unintelligence coming at NE Philly to the max full throttle with the latest proposal being to convert it to a bank. For seriously folks! This is just so totally laughable! And how is that those of you who support this proposal are not just totally embarrassed by your absolute stupidity? For it just can't get any dumber than that, can it?

TheaterBuff sees the Light! Everybody else is stupid!

TheaterBuff leads the way! All other leaders are stupid!

TheaterBuff didn't slither from his mother's womb!

Way back when, the majority were like TheaterBuff!

Now, TheaterBuff is the only one!

TheaterBuff knows! Theaterbuff sees! Theaterbuff hears! Theaterbuff speaks! Theaterbuff writes!

Uh, yes, and who, pray tell, might you be, TheaterBuff3? Also, I'd be very curious to know who TheaterBuff2 is. So hey, TheaterBuff2 if you're out there somewhere reading this, please feel free to jump in and add your comments if you wish as well!

Meantime, just to demonstrate some of my wondrous power of super-human insight, it's not too hard to figure out from that last message posted, going by the time when it was posted, precisely who TheaterBuff3 is. So hello there, Solieri (presuming you saw "Amadeaus" and thus know just what I mean by that)... :)

Hope no one minds if I return to discussing the Mayfair :)

Had a few more random thoughts about the theater.

Until sometime in the 1970s, the candy stand was in the back of the theater on the left. (That is, after you go through the lobby doors, you'd go to your left to get your popcorn and over-priced Junior Mints.) The candy stand was set back in the wall next to the ladies room. (And I must disclose that my memory on this is pretty foggy.)

However, sometime prior to 1980 the candy stand was boarded up and a new free standing candy stand was built immediately opposite of the lobby doors. (Right up against the partition for the seats, in the center between the two aisles.) The old candy stand area was then used as a janitors closet.

The partition at the back of the seats had a glass panel at the top, and I usually stood there ushering. One fun thing I remember was during the run of Friday the 13th. There's a scene where Jason jumps out of the lake and startles the audience. I usually made a point of standing in the back to watch the audience reaction, which was always amusing.

Theaterbuff loves Amadeus!

Theaterbuff does not aspire to be Mozart. He aspires to be Spartacus!

Jack:

Back in the 1950s and '60s, which is when I recall the Mayfair Theatre operating at its very best, the concession stand prices weren't high at all. And I can remember admission being only 50 cents! Don't ask me how they did it, but somehow they did. And add to this that the crowds were always very well behaved. The much higher prices on everything all came later, along with the unruliness and evident signs of wear and tear.

Which reminds mr, TheaterBuff3, do you recall exactly where you and I saw "Amadeus" together? I remember the movie, but I can't pinpoint where we saw it. Was it downtown, the Fox perhaps? I know 1984 was a long time ago, but try to think back and see if you can remember.

As for "Spartacus, I never saw it, but it seems I can remember your telling me you saw it at the Mayfair back around 1960 or so.

I remember the Mayfair admission price in the mid 70s as $1.50 for adults, 75 cents for children.

A very good point you bring up. For being as I was just a little kid back in the late 1950s and '60s, I have no memories of what the adult admission price at the Mayfair Theatre was, and I apologize for that oversight on my part. Perhaps TheaterBuff3 can remember since he was a year or so older than me.

By the way, does anybody remember when the Redeemer Lutheran Church (where I was baptised, incidentally) held its annual Easter service every year at the Mayfair Theatre? When they held their Easter services there, there were three crosses on stage with special lighting for added dramatic effect and a fiery Pastor Bertrum (the man who baptised me) preaching the sermon. As I understand it, they had to hold their special services there on Easter because the church up on Ryan Avenue wasn't big enough to hold them all. And the turnouts for this as I recall were huge. Anyway, this is just a bit more trivia I thought I should add to the Mayfair Theatre page.

That's interesting. The Mayfair had a very large stage, and I always thought it was a shame it was never used for anything. (Well, "never" meaning in the 70s and 80s. I believe live shows ended there in the 40s or 50s. Not including the time when we ushers got up on stage after hours to sing along with whatever music we had on one night.)

Ah, now that's something I never knew, that it had live performances there other than the Easter services I recall from my early childhood. For being as it doesn't have a stage house (maybe it did at one time?) it seems it would've been very limited. Also, did it have a green room, dressing rooms, wardrobe rooms, and a prop storage room? Also possibly a loading dock in back at one time? And to the best of my memory I can't recall any traces of a onetime orchestra pit. I will say though that the more we talk about this the more I miss it as having been such a classy movie theater so close by! Back in yesteryear we all just took it for granted! And not in a careless, wreckless way, but in simply that was just the norm. And I can't recall ever seeing any movie there that wasn't perfect for seeing at that theater, whether it was "Jason & the Argonauts," "The Agony & the Ecstasy," "Fantastic Voyage," "Planet of the Apes," "The War Wagon." "Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid," "To Sir With Love," and so on. It just seemed to be so versatile in that regard. Which is why it's so hard to understand how it could ever have possibly folded.

Anyhow, anything new on how the bank that's taken it over plans to transform it? I hope they don't alter it too much, because I believe a day will come -- though perhaps not right now -- that it could become a movie theater again. But before it can happen, Mayfair must make up its mind who it is first. At one time that community was a very fixed thing. Then it went into transition, and it's still in this phase to a large degree. But as the babyboomers get older and want to settle down in one place once and for all, at that point I expect Mayfair to stablize once more. So I guess we'll see how it is come then...

In the 70s, there was a tear in the screen that was quite visible at times even though the patch was pretty good. I saw "Torso" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" here as a double bill. I recall seeing "Airport 75" and Charles Bronson in "White Buffalo" in the 70s when the admission price was $1.50. Remember the heavy drapes beyond the entrance that separated the concession area and the auditorium? I miss not being able to stay in a theater all afternoon to watch a favorite movie a second time.

Yes, there was a large greenroom below the stage. (We called it the usher's room, and I do remember there was an old bong in there - gives you some idea of how it was used, but not by me! I used it - the room, not the bong - once or twice when I wanted to take a nap.)

Don't know if there was an orchestra pit, but I think there was. I'm pretty sure that the area in front of the stage had a wood plank floor that probably had been an orchestra pit.

Also don't know if there was a loading dock or other backstage entrance at one time. I don't recall seeing any signs of one, but I didn't have much reason to go behind the screen very often. (The speaker behind the perforated screen was pretty big.)

The heavy drapes hondo59 mentioned were just beyond the ticket taker stand and were intended to keep light out of the auditorium when the lobby door was open.

The ticket taker for many years was a dirty old man named Bill. (He'd be okay with that designation. He spent most of his time ogling the girls that came in.) Great guy. He had worked at another theater years before; I think it may have been the Kent. I remember we were goofing around one night and he grabbed my tie when I was working in the candy stand. He leaned against the stand to get a better grip, and broke the glass display case. Naturally, we said some kids did it and took off.

The late Irvin R. Glazer, in his hardback book Philadelphia Theatres A-Z wrote the following:
MAYFAIR THEATRE, 7300 Frankford Avenue; Capacity 1009, Architect David Supowitz

The entrance area of the Mayfair Theatre is on a triangular lot with the adjoining auditorium built on a rectangular lot giving the 90 by 200 feet theatre access to three streets. A very wide white plastic and neon marquee fronts the cut-off end of the triangle with a deep recess leading into the mirror and chrome decorated foyer. A very ample standing room area behind the seating section was designed so that 300 seats could be added if needed. The walls have an impressionistic mural on each side framed by panels of horizontal colorings. Birch and walnut veneer panels cover the base areas. The floor is steeply pitched towards the wide stage assuring good sight lines.

The theater opened in the fall of 1937 with subsequent run feature pictures and stage shows. By 1940, the Mayfair was showing only moving pictures and by 1950 the policy was double features. The theatre now alternates between single and double features showing the best product available.
(The Mayfair Theatre closed in November, 1985).

in the intro text of the book, Glazer wrote "Big one story art deco styled houses continued to be built, with the President in 1936 and the Frankford-area Mayfair and South Philadelphia Savoia in 1937."

This book was published in 1986 and is out of print. The "theatre" should have been "theater" except when part of actual name, i.e. Mayfair Theatre. I'd also put in caps Art Deco. Although he says the murals were "impressionistic" I think I've read him do that elsewhere where the term "Art Deco" might have been best used. He wasn't always accurate in all details that he wrote about theaters, but we owe him so much for writing on all our theaters and collecting tons of historic photos and documents, now at the Athenaeum.

The book "Philadelphia Architecture: A Guide to the City (1984) includes the Mayfair Theatre with this description:

Streamlining was a favorite mode of design in the 1930's. It was an important aspect of the Art Deco style and reflected America's growing preoccupation with speed and transportation machines. Streamlining had little impact on building design in Philadelphia, but even in conservative cities movie theaters were often designed in this popular style.

The Mayfair was the first movie theater in the city designed in a streamlined manner. Supowitz, the city's outstanding theater designer of the 1930's, transferred the building into a giant sign. The horizontal bands of the curved marquee are repeated in decorative horizontal bands on the wall below, broken by circular display windows. To achieve a sleek appearance, Supowitz used modern materials, including porcelain, structural glass and stainless steel. The Mayfair influenced the design of many subsequent theaters in the city.

Howard Haas note: "structural glass" was often Vitrolite or Carrara glass, brand names.

That's great info. Thanks Howard!

David Supowitz also designed two other Northeast Philadelphia theaters of note -- the Tyson at Castor and Tyson Avenues and the Crest on Rising Sun Avenue several blocks below Cottman.

The former Tyson Theatre is now a furniture store, and as buildings go is well maintained and appears to be in excellent shape. The Crest Theatre, meantime, I believe had been torn down.

Of all these three theaters Supowitz designed up here, the Mayfair was by far the best. It had to be, given the prominance it was given when the all new Mayfair was built!

The latest news on the Mayfair Theatre building, as told me by my brother yesterday (March 9, 2006), is that trash and litter is fast beginning to fill up its boarded up front vestibule, and grafitti artists are wasting no time seizing upon it. And what's the political message? That either it be a drug store or bank or whatever, or it just become what we're seeing it be reduced to now? But for it ever to be restored to a neighborhood theater again is totally out of the question?

What I feel is that Mayfair needs to become its own municipality, quite separate from the rest of the city, with its own mayor, police force and so on. For Mayfair is not a community that can be run unseen, and from a far distance. For we're seeing right now how that alignment is failing miserably. And we're seeing the exact same pattern in communities all throughout the Northeast portion of Philadelphia, ranging from Mayfair to Holmesburg to Burholme to Fox Chase to Bustleton to Somerton and so on.

There was a sign on the building yesterday (the cottman avenue side where folks wait for the 70 bus) proclaiming TENANT OBTAINED. No specifics on who the tenant is though.

I didn't notice any graffiti though, unless CLIP cleaned it off already.

If the Mayfair Theatre building gets converted to something the people of Mayfair can really connect with and love, there's no need for programs such as CLIP. Which was the point I was trying to make many many comments back on this page when I described the Flyers celebrations/riots that took place at that Frankford & Cottman intersection in 1974. The rioters went after all else, but the Mayfair Theatre as I say was completely unscathed. At which point all the other merchants of Mayfair should have asked themselves: "What are we all doing wrong that the Mayfair Theatre is doing right?" Instead, a whole battalion of cops was brought in to beat the people down for expressing what they really thought through their actions. I remember that night very vividly. A thousand and one billyclubs suddenly tearing their way into the drunken crowds and swinging this way and that, the sounds of screams and cracking bones and the sight of blood immediately following. I managed to stay out of harm's way, however, given how I stayed close to the Mayfair Theatre the whole time, where all was very calm.

It was just brought to my attention today that it's pretty close to impossible for most people to look upon the Mayfair Theatre as it is today as a "work of art." And in all fairness to those who don't see it that way, it made me realize that when I look at it, not only do I see it as it is here and now, all boarded up and much stripped down of most if not all the many embellishments it once had had, but I also see it as it once was. That is, as an alive and well theater and being run in the best possible way. And very little if indeed any indication of that shows now. And naturally there's no way I can take photographs of what I can now only see in my memories. And yes, it could well be that my memory is creative in that what I think I remember differs greatly from what actually once was. Children see things much more specially than we the adults do, and to be sure, my best memories of the Mayfair were when I was at my youngest. As a child everything looks so much bigger, of course, not to mention that a child's focus is much more selective. And children are powerless to destroy things the way we the adults so readily do. And now as adults we've become one heck of a tough audience to so easily please. And with the Mayfair Theatre building being at its worst ever at this moment at that.

Money-wise, there's no question it would cost a fortune to bring the Mayfair Theatre up to what most adults today would regard as a "work of art." But instead of thinking strictly in terms of money, what about imagination-wise? Have we adults become so dead in this regard that we can't even write out on paper at the very least what changes and alterations the Mayfair Theatre would require so as to readily be recognized by everyone as a work of art? For instance, can we simply make a list of what it is we don't like about the Mayfair Theatre building as it is today? Factors that either didn't exist or that we didn't notice when we were children? For maybe some of those factors can be changed, we really won't know until we draw up such a list. Or, if not changed, at least compensated for in some other way. The latter is a process I call "off-setting." For instance, it may totally lack parking, but on the other hand it could have so many other positive things going for it that would make it well worthwhile to get to it via public transit or on foot. And what would such other factors be? Using our imaginations and only just that for now, could we make a list of that much? Or has money consciousness fully cancelled out our ability to still think in that way?

When a child sets out to build a sandcastle, money is the last thing on the child's mind, and in achieving this task, the child has no money to speak of. Yet lo and behold, that sandcastle gets built. With a child's imagination, the "unrealistic" is simply the reality.

Just as an update to this venue.

There is a large billboard on the Cottman Avenue side of the building. It is advertising a coming soon for "Republic First Bank". On the billboard is an artist's interpretation of what the outside of the building will look like once the bank moves in. No date was given.

Republic First Bank is a business bank. The main branch is at 16th and Walnut and according to thier website, this looks to be the 9th branch.

This was in no way to give any sort of editorial on the building, just to update those wondering what is going on with it.

Just to go one step further, not only did I see the billboard Hdtv267 is referring to, but I also got photos of it, along with how the theater building looks now. From the looks of things, if this bank follows through with its proposal, it will alter the Mayfair Theatre building's exterior very little from how it is now.

Meantime, going by the kinds of people I saw around the Mayfair Theatre building today, which were very varied, it would be very tricky trying to come up with what the happiest medium would be if it were to be restored to be a movie theater here and now. Not impossible, mind you, but tricky. A theater, no matter where it is located, or the clientele it will most likely serve, should appeal to and evoke peoples' highest aspirations, no matter what they might be. And we haven't really been pushed to that point just yet; to that level of commonality that Churchill aluded to in his "Finest Hour" speech. Which means there's time for now to think in terms of how this building could be best restored as a theater, even though it might not be the right time to actually do it as of yet.

I understand that the marquee is coming down as part of the project.

Jack, going by the billboard atop the theater building to the Cottman Avenue side, which shows an artist's computerized rendering of what the completed First Republic Bank will look like, the classic marquee indeed will be missing. Futhermore, the whole entire building when transformed will be totally gray -- bound to uplift the spirits of the folks of Mayfair on those stretches of gray rainy days that seem to go on and on forever. Before on days such as that people had the great theater to offset this. Now it's to be a bank, and by the way, unlike how hdtv267 tried to make it sound, just a bank like any other -- and in an area that is oversaturated with banks as it is, not to mention immediately across Cottman Avenue. And to those who have that Beneficial Bank right across Cottman Avenue from the Mayfair I wonder what that feels like? For the idea of this new bank is to fully displace the old one, isn't it? And needless to say, the people of Mayfair themselves were never even asked what they would like to see the Mayfair Theatre building become. Rather, they're simply being told by the 1984-ish billboard to the Cottman Ave/Beneficial Bank side: "This is what it's going to become next, and you all are going to like it." It's like the aliens are moving in and displacing all that remains of before. All told, pretty creepy, huh?

Though I don't have the heart to go see it first hand, from what I've been told, most if not all the Mayfair Theatre building's marquee has been fully removed. And if you think this sort of destructivity is limited just to Mayfair, just wait till gambling takes full hold in this state. For I saw how that worked when gambling became legal in Atlantic City, NJ. So many operations throughout New Jersey that were not gambling related, and that were doing very well up until that point, literally just curled up and died overnight. And New Jersey's movie theaters, among other things, topped the list. So I guess it's just as well that the Mayfair Theatre building is one of the first casualties on the path of what's to be coming next throughout our entire state.

I thought the Mayfair Theatre building had a chance there for a moment to come back as a classy neighborhood theater. But, "one swallow doesn't make a summer" as they say.

It is SAD that we can't preserve even the notable exterior features such as a marquee! It would've been even better to also have preserved for public enjoyment notable interior features such as the Mayfair's murals.

The current draft of my pending Weekly Update email for Friends of the Boyd includes as its concluding paragraph:

Other theater news: The former MAYFAIR movie theater in the Northeast is losing its marquee as it changes from a drugstore to a bank. The Mayfair, featured in John Gallery's book on Philadelphia architecture, is important for being our first Streamlined Moderne theater. We in Philadelphia have not done a good job of protecting and landmarking our cinemas. That's all the more reason why we need ensure the Boyd is restored, reopened, and once again enjoyed!

Being the eternal optimist, at least they didn't knock down the Mayfair Theatre building completely.

Meantime, onto more encouraging news, the Majestic Theatre in Gettysburg, Pennsylvania over the past several months has just undergone a wonderful restoration, it's having achieved this goal by aligning itself with Gettysburg College, which purchased the building in 1992 as part of its ongoing commitment to revitalize downtown Gettysburg. In other words, rather than try to restore and reopen the Majestic as business, they went in the direction of restoring it as a great art form instead. And wow, is that theater ever looking beautiful now as a result of it!

If there was greater appreciation of the arts here in Northeast Philadelphia, particularly among its politicians, I have no doubt the same thing could have been done with the Mayfair Theatre building as well, and for that matter, still could.

For long term, at least, I can't see the bank that's taking over that building now faring all that well. Not when there's several other banks right in that same vicinity.

Meantime, the Devon Theatre not all that far from the Mayfair Theatre building is continuing on its course to reopen eventually as a live performing arts theater. And if the Devon proves successful, it could maybe make for a good case why the Mayfair building should become a theater again as well -- that is, the Devon being for live performances, and the Mayfair for movies.

So on the road ahead, much will hinge on how well the Devon does when it reopens, and what the story on the bank will be once its honeymoon period is over.

Some theaters, such as Northeast Philadelphia's GCC Northeast, are merely big boxes, memorable and noteworthy only because of the movies that had been exhibited at them, and designed so formulaically and generically that they could be easily replicated. Other theaters, however, have a great deal more depth and dimension to them than simply being that. And to be sure, the Mayfair Theatre, designed by one of the 20th century's leading movie theater architects, David Supowitz no less, was such a theater. And the fact that from its being a classic theater it was then converted to a drugstore for a time, and then to become a bank, which it's in the process of becoming now, speaks volumes of how much Mayfair has fallen into a state of demise since the time when the Mayfair Theatre first was built. What is especially disturbing in the Mayfair Theatre's case is that these downward alterations were made to it without even the slightest trace of any community outcry, combined with very harsh criticisms of my one lone voice coming to the theater's defense.

Now in turn I could be very critical of those who criticized me, plus those holding power over the Mayfair community at the present time. But how can you criticize people who don't know any better?

I myself was very fortunate to have grown up in Northeast Philadelphia during a much better era, and had appreciation of art and architecture instilled in me from a very early age. And given how the Mayfair Theatre itself had played a special part in that upbringing, of course I viewed the Mayfair Theatre a whole lot differently than later Northeast Philadelphia residents to come. Even long after it began deteriorating. But for those who never got to know the Mayfair Theatre when it was at its height, could I realistically expect them to see what no longer was by the time they came on the scene? For so much of the Mayfair Theatre's former glory was severely tarnished by that point. And with few if any standing in defense of it and trying to bring it back to what it once was, namely because few such people were still around at that point. Even I was away attending school in the Midwest during those years, which, I suppose, spurred others to up and leave Northeast Philadelphia as well. For I still have an old letter somewhere from one of my childhood friends from here literally begging me to come back, while telling me how rundown the old neighborhood was starting to get.

Now here I am, back again, and everyone else has left, and with few if any around today to recall how beautiful the Mayfair Theatre, among other Northeast Philadelphia features, once had been. And to be sure, there's no one in power in Mayfair of today who has any recollections of this. So how can I fairly blame these people of Mayfair today for what it is they don't know? I can criticize them for their thinking they know it all, but that's about it -- hence the "Northeast Philadelphia Taliban" reference. And the fact that the Mayfair Theatre was transformed to a drugstore for a time, and now soon to be a bank, and without any real community outcry of any kind to go hand-in-hand with this, simply reveals how much of the original Mayfair community -- in terms of its people -- is now gone. But is Mayfair's upwardly mobile potential gone as well? For other than a very blind sort of resistance to this I say it's not. And factually speaking, though it did not have the public support that was necessary, that Mayfair Theatre building could've been made a classy neighborhood theater once more. With its lack of parking, most would have to either walk to it or take public transit. But with gasoline prices creeping ever higher, a theater that can easily be gotten to without the need for a car sounds like a pretty practical idea to me, and growing all the more practical with each passing day and with each new gas spike.

The further destruction/renovation on the former Mayfair theatre continues.

On my trip home today, I noticed that not only is the marquee gone, but the front portions of the theatre are gone. Revealing now the parts of the outer area that housed where the posters were.

Unfortunately my camera phone wouldn't pick it up.

Or perhaps fortunately you should say. For I was down in Mayfair today, but I made a special point of avoiding the vicinity of the Mayfair Theatre building at all costs. I really couldn't bear to see it as you describe it as it is now, not even in photographs. And even if it's just me, I liken what you're describing to what took place in Afghanistan a year or so before 9/11/. At that point the Taliban was just getting a start on things and cutting its baby teeth so to speak by destroying these large Buddha statues in north Afghanistan that were carved in the side of a mountain and that were over 1,500 years old. News photos showed how they looked back while they were still perfectly intact, and then after the Taliban soldiers blasted their faces off. It was so senseless, just as was 9/11 to come a year or so later.

And how is what you're describing all that different I wonder? For as I see it, just as the Taliban's destroying those 1,500 year old Buddha statues was a preliminary to 9/11 itself, is this, too, a preliminary to something every bit as sinister?

I really don't know what 9/11 has to do with this. Or Afghanistan for that matter and the Taliban. As someone who lost a good friend on September 11th and also someone fighting in Iraq, I find your analogies highly offensive and also bordering on unbalanced.

HDTV267, with all due respect, nothing could possibly be more offensive than the comment you just posted above. However, given how I now have some familiarity with you based on various comments you've posted in the past, I know that you're speaking from the viewpoint of one who doesn't know any better. I know, for instance, that you didn't grow up with the Mayfair Theatre back in the days when it was a really classy neighborhood movie theater to go to and back in the days when Northeast Philadelphia was far more on the up and up than it is today. For I, for one, and it's based on what Mayfair was at one time compared to what it's like today, find it VERY hypocritical for America to be sending troops into Afghanistan to bring down the Taliban when we allow something very Taliban-like to fester in Northeast Philadelphia unchecked -- which I feel is greatly symbolized by the current state the Mayfair Theatre building is in. I mean, look, it's not easy seeing corruption when it's right in front of your eyes and an integral part of your existence rather than far off overseas somewhere. And so when that is the case, too often people turn a blind eye to it, feeling they have no other choice. Trouble is, that doesn't make the situation any better. While I can fully assure you it does make things a lot lot worse.

Now with that said, Northeast Philadelphia DOES have to get out of the rut it's currently in. And your remarks, based totally on ignorance, certainly aren't helping things any. And based on your comments, I assume you're not college educated. Either that, or you did not have very skilled instructors/professors, or the college you attended was such that they allowed you to fake your way through. Because I can fully assure you, based on the actual facts rather than mere opinions such as you express, that it is YOUR thinking, rather than mine, that is unbalanced. So I'm going to ask you to take a big step, and that is for you to stop assuming you know it all, because you don't, okay?! For I can assure you that if there were more educated people around here rather than such a large number of ignorant people such as you, that Mayfair Theatre building would be being restored to a classy neighborhood movie theater right now rather than transformed into being a bank -- as if Mayfair needed another one atop the many underutilized ones it has now.

Fully confident in my academic and preservation credentials, I will say the following:
(1) it is sad that the Mayfair's landmark Streamlined Moderne architecture hasn't been protected. That said, I don't see the economics of "right now" restoring the Mayfair Theatre to a single screen, nor does anybody else that I know of.
(2) I don't see what foreign nations or the Taliban have to do with this either. What private developers do in the name of making a buck, in Philadelphia to buildings that aren't legally protected has nothing to do with the religious extremism that is afflicting another part of the world.

Here's a Mayfair Theatre trivia question: what was the last film shown at the Mayfair? Need a clue? The marquee did not show the film's actual title, but rather the name of the main character (which became better known than the name of the film).

Give up? It was "First Blood", which was incorrectly listed on the marquee as "Rambo". All Seats were $2.00.

Recently a friend (another former Mayfair employee) showed me a videotape of a Channel 3 Evening Magazine story on the closing of the Mayfair. It includes video of both the exterior and interior of the theater, as well as an interview with (late, great) ticket taker Bill Pierce. I'm hoping to get a copy I can post online. Once I do I'll put a link on this page.

Side note: the story includes a comment that the last show on the last night was cancelled due to technical problems. That was probably a lie: whenever there were less than 10 people for the last show we told them there was a technical problem. The real reason usually was that we wanted to go home early. (The fact that the second show was usually empty helps explain why the Mayfair closed.)

Hello, I was an employee of the Mayfair from November 1966 until Spring of 1975 I believe. I was an usher and then Assistant Manager of both the Mayfair and Merben Theaters. Even was sent to the Devon a few nights ( the Fox brothers were left all three from daddy Ben)
I remember my time at the Mayfair very fondly. We were a family there.

Jack Ferry - the green room / ushers lounge was used for MANY things in the late 60's.

I will search for some old pictures..

Hi dan1aoh,

Thanks for your comments. So you dealt with Steve and Remy for 9 years? Were Abe and Leo the projectionists while you were at the Mayfair? Do you remember dealing with Jack Sherman at the Devon?

Hope you can find the old pics.

Jack Ferry,
Abe was the only projectionist. Once in a while someone would come in a give him a night off. I was only sent to the Devon a few times, I think the guys name was Jack. Remy had such a beautiful blonde girlfriend that we were thrilled when he came by.

Will ck for pics, but I am not too confident..

Dan

I'm pretty positive the last movie I ever saw at the Mayfair was "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid," either in the winter of '69 or early in the spring of the following year. For I know that after that it was off to school in the Midwest for me, while others I grew up with and went to the theater that night with went on to their separate destinies as well. So for us it was very much a "The Last Picture Show" kind of thing, had that same exact kind of feeling. And oh was the theater run so classily well that night! Munching on the best tasting popcorn I ever had in my life while watching the images of Paul Newman showing off on that old bike to Katherine Ross to the tune of Burt Bacharach's "Raindrops Keep Falling On My Head" on that gigantic Mayfair Theatre screen is something I'll always remember! And for this particular movie it seems there could not have been a better theater for it!

Meantime, to you, Howard, sorry about the delays in my replying to your commentary above, but when I was making the Taliban reference, I was thinking how it would feel to the artist who did the murals that once decorated the Mayfair Theatre's auditorium as construction workers who don't know any better sandblasted them away or chipped them away with jackhammers in the same manner that back early in 2001 members of the Taliban used bazookas to blow away the faces of those thousand year old Bhudha statues in north central Afghanistan. What I was getting at was "To be that unhuman, that un-alive." For simply put, business doesn't trump art and history, Howard. And if we do see this happening, every single one of us should be saying "Uh oh." For at that point we're not people anymore, we're just worthless things taking up space and resources, that's all. Do you get it now? For I think my comparison between the Taliban's actions leading up to 9/11 and what they did to the Mayfair Theatre was very fair and right on target. And if you yourself don't see that, you better take a hard hard look again. Re-check out that link Jack Ferry gave us above of that mural photo. For see, I come from an America where don't do this, where we don't destroy others great creations because we cannot do the same. And all your talk of business means nothing in relation to that, Howard.

I've said that I don't believe it is feasible to return the Mayfair to daily single screen status. I never suggested anyone should damage original historic details, exterior or interior including the murals. I also haven't read any definitive account as to whether the Mayfair murals are in fact gone, and when so.

Although I understood your reference, I don't think we need to bring in politics & religion here to understand why Art Deco ornamentation shouldn't be destroyed.

Also, I have long gone long out of my way to enjoy movies in historic theaters, but there aren't enough people like me to keep enough of those historic theaters alive, much less return too many that failed three decades ago or even half a century ago (Holmes).

No offence is meant to a dream, but if economics could revive single screen theaters, they'd be popping all over the place.

Gene Denicolo's experience in re-opening the Devon is pretty informative as to the economic realities involved here: http://www.northeasttimes.com/1226/devonmovies.html

Thanks for sharing the interesting article.

I hope you can post the videotape of the Mayfair online and Dan can find photos.

There are many factors working against trying to run a business of any kind successfully here in Northeast Philadelphia at the present time, whether it be a movie theater or anything else. And it's been this way for a very long time now, though it wasn't always the case. Now just to review the Devon Theatre a moment and why that failed, in looking over the expenses Gene Dinicolo had to grapple with each month, what jumps out at me most is what he had to pay each month in rent. For how, I wonder, was that $4,000.00 a month figure ever arrived to?! For the cost of rent must be in alignment with the business is capable of making each month, and it doesn't appear that was ever given much thought to on the landlord's part. For sure, the landlord can charge whatever he wants per month, but. If what he's charging is far in excess of what that business can earn per month, then only a fool is going to rent this business from him and try to make a go of it. At the same time, not to come down too hard on the landlord, my guess is that he had little choice but to charge that much due to a combination of the especially high city property taxes on it plus Philadelphia's "business privilege tax." You have to remember that when Rizzo became mayor of Philadelphia he hit Philadelphia with the highest property tax hike in the city's entire history. And since, that hike has never really been reversed. The only exception is that all new Philadelphia buildings get the 10-year property tax rebate, but, of course, that wouldn't apply to the pre-existing Devon. But what I'm doing here, guys, is I'm following the money trail.

For let me put it to you this way: Any business can do well and flourish so long as it takes in more than what it has to pay out to stay in operation. But all parties involved have to work with that. I mean, you can't have the government say, "This is what the property tax is, and that's just the way it is." For what the government collects in taxes from any business has to be fairly proportionate to what that business actually makes. Furthermore, it must use a sizeable portion of what it collects in taxes from that business to make things better for that business with regard to its earning potential. But the number one focus every party involved has to have is to make sure that business is in the black and not the red. And only in that way can the government be sure it's not collecting too much in taxes.

Now in terms of Mr. Denicolo's frequent complaints of not having enough customers, you have to look at when this occurred. For some idiot one day took a look at this city, which has a very sizeable blue collar population, and said hey, let's phase out all the good-paying blue collar money making opportunities this city has (or that it once did have) and switch Philadelphia over to being a services based economy only. This in turn forced Philadelphia's blue collar citizenry either into unemployment -- which put them in a position of no longer being able to afford attending movie theaters regularly -- or into service oriented jobs where they felt very much out of place and really weren't the best cut out for. Take that Steck the typewriter repairman, for instance, who used to have his repair shop right across the street from the Mayfair Theatre. He probably was very good back when he worked in the manufacturing of typewriters down in Philadelphia's Kensington section when industry was in full swing there. But as you could see in my post many many posts back, he clearly was not cut out for the services based industry at all. And if blue collar opportunities were brought back I'm sure he'd be the first to admit it.

But see, all this is just to show what was going on in Mayfair at the time the Devon closed. And these days Mayfair is overshadowed by Pennsylvania House Speaker John Perzel who makes more money per year (our taxes) then most business operators in Mayfair could ever dream of making, yet Perzel complains constantly that he's still not making enough. So there's that kind of breakdown in synchronization going on there right now. For everything has to be brought proportionately into the right balance, otherwise, no you can't run a movie theater there. In fact, how many type businesses could hold up under that really? Which was why my whole angle with the Mayfair Theatre was to look for ways it could be run as a nonprofit. For at this point it is historic, and its architect ranks very high.

If you were paid by the word, you'd have the funding....

You do go so off point with all the politics, taxes, etc...

Did the Mayfair reopen yet, as a bank? Is that going to use the former auditorium space?

Yes, the Mayfair Theatre building is a bank now, yet another in an area where there's already too many, yet too few things to uplift and inspire people to let them know that they're still human beings. All told, it's all very surreal to those of us who vividly Mayfair back when it was great, and I myself won't go anywhere near there now if I can help it, not even to pass through. Too depressing. Maybe at some future date, if Mayfair's current direction fails, it will get another golden opportunity like it had last January (2006) to make the Mayfair Theatre come back to life as what it's meant to be -- a classy neighborhood movie theater. But that theater building has been so mutilized now that it would have to be restored almost completely from scratch. Which wouldn't be completely out of the question. For I don't know if you've ever been up to Pennsbury Manor in Bucks County, Howard, this being the historic estate of William Penn (who Pennsylvania was named after), but that was completely restored from scratch (the original having completely burned to the ground) and they did a beautiful job of it, just to show what can be done if intelligent thinking is brought into play and applied. Mayfair's biggest movers and shakers right now, though, are all bent on proving that stupidity is king, and right now they have all factors working in their favor in that regard. It's a real, "Mayfair today, tomorrow the world" kind of thing. It has a lot of Mussolini-like overtones to it. But while that's taking shape I'm wondering what the potential is for building a very nice movie palace in Havana...

Presumably you are telling the public rather than me who William Penn was.

Ah, you caught that, ay? It's just I wasn't too sure you knew that or not, Howard, because on several occasions now you've said "Holmes" with regard to the Holme Theatre rather than "Holme," Thomas Holme being William Penn's top surveyor when Philadelphia was planned out. And needless to say, Holmesburg, which is to the north east of Mayfair, and where the Holme Theatre building is located, was named after him, this being the land that William Penn granted him in exchange for his services. Mayfair, meantime, wasn't named after anything. Back when my father was growing up here it had all been open farmland. Must've been really beautiful, as it had all been part of the sizeable estate of 19th century world acclaimed stage actor Edwin Forrest -- who the Forrest Theatre down in Center City Philadelphia was named after.

I am a lawyer, so when I put an "s" on it, it's because I am starting to spell Holmesburg due to a facility that used to provide "rent free housing" to clients in the past. That place is more locally famous than a theater that closed half a century ago.

There are too many lawyers. I'm in favor of protectionism - once I passed the bar they should have closed all the law schools. (Although since Howard's ID number is in the 44,000s and mine's in the 75,000s, he's got about 10 years more experience than me.)

I agree there are too many lawyers, though I don't mind your being one. You at least care about something else, i.e. historic moviehouses. I usually encourage competition to move to Florida.

Though I myself am not a lawyer -- obviously! -- one of my best friends is, and I discussed with him the Mayfair Theatre's potential to be brought hack as a classy community neighborhood when he was home from Italy last February (2006) to renew his bar license, or whatever you guys call it. He has both a brother and sister who live in Mayfair now, plus he himself grew up there, so he knows Mayfair very well. For he also was a committeeman there back when he was in college. And here's exactly what he said: "There's no reason why it couldn't be brought back as a movie theater again except for the fact that there's not enough good people living in Mayfair now to make it possible. And people get what they deserve."

See, one real advantage you had with the Boyd, Howard, was that when its future became uncertain, a lot of good people stepped forward in defense of it, yourself included. But there was nothing like that with the Mayfair Theatre, other than me -- my one lone voice -- ranting and raving. And so given that, had I tried to force through what I would've liked to have seen happen there, then it would've been me in the Mussolini role. That is, I probably could've used the same sleazy tactics the bank did to get its way with that building. But for who? But for what? Just as it now is with that bank. In other words, I didn't have that angle with the Mayfair Theatre that you had with the Boyd -- a sizeable number of good people turning out to say they wanted to see it reopen as a theater once more. Of course, there wasn't a sizeable turn out of people demanding it be made into a bank either. But that bank and me are two totally different creatures. That bank doesn't care what people want. I do. That's the fundamental difference.

As for the Liddenfield Housing Projects, which I assume is what your referring to up here in Holmesburg, this is not something that Holmesburg can be blamed for. Rather, it's a leftover from past misinterpretations of what Holmesburg's best potential is. People who had absolutely no regard for Holmesburg's beauty and history pushed to have that thing built there. And it's the same exact type of people keeping it afloat there now. And there's absolutely no love or ideals that motivated the creation and the perpetuation of that housing project. This in no way is "noblesse oblige." Rather, it's a little concentration camp of sorts, to keep a certain group of people -- namely those that are uneducated, unconnected and African American -- in an ever ongoing cycle of always being down on their luck so that welfare bureaucrats can exploit them for selfish gain generation after generation after generation, squandering our taxdollars, of course, to do so.

But Howard, let me just ask you, if somebody takes a handful of mud and throws it at the Mona Lisa, are you in the habit of saying in response to such acts, "It's not the Mona Lisa now, it's just a lot of mud"? For as a Holmesburger I'm telling you what Holmesburg is, but to you the reality seems only to be that of the outsider mud-slingers, that is, those who don't know squat about it. Obviously, and with Liddenfield being good proof of that.

I meant another famous "rent free" place now closed but still there. I have practiced many fields of law.

In Holmesburg? Hmmmm...

Ah! I know what you're referring to now, as my great grandfather worked there when it opened circa 1894 and it was all new and state of the art. And I've often said I'd like to see it reopened so we could finally have someplace to put all those outsider folks who come to Holmesburg seeking to do it harm, to reopen it as a real Bastille kind of thing, as in "Off with their heads!" (Uh, not that anyone who wishes Holmesburg harm has one.) Meantime, to all you reading this who haven't a clue what Howard and I are talking about, just rent the movie "Up Close & Personal" starring Robert Redford and Michelle Pfeiffer and it will all come ringing home, or "Holme" I should say. And by the way, Howard, Redford loved Holmesburg when he was here. And that state of the art playground across the street from what you're referring to was his parting gift to it.

Meantime, since the Mayfair Theatre is off the table -- at least for now, and other than what remains of it in great memories -- shouldn't this discussion move to Cinema Treasures' Holme Theatre page? The link for that is: http://cinematreasures.org/theater/9141/

For the record, First Republic Bank is now in the theatre space as of August 2006.

And has its grimy, slimy paws in everything else, too, I would imagine. Talk about creepy!

Although it's very obvious the Mayfair Theatre as any sort of entertainment venue can never be again, why it met the demise it did from having been the great neighborhood movie theater it once truly was -- if the actual reasons for this demise could somehow be brought to light -- it might go a long long way in revealing what is so terribly wrong about Northeast Philadelphia today and who all's behind it.

At this Mayfair Theatre page we've heard from Jack Ferry, who worked for the Mayfair in its last days as a theater. But what became of all those who were involved with the Mayfair Theatre prior to then? That is, those who ran it really well, the way I remember it being as a child?

One thing many people don't realize is how well removed Northeast Philadelphia is from the rest of the city, how this especially became the case when the heavily industrialized areas of the city -- between Northeast Philadelphia and Center City Philadelphia -- fell into a state of total collapse from the late 1970s onward. Prior to this the city of Philadelphia throughout was very much one city. But after that industrial collapse cut the city in half, Northeast Philadelphia became very much isolated, a remote backwater of sorts.

A whole new array of politicians arose up in Northeast Philadelphia during that time period and not so good things started to happen, and with nothing to stop it.

And as for why the Mayfair Theatre met its demise during that time period, well yes, we can say it couldn't compete with television, multiplexes and so on. Certainly all valid sounding reasons. But I would be very hesitant to say those were the biggest reasons. For in the Mayfair Theatre's case in addition to all that it got a push. A push that, in a sane, civilized society, would be describable as nothing short of criminal. And in all the many years since the Mayfair Theatre's closing this has never been investigated.

Now I myself, I wouldn't have any objections if such an investigation were conducted here and now, with the Mayfair Theatre's mysterious folding put forth as "Exhibit A." But others would. And the big question is, why? Why? WHY?!

Although such an investigation couldn't bring the Mayfair Theatre back again, especially after the major number Republic First did on it when it converted it to a bank, it could bring certain attention to certain people who are apparently still around today who obviously don't want that certain attention brought to them. And again, of course, the big question is why? Why? WHY?!

For simple mistakes in judgement are excusable. Ignorance at the time certain decisions were made can be excusable. But when there was criminal deliberation behind these things, that I can understand certain people not wanting to get out. But now was that the case with this theater? For short of an investigation it suuuuure looks that way! And if it was me sitting on the hot seat I would say, hey, let's bring on that investigation! But others get angry at such idea. Why? Why? WHY?!

Umm...maybe because in a democratic, capitalist country business owners are permitted to use their property in a commercially reasonable (i.e. profitable) manner?

Let me see if understand your underlying principles:
1. The profitability of a business venture is not a proper consideration as to whether that business should continue.
2. When a desirable (in the eyes of the enlightened class) business is closed, there must be a conspiracy involved.
3. Before a commercially zoned property can be changed from one business type to another, there should always be a public hearing, with final approval to only be made by enlightened politicians.
4. An owner of a desirable but unprofitable business must use his own dollars to continue that business. The failure to do so should result in criminal sanctions.
5. Tax dollars should be taken from the citizens that refuse to patronize an unprofitable, but desirable, business so that all can enjoy that business in the future.
6. Desirable properties should be taken over by the government since private ownership of land results in so many problems.

Your "sane, civilized society" has already been tried and it failed, comrade.

Guess I should get ready to be flamed.

Jack, when the Mayfair Theatre was at its height, which is how I best remember it when I was a child, that theater was on very solid footing, while I see absolutely no good reason why it couldn't have continued on that way. But let us not kid ourselves that there was no major shift in politics from when that theater went from its absolute height to the demise it met with later. And on the topic of this theater so far we've heard from you, who only knew it during its last days, but not a word from those who ran it before, when it was at its height. And as for those previous operators, what became of them? You yourself most likely don't know, but somebody must. And from my point of view it's just a simple straight forward question, and one that shouldn't evoke any sort of anger I wouldn't think. What became of the previous operators? Who were they, where did they go to once they were gone? Why did they go?

Of course the community of Mayfair itself has always had an odd history. Once the vast country estate of the great 19th century stage actor Edwin Forrest, after his passing he wanted in his will for it to become home for retired actors. Though it was all so very long ago and few know it now, following the assassination of Abraham Lincoln by stage actor John Wilkes Booth, for a very long stretch of time actors in general were very much hated in this country. And it was Forrest's aim to try to offset that somewhat by pledging his estate on their behalf. Trouble was, in his last days he had marital troubles and was on the brink of divorce right before he died. After his passing, his wife became executer of the will, and perhaps out of spite she botched up his last will and testament. In any event, Forrest's final aim never came to pass and Mayfair was born instead, named for the London theater district where Forrest spent most of his career -- due to hostilities in this country towards actors following Lincoln's assassination.

However, the creation of Mayfair, historically one of the first suburbias on record or first attempts at creating suburbia, proved very very successful, and for a very long stretch of time at that. Yet the whole time atop a type of land swindle which Forrest's widow had been a party to. Or that's one version of the story at least.

In any event, Mayfair worked. Or for a long time it did. Back when I was a kid everybody loved Mayfair! Or at least everyone up here did. But then things changed. And today Mayfair is quite a far different place from what it had gotten to be for a time. And when this downward transition is questioned today we're told it's just as it should be here and now. Still, I wonder what became of those who ran Mayfair so well before -- a wondering which evokes inexplicable, mysterious anger in some, most particularly when the Mayfair Theatre itself is brought up.

Like that day back in the early 1990s when I took my word processor for repair to Steck Typewriter across the street from the Mayfair Theatre, and the Steck guy acted very angry when I said how sad it was that it wasn't a theater anymore, hoping the reasons why were all totally innocent and that maybe he could've shed some light on that. I certainly didn't expect anger! At the same time keep in mind this was after the city's heavily industrialized areas farther south had fully collapsed. And what do people do when it comes to surviving? What won't they do? Or at least the prouder ones?

Auditorium from 1937 The Exhibitor trade magazine:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/howardbhaas/821959845/

While most people would identify that as a movie palace auditorium in today's world, I never saw it that way in all the years I was growing up. To us it was just our local theater and very much an everyday -- and you could even say "ordinary" -- thing in our lives in that regard, just to really drive home what Philadelphia was like over all back then. I mean, we all loved it, but we never thought of it as being special beyond what it was to us personally. So it truly is an eye opener when you look at that photo now.

shown last night on Fox TV Channel 29 news in its unfortunate state as a bank (during the story of the closure of the AMC Orleans 8):

http://www.myfoxphilly.com/myfox/pages/Home/Detail;jsessionid=8D4B8863F1A6AB96540E8856C148C9C3?contentId=4253391&version=1&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=VSTY&pageId=1.1.1&sflg=1

Here is a larger version of one of the PAB thumbnails posted by Jack Ferryin 2006. The photo is from the Irvin Glazer collection:
http://tinyurl.com/2xlyha

Thanks for posting that pic, Ken.

Seeing the marquee again reminds me of all the times I stood on the top of a metal ladder (above the "do not stand above this point" warning) to run cheap wire to try to bypass broken neon tubes. Changing lightbulbs throughout the theater was always a challenge. I took some really nasty electrical shocks.

Guess I was pretty stupid as a 16 year old. Too bad that hasn't improved much with age.

I never made it to that neighborhood when I was a kid, although my father lived around there when he was younger. My grandmother lived on West Queen Lane, so usually we took East River Drive up to Midvale and then over to her apartment building.

Here are some photos of the Mayfair being converted into a bank.

These photos showing the Mayfair Theatre being converted into a bank expose the huge mistake of looking upon the northeast section of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania -- where the Mayfair Theatre building is located -- as a source of revenue generation. Some places are suitable for revenue generation, but all efforts to transform Northeast Philadelphia into that have resulted in nothing other than one huge, bland mess -- which is exactly what I saw as I passed the Mayfair today. In it's being re-made over into a bank it really looks awful, folks. And as such it's certainly not doing Northeast Philadelphia any good. And when you see it as it is now the obvious thought that quickly crosses your mind is, no wonder Philadelphia's population is waaaaaay down now!

In other words, my now speaking after the fact, unlike my previous posts here where I spoke before the fact, I'm basically saying: I told you sooooo....

So someone is selling a DVD of the movie "It Happened in Mayfair" on ebay. As I said in a previous post, it's a hokey 1937 film shot by the Mayfair Business Association, but it's cool because it includes film of the Mayfair. It's in the public domain, and you can find it for free online if you google it. But the really interesting part is this portion from the seller's description:

"If you ever lived near Frankford and Cottman Aves. in Philadelphia, you need to watch this film. It's fun to see the various buildings and businesses from 1937 and try to figure out what type of thrift store they are now. My wife and I met when we both worked at the Mayfair Theatre in 1981, so it held extra meaning for us."

Excuse me? I only know of one married couple that met when both were working at the Mayfair Theatre in 1981, and it's me and my wife. I've got no idea who this guy, but it appears that he has taken my story posted above, and is using it to try to sell copies of a public domain video. Gotta say, I find this hilarious. Who would want to steal my lame life??

UPDATE: I sent an email to the ebay seller to ask if he really worked at the Mayfair in 1981. He didn't answer my email, but I saw that he removed the sentence "My wife and I met when we both worked at the Mayfair Theatre in 1981" from his ebay item description. Too bad. I was hoping that two of the people I worked with back then did wind up together. Or that I may have a future in licensing my life story for commercial purposes.

Well Jack, I'd just be curious to know if the dirty old man who worked the Mayfair Theatre's ticket booth during that time period got to serve as your best man. Yes or no? If so, no doubt you had to keep all the flower girls under lock and key! Meantime, assuming the wedding wasn't held there at the movie theater itself -- even though, as I've said, the church I was baptised in used to hold its Easter services there back in the late '50s -- did you by any chance seek to hold your wedding there at the Mayfair? If not, taking after that e-Bay guy, you could always make up that you and your wife were married there. In fact, taking things further, I think we have the makings of a movie script here! Would it matter if it's true or not? Naw! If it's a great story people don't care about that! So by all means go for it, Jack!

One of my relatives (a great uncle I think) either painted the murals or was on the team of follks who painted the murals... my grandparents lived up the street on Shelmire St and I spent a lot of time there... I saw some great horror flicks at the Mayfair, including Squirm and Phantasm and The Shining.... I also remember seeing the Sword and the Stone and The Phantom Tollbooth there too.... I really loved that place. I think the last flick I saw there was a repeat viewing of Raiders of the Lost Ark. Let me know at : lostharvestmovie@yahoo.com if you can get me some pics of those murals! Thanks again.

Gerald Clough
www.savagerun.com

Hi Gerald,

When I worked at the Mayfair we ran lots of horror flicks and slasher movies. Phantasm stands out as one of the better ones. There were a bunch of really bad ones as well. (Maniac comes to mind.) I had a pretty good collection of posters.

The only mural photos I know of are on the links earlier on this page.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/99041851@N00/84183605/

http://www.philadelphiabuildings.org/pab/app/ho_display.cfm/91631

I should note that in the 80s, the Mayfair pretty much only ran two kinds of movies: slasher films and Disney.

Since Romero's Diary of the Dead came out yesterday, it's a good time to remember the First Run release of Day of the Dead at the Mayfair in 1985(?); I'm pretty sure I went to see that one twice at the Mayfair. I remember a decent, half filled type of opening night for Day of the Dead. Thanks for info on the murals, it'll be nice to keep a pic and maybe I'll subscribe for those other pics. I think I saw that awful film Maniac at the recently closed and demolished Budco/ AMC Orleans. Squirm was part of a double bill that also featured Tentacles-- a lousy movie about a giant squid or octopus that had some "stars" like Shelley Winters. There was also this weird flick called Starship Invasion starring Robert Vaughn about an alien invasion that featured a suicide plague. I'll remember more "grindhouse" type of stuff soon.... thanks again.

Gerald Clough

Though I didn't, my younger brother went to see PHANTASM at the Mayfair, and if I recall correctly, that was the horror flick made by a 15 year old who somehow convinced his parents to give him the money they'd put away for his college for the making of that movie instead. I think the deal was, if the movie flopped he promised his parents he'd foot his own way through college, working at McDonald's or wherever else if he had to.

As for me, I feel rather lucky I missed out on all the years when the Mayfair was showing that God-awful, never-ending stream of slasher flicks so popular in the early 1980s. Meantime, just to be real about it, was it the slashing scenes of those films that was the big lure? Or the in-between scenes of a....hmmmm, how should I say it?..nature? My hunch is it was the latter, but in those days no one dared ever admit to that.

I have this theory about slasher "films" and it is related to your theory re: "nature"; adolescents are fascinated with the body.... and body parts. All a producer has to do is throw in some "nature" and then have the participants ripped apart..... it all relates to the adolescents' fasination with the "body"-- and body parts.... in a perverse and different way but it seems to me after 40 years that the universe is perverse and different. I'll always have the Mayfair "grindhouse" to remember. Thanks again for the info. I like monster movies and have never really enjoyed the slasher genre at all. Even when I was 12, watching Friday the 13th for a dollar at The Crest (Rising Sun Ave) I could sense that slasher flicks were made for and by the mentally disturbed.

Gerald

Well the big make-you-jump scare was fun. During Friday the 13th, I used to stand in the back of the theatre and watch for the audience reaction to Jason suddenly jumping out of the water and grabbing the girl in the boat. It was great watching people fly out of their seats.

Assuming you're referring to FRIDAY THE 13TH, PART II, I believe the scene you're describing is preceded by that great scene where Kirsten Baker decides to go for a bit of after-dark skinny dipping. It was very good -- and tasteful -- direction involved in the filming of that I have to say. But then I feel they totally ruined that great film work when suddenly stupid Jason is introduced to the scene.

Which got me to thinking.....

Going back to Mayfair and how it was in that early '80s era, just suppose they took that same movie, fully removed Jason and all the slasher scenes all throughout it, so that it just became a film about young people enjoying a really great stay out at Crystal Lake, and retitled the movie "Fun Times at Crystal Lake," or whatever. How would the community standards at that time have reacted? My hunch is there would've been communuty outrage from here to Kingdom Come, no end to it, and the Philadelphia vice squad would've rushed in and shut the Mayfair Theatre down immediately.

But by its being a slasher film it was, oh, no problem; all such "promiscuity out in nature" scenes were fine just so long as you added Jason or whatever to the mix. Making it, "Nothing to get upset with, folks." Or at least that's how it all seems to me as I now look back. I wasn't much around Northeast Philadelphia during those years, and it's only dawning on me now that that was probably a major reason why.

In contrast to the slasher flicks of the '80s, as a child growing up in Northeast Philly, I, too, remember really loving the monster movies, quite a few which I saw at the Mayfair, Merben and so on. But they were a lot different than the '80s slasher films, for not only did they know where to draw the line when it came to showing gore, but they also didn't try to twist around what was good and evil. Though it wasn't exactly a slasher flick, on one of my stops back to Northeast Philadelphia during that era I saw DEAD AND BURIED (at the Tyson, I believe, or maybe it was the Crest), and the whole entire film, with its ultra-graphic scenes, was just pointlessly sick. Yet there were some really weird people in the audience that night just hanging on every scene. And I think that might've marked the turning point for the popularity of horror flicks in NE Philly, I'm not sure. I know that one film certainly ruined the career of its star, James Farentino, and was an embarrassing last film for Jack Albertson right before his death. But then things turned for the better. On another visit back I saw RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK at the Devon, and it was mobbed, huge long lines to see it -- as if to say Northeast Philadelphia audiences were starved for great movies once more. And that was very reassuring. But then what happened to Northeast Philadelphia theaters after that I don't know because I wasn't around. On my next return, all the great theaters -- the Mayfair most notably -- were shut down...

No, it was definitely the original Friday the 13th. Adrienne King was the girl in the canoe. I never saw any of the subsequent Friday the 13th movies.

I think the girl in the canoe scene was in each of the first two films (it was definitely the end of the first film); in Part II, the makers may have repeated that scene (turning it into a dream?)... anyway, I sort of liked Dead & Buried (though it was very disturbing); Albertson's undertaker character fascinated me and the "shock" ending was pretty cool too... high budget flick Dead & Buried was indeed... very creepy and atmospheric film but maybe a little too brutal.... I saw Dead & Buried at the Orleans....

gerald clough

I'd completely forgotten till now, but you're absolutely right, there was a canoe scene in the first FRIDAY THE 13TH as well. And it, too, was preceded by an after-dark skinny dip scene. as I recall. Since I saw both films on cable and not at a theater, also FRIDAY THE 13TH, PART III, and it was so very long ago, it's easy to forget a lot. So I guess it's to the credit of the makers of the second one that all these many years later I still remember the great skinny dip scene with Norwegian beauty Kirsten Baker. And even with my not having seen it at an actual theater at that!

As for DEAD & BURIED, there were brutal scenes in it which clearly were intended to appeal to the most criminal-minded, and that was their ONLY intent. For the most part it was a snuff film through and through, with the filmmakers going all out to ensure the highest degree of medical accuracy -- such as to show what it would actually look like if a person is unwillingly pinned to the floor and acid is passed through tubes shoved deep up into their nostrils. While certainly its filmmakers achieved their minor goal of horrifying some with that scene and others, their major goal of making happy the most perverse among us is what stands out most about that particular film. For rather than horrifying such people, you could see how certain audience members in the theater that night were totally feeding on it; it was their own special brand of pornography. They didn't come to that theater to be shocked and entertainingly horrified, but rather, titilated. And totally fairly, I feel, the film's two biggest stars -- Farentino and Albertson -- got harshly criticized for it. Did they know what they were signing up for when they made that film? Who knows? In Albertson's case he passed away soon afterward, so in his case the fact that he made DEAD & BURIED could be greatly downplayed and the highpoints of his vareer played up in his obituary. Farentino wasn't quite as lucky. Pity, too, because he had such a great career leading up to then and with a lot of shelf-life still left...only for it all to fizzle out with his being brought up on cocaine charges and arrested for stalking Tina Sinatra not long after that. And who today remembers he also did great films such as EL CID and THE PAD AND HOW TO USE IT?

Getting back to the Mayfair, I saw Alfred Hitchcock's THE BIRDS there back in the mid '60s, and I'll always remember the calm of my friends and I as we were walking back home up Frankford Avenue right afterwards --- "calm" that is, until the most innocent looking little tiny sparrow swooped in close across our path. With our minds still back at the theater watching that film, on cue, all of us jumped back away from that tiny little bird in shear terror -- only to then just as quickly catch ourselves, at which point all of us laughed, the transition of coming back from fantasy to reality....and a great tribute to the power of Hitchcock and the Mayfair Theatre combined!

Google search exactly the words "Boxoffice May 29, 1937" and when the issue appears, type in the search box "Philadelphia" and eventually you will see an exterior photo of the Mayfair in all its original glory.

The search is a bit tricky, but the pic of the Mayfair on page 31 is worth it. The link is http://issuu.com/boxoffice/docs/boxoffice_052937/31

1983 photo of the Mayfair Theatre.
http://americanclassicimages.com/Default.aspx?tabid=141&txtSearch=CATAdvancedSearch1%2c38%2c3%2c2268&ProductID=29655