70mm World Premieres now listed in introductions of New York City movie palaces

Well during that time frame the Best way to present a film was in a 70MM Stereophic Sound format. The studios gave important films and some not so important films the BIG SCREEN treatment on 70MM it also gave a Big Boost at the box office. CinemaScope and Cinerama also offered large screens and stereo sound. But the studio found that Cinerama was limited at the start to a select few theatres. CinemaScope was a big draw and most every theatre could install it for a nice cost. But 70MM was the Rolls Royce of presentations in the film world. 70MM could offer bigger sound and clear pictures that the 35mm versions of the film. And 70MM engagements out grossed the 35mm engagements many times. That’s why people have a strange obsession with 70MM engagements. Work in the booth, I’ve played many 70MM shows.

Thanks, William, I didn’t think “Windjammer” was 70mm or true Cinerama, but wasn’t sure what CineMiracle is. Now, you’ve explained it! When cleaning up Philadelphia’s Boyd, we found a huge Windjammer poster. I took photos of it, but the poster was tossed (by the owner). It was too dirty and without any real pictures.

I remember as a kid in 69 being amazed that a legit house was showing a movie…. but I am sure GOODBYE, MR. CHIPS did indeed have its first NY (roadshow) run at the “RKO Palace” in late 69. I’m not sure if it was the World Premiere, but it was the NY premiere, and I’d imagine MGM would have struck a 70mm print, because the throw was soooo long up above the 2nd balcony. I’ve been up there and it’s like he side of a mountain.

However, the UA Rivoli did not exactly (as stated on the Rivoli page) get converted to 70mm/Todd-AO for AROUND THE WORLD IN 80 DAYS. The first picture released in Todd-AO was the first to play the Rivoli after the big overhaul, and a special crazy-quilt like curtain was created and installed specifically for OKLAHOMA! I have a copy of the Boxoffice magazine announcing the conversion and debut of Todd-AO at the Rivoli, and there are good pictures of the entire conversion process at American Widescreen Museum www.widescreenmuseum.com in the Todd-AO section.

Having said that, it is pretty nifty to see the extra details added in here.

“Goodbye Mr. Chips” was a 70MM blow-up and had it’s World Premiere on Nov. 5th. 1969 at the Palace in NYC and a West Coast Premiere on Nov 7th 1969 at the Fox Wilshire Theatre in Beverly Hills.

I remember “Goodbye Mr. Chips” getting a nasty critical drubbing at the time of its release, and I avoided seeing it despite Peter O'Toole getting an Oscar nomination for it. What a mistake that was – I finally saw it many years later on Turner Classic Movies and enjoyed it very much. If only I’d gotten to see it in 70mm …

Thanks, Howard, for all your efforts. William was so right when he said 70mm was the Rolls Royce of film presentation, and any information about it or references to it are more than welcome on these pages.

A couple of notes: When I first came to New York there was a picture of taken in a booth showing Cinemiracle which I assume was the Roxy on the Local #306 meeting room wall. Cinemiracle used extremely large reels as did Cinerama, but in that case both were mounted below the projector.

A friend and colleague of mine Milton Olshin was the projectionist sent to run the test footage and dailies in a theatre in Westchester. Milt was short, and one of the Cinemiracle people told Steve D'Inzillo, the B.A. of #306 that Milton was talented but perhaps a little short to lift the reels to the top of the projector. Steve replied, “Oh we’ve got lots of TALL projectionists!” implying that Milt could be replaced, but not with the same results. As a result, according to Milton, they redesigned the magazine layout so that both reels fed from the bottom of the projector which actually made sense, since Cinerama later developed a large hoist system to lift the reels to the top magazine.

I also remember Bill Nafash my predecessor at Radio City talking about the “Chips” installation at the Palace. They built a special booth down in the balcony or mezzanine at about a zero degree angle for 70mm, both for the “Ben-Hur” re-release and the “Chips” premiere. As has been noted above, the throw was so short, and the focal length of the lenses was so short to achieve the picture size they needed, that every time a projector was threaded the lens had to be unlocked and slipped forward to allow the film gate to be opened, and then put back to show the reel in focus. There were times when it was forgotten to reinsert the lens to the proper position, resulting in a very out-of-focus picture at the changeover.

By the way, I was in the original spotlight/projection booth at the top of the Palace balcony during a legit presentation. The 35mm projectors were still there, and the angle was so steep that the projectionists would have had to sit down to thread the machines.

Just a quick note, unrelated directly but in a roundabout way: I saw “Blade Runner – The Final Cut” at the Ziegfeld Theatre in NY the other day. If you’re a fan of the above movies, that may not be your cup of tea. But it’s one of the last big-screen theaters anywhere, and the highly touted digital restoration of this movie is everything the critics said it was. So bright and sharp it’s almost 3-D. I don’t know if it was a film print or a digital disc, but it was really amazing. I’ve never seen anything like it. So I’ve seen the future, and it’s looking good.

I don’t recall when 70mm blowups became the norm. Originaly of course, movies were filmed in 65mm and the 70mm release prints were outstanding. later, sometime in the 60s I believe, more and more movies were shot on 35mm, and 70mm blow up prints were struck. The difference, at least to me, was rather obvious. Is there a list of films filmed in 70mm as opposed to those shot in 35mm? When was the last film shot on 65mm stock?

Vito, you are correct. There are a few websites including http://www.fromscripttodvd.com/index.html
from which you can review film by film.
Looks like 1st blow up around 1963 but they kept on filming some films in 70mm. I think “Hamlet” in 1996 was the last one filmed on 65mm; I saw it projected in 70mm at the Paris in NYC.

Ron Fricke shot “Baraka” (1992) in Todd-AO.

JSA

Not meaning to rain on anyone’s parade, but I feel the film gauge
is not the criterion to be used in making the exhibition of a film “special.”

I am of the opinion that the criterion to use is if the run was a hardticket (reserved seat) one with limited showings (meaning one showing every night with matinee showings three days a week).

Historically speaking, are we to rank the musical version of “Goodbye, Mr. Chips” as higher on the importance scale because it was in 70mm as compared to such 35mm releases as “Gone with the Wind” or “Birth of a Nation”?

Up until Digital and analog stereo sound was the norm, magnetic sound was the way for a studio to present a film in stereo. For those BIG studio releases on Roadshow. They presented the film in the Best way it could be presented in 70MM and Stereophonic sound. On this thread it’s about some of the technical aspect of the presentation when each theatre had a full-time projectionist that put on the show. Today it’s all done with an automated unit to do what a projectionist did. During that time there was one to two men in those booths for Roadshow presentations, and they made each show a First Class trip to the movies. Not all Roadshown movies were in 70MM or stereo. In each big city around this country and the world had their First Run district in the downtown areas. Alot of the presentation aspect has been lost or never told to the public. Some people think it was all done by machines. But no it was done by a group of people who knew their craft as a projectionist. Today it’s a lost art, as you will see.

I updated each of these 6 movie palaces because there’s a website that tells where the World Premieres of 70mm features were held.

So far as I know, there’s not a website for 35mm World Premires, or exclusive runs of outstanding famous films like GWTW or 35mm Road Shows.

In other words, I did what I could. And, I thought it would be interesting since 70mm is the “Rolls Royce” of film presentation and many of the films mentioned are among the best beloved.

Now, if people want to Comment at each theater’s page which World Premieres, and/or exclusive local runs (regardless of premiere) of famous 35mm (“famous” because there were so many 35mm)were shown, then eventually, it is likely that the Introductions could be so updated. The volunteers have better things to do than update ONE film at a time, but once there’s a nice gathering….

Well, for starters, my former theatre Radio City Music Hall did “White Christmas” with horizontal VistaVision projectors. In addition, I believe both the Criterion and the Paramount installed them for the runs of the next two VistaVision films. It was Paramount’s proprietary process, so it would have made sense for them to do the initial runs with horizontal projection (I believe the two films were “The Far Horizons” and “Strategic Air Command”, but I’d have to check Martin Hart’s Wide Screen Museum site to make sure.) In Chicago I believe “White Christmas” premiered at the State-Lake with true horizontal projection. Theo Gluck of Disney found that there were probably more screenings in England than here (possibly because there was an additional tax on 70mm prints, and VistaVision was 35mm). Those machines are still running. I did VistaVision dailies on “Men In Black”, “Michael” and “Jungle2Jungle” a few years back. The problem of course was that a horizontal VistaVision projector could only run that process, while 70mm projectors could also run 35mm film.

Gentlemen! Gentlemen! There’s no point rehashing how great 70mm projection once was unless it’s with an eye to the future of replicating that greatness with digital cinema.

Which Philadelphia’s Boyd Theatre, currently up for sale, is in the perfect line up for. In the past when it came to both 70mm and Cinerama it proved to be outstanding in this regard, while there’s no question that it demands to be brought into play in this way again. Only incorporating digital cinema technology this time around. Meantime, I think we ALL would like to hear what HowardBHaas — who heads up Friends of the Boyd — is doing to help bring this goal to fruition. So let’s hear it, Howard! We’re all ears!

For seriously, gentlemen, we can’t go back. But we can go forward. And this is forward. That is, let’s make this webpage relevant to the here and now.

Well Howard, that brings to mind one of the last 35mm roadshows. “Fiddler on the Roof”, which I ran in June 1972 at the Syosett on Long Island in 35mm with four mag track sound.

70mm in New York lists the D-150 on Long Island as having played “Fiddler”, but as I recall we played the movie at the Syosset which we played day and date with the Five Towns theatre in Woodmere, Long Island. The Syosset played the movie in 35mm with four track mag sound and the Five Towns played it in 35mm with Optical(mono)sound. They did get a four track mag/optical print at the Five Towns but the theatre did not have mag capabilities and so it played mono

It was a significent event on Long Island because Prior to “Fiddler” most if not all roadshow engagements were 70mm which employed two projectionists on duty for every show. However when “Fiddler” played in 35mm, the projectionist union had a difficult time convincing the theatres owners to continue using two projectionists per shift. Century theaters, who operated the Five Towns, insisted only one man per shift was needed for a 35mm engagement, roadshow or no roadshow.

REndres, there has always been some confusion in my mind about VisatVision projection in New york.
I recall you teling us RCMH installed VistaVision for “White Christmas” but used the projectors for only that engagement.
I also remember the Paramount theatre installing VistaVision projectors. but That’s about all I can recall.
I always wonderd about the Criterion, did they ever install the projectors and how did they run “10 Commandments”
I was still new in the business, working the Paramount theatre on Staten Island in 1954, and can not recall where the projectors were actually installed. The Capital theatre played a few Paramount pictures, any VistaVision there?
By the way, what ever happened to the VistaVision projectors at RCMH,
and what was the configeration in relatinship to the other four 35mm projectors?

For the VistaVision Presentation of “Strategic Air Command” at the Warner Beverly Hills Theatre. It was presented using the Century Lazy 8 projectors on the new Curvilinear Screen and in Perspecta Stereo Sound.

I remember that 70MM releases were so exclusive that in 1981 when “Raiders of the Lost Ark” was released here in Toronto, the ads proclaimed “FOR THE FIRST TIME, 70MM AT FOUR THEATRES”. After that, there were so many films released in the 70MM format, that the theatre chains kept adding more and more with 70MM capabilities. By the time that “The Untouchables” and “Stakeout” came out in 87, they showed at about 10 or 12 theatres in 70MM.

William: I moved to the LA area in the late 80’s. As you know, during that time and until the mid 90’s, there was an unprecendented surge in 70 MM releases. Although I don’t have hard numbers, my experience tells me that given the choice between 70 vs 35 mm, patrons chose 70 mm consistently. So if we have 70 mm engagements out-grossing 35 mm, what happened? Were the earnings not enough to cover for the additional cost of blow-ups or shooting in 65 mm? Or was it a cost cutting issue within the theatre chains?

The economics of the existing motion picture industrial-complex baffle me.

JSA

I started to see the end of 70mm prints in the late 60s; then came Star Wars in 1977 and the resurgence began. People wanted more 70mm and prints began becoming available once again. I seem to recall the biggest 70mm releases came in the early 80s were just about every other week or so I saw the release of a movie with prints available in 70mm. Theatre owners were once again began installing 70mm.
Unfortunately it did not last, and by the late 80s once again, 70mm prints began getting scarce.
One of the problems steamed from the fact that Multiplex theatres with limited 70mm houses could not move the 70mm prints from house to house depending on how well they were doing. Many 10-12 screen Multiplexes had only two or at the most three 70mm houses and they were always the largest ones. So, if a movie did not do well after one or two weeks we had to switch to a 35mm version in order to play it in a smaller auditorium. I read Tim’s comment on theatres in Toronto having 10 or more auditoriums equipped with 70mm, but in all my travels I never saw anything like that in New York/New Jersey. Perhaps someone can correct me on that.
In addition, the prints could not be interlocked into two or more screens, and on a busy Friday or Saturday night popular movies needed more seats, but with the 70mm print we were locked into just the one auditorium. Then of course there was the cost, the 70mm prints were expensive and shipping a print was double the cost of a 35mm print. The studios began to wonder if that extra cost was worth it. I always thought it was because time and time again when ever we had two prints of a movie and played only one of them in 70mm the house with the 70mm print always did better. When a 70mm showing sold out people would often wait it out and see the next performance rather than settle for the 35mm version.
So it was not so much loss of interest by the movie going public that killed of 70mm it seems to me it was the studios reluctance to provide prints, and the theatre circuits shying away from them.
The company I worked for had for many years installed 70mm in at least two of the auditoriums in a Multiplex. Then in 1993 they stopped, and instead spent the money on Dolby Digital and/or DTS equipment. Other than IMAX, They have not had a 70mm installation since 1992.

Very true Howard, While Dolby Digital is not compatable with 70mm, DTS is, all that was needed was a 70mm reader.I thought Titanic was going to be the begining of a resurgence of 70mm, with Digital sound replacing the mag tracks. However it was not to be, the idea soon faded. In fact I would be concerned about the fate of both DTS and SDDS Digital sound, it’s all about Dolby now. We still have Quad prints with Dolby SVA, Dolby Digital, DTS and SDDS all printed on release prints, but for how long I wonder.
It is too late for 70mm, all attention is focusing on Digital Cinema which is growing at lightning speed. The use of film in motion picture theatres is in danger of going the way of Vinyl records and video tape. It’s a whole new world.
Progress? well, I suppose.

The studios were going for the bigger sound that only 70MM print could offer. The picture have was just extra. So the advent of Digital sound on 35mm print could give the film maker that BIGGER sound and the studio only has to spend for 35mm prints. So CDS was the first out of the gate, it gave you 70MM picture and Digital sound. But it had no back-up analog track to save it. (Failed) Dolby did many test runs on their system and how the print would run after X many runs on it. (Passed) DTS offered a cheaper way of Digital sound and it works, but you need the depot to ship the disc for Digital sound (Passed) SDDS the last out of the gate and the most expensive to install and great when it works right. But has problems with worn prints, splices switching it back to analog for a few seconds and repairs from SONY now. (just waiting to fail). And the one that never made it out of the gate DLS (Digital Laser Sound) which also used a disc for playback.

Vito, I’ve noticed I’ve seen more films recently in theaters with Dolby Digital, but until reading these comments, I didn’t realize that Dolby Digital had won out over DTS & SDDS. Dolby sound had previously set an excellent standard, but at the onset of digital sound it often seemed as if the others were superior.

I know there won’t be new 70mm films, but I do hope there will be some life in restored and vintage 70mm classics. New films will all eventually be digital, and many classics, too. Digital isn’t up yet to the quality of 70mm. I would’ve preferred the new revisions of Apocalpse Now and Blade Runner in 70 mm prints.

For those who haven’t stated their opinion yet, which of the 6 movie palaces mentioned on this thread was your favorite to see 70mm?

Sorry, I was of course referring to DTS with the Spielberg story

Well it seemed to be the best, but SONY no longer sells new SDDS units and theatres are replacing the old units since they do not repair them.

Bill, I too am sorry that you are such a young whipper snapper, if not you would have had a chance to fully experience the magnificent presentaion at the late,great Rivoli.

You said it, Vito. “West Side Story” at the Rivoli 46 years ago would be my very first stop if I had access to a working time machine. Come to think of it, I did see 70mm there once: a revival of “2001”!

Actually, Vito, I suggested classics going digital is the inevtiable future.
My dream would be to see more 70 mm 6 track prints- excellent ones, and some restored ones. I saw the restored Lawrence of Arabia, but missed color corrected restored print. Robert Harris doesn’t like the “restored” Dr. Zhivago so I’d like to see a restored 70 mm print of that. I’d like to see restored 70mm prints of Ben Hur and The Bridge over the River Kwai.

Being younger than Bill, I’ve seen 70mm classics in their restored or rerun appearences at theaters especially Uptown in DC, but arrived too late for the 6 NYC movie palaces that I’ve updated. I could’ve gotten into the chopped up Criterion or DeMille, but that was after Road Show years.

So which American theater will dare to take digital cinema out of the “Edison stage”? Just as SINGING IN THE RAIN depicted Hollywood’s transition from silents to talkies, will there someday be a musical about what’s going on now as well? I look forward to the theater that really takes the lead and runs with digital cinema. America-wise, will it be in NY or Philly? Back when the Beatles sought to make there American debut, Philadelphia, with its “American Bandstand” TV show at the time was given first choice, but host Dick Clark didn’t see anything to them. So NY stepped in and grabbed them up, premiering them on “The Ed Sullivan Show,” and Philly’s been kicking itself ever since.

Al, you are correct in that multiplex exhibition did play a big part. However, 70mm 6 track prints were produced UNTIL DTS digital sound began. Then, studios & operators abandoned the format. As William said above, the sound was important, and once digital sound arrived….then combined with your multiplex rationale, both reasons together caused 70mm to go bye bye.

Al, I am sorry, but I cannot agree with your comment “The death of 70mm had nothing to do with cost cutting from distributors nor exhibitors”. I would also disagree with the idea that with respect to the difference between 35mm and 70mm, that “few would notice the difference"
As a film exhibitor I can tell you they most certainly did notice, and in fact performances in 70mm were always more popular than those in 35mm. I state my claims based on my regular dealings and discussions with film buyers and studio people. That coupled by my first hand knowledge by having been there. Obviously a blockbusters gross was not affected by whether or not it was in 70mm, people were going to see the movie either way. Which is the whole point, and is why the studios (distributors) and exhibitors abandoned 70mm.
I agree with Howard, who wrote, the big sound helped kill 70mm.

TheatreBuff, You articulated some very interesting thoughts regarding Digital projection.
Keeping in mind that the skies the limit with what the future holds in motion pictures by way of this new medium, Digital cinema has given the theatres a new breath of life. Digital projection is being installed around the country at a much faster pace this past year, many multiplex’s now have better than half their screens equipped with Digital projectors sitting along side the film projectors. Exhibitors are beginning to see the potential for putting more people into their theatres.
Originally it was the studios that had the most to gain, by way of savings in print costs and shipping.
I am not sure how many realized the full potential of Digital or the impact it would make on the theatres.
70mm did originally bring people into the theatres, as did Cinerama and 3-D. These were new and exciting movie going experiences and the audiences loved them. However people grew bored with 3-D and it quickly died away, In addition, although not many may realize it, we had a lot of problems in the booth with 3-D, breakdowns were all to frequent, causing audience dissatisfaction.
As for Cinerama, when 70mm came along, that to seemed to disappear. Running Cinerama was a royal pain in the butt and with the quality of 70mm and the cheaper cost to produce and exhibit; I think film makers lost interest in Cinerama. Don’t get me wrong, I believe Cinerama to be far greater than 70mm, but audiences were satisfied with 70mm and did not seem to care if Cinerama survived or not. At least that’s the way I recall it.
Digital cinema gives the theatre owners something they have desperately needed for quite a while now, and that is new ways to fill the theatres. Digital 3-D is outstanding, and much cheaper and easier to present the 3-D of the past. Through Digital projection, Theatres can now present live feeds of sporting events, and concerts. National Amusements, for example presented live Boston Red Sox ball games and live opera performances.
We have just begun to scratch the service with the potential of Digital Cinema. This time unlike 70mm, 3-D and Cinerama, Digital is here to stay and will in fact eventually replace film all together.
I never want to see film go the route of Vinyl records and video tape, but on the other hand I support any medium that will keep motion picture theatres alive and thriving.
We are a dying breed I am afraid, the new generation of movie goers do not know much, or care much about 70mm, unfortunately I don’t see much coming down the pike to change that. However we must work hard to preserve the few 70mm venues we still have and continue to present 70mm film classics.
I would hope there will always be a few theatres still showing the 70mm films we all love for many years to come. 70mm simply can not be allowed to die and completely disappear; we must teach the young folks to embrace 70mm and help keep it alive.

William, Oh yes, the cost of running 3-strip Cinerama was high. We had up to five projectionists on duty per shift. A 70mm engagement generally maintained two projectionists, as did 3-D.
Later on some theatres went to one man who received an increase in salary while running 70mm.
The 70mm booth ran for the most part without problems, which was not always the case with 3-D or Cinerama. With 3-D projection, the sync motors would occasionally fail causing the left/right images to run a couple of frames out of sync. While Cinerama did not have that problem, film breaks would occur meaning the same number of frames damaged of removed from the left print would have to be removed from the right print. In order to keep the integrity of the sound track we would usually not cut frames or footage out of the undamaged print but rather insert a black slug the same length of the film removed from the damaged one. So when that scene went by the movie suddenly went 2-D (flat) for a few seconds. So projectionists became film editors, we kept a three gang synchronizer in the booth on the make up table. Incidently many may not realise that the term “flat” was coined back in the 50s when movies wher either 3-D or flat(2-D) Today it is used to destinguish between anamorphic and non anamorphic prints. Hense, flat or scope.
You are correct when you wrote about the replacement of Cinerama with 70mm Ultra Cinerama. This was caused by on going problems with the three-strip technology and its expense, many thought that the audience would not notice the difference anyway, I think the switch began sometime around 1963, as I recall the single strip Cinerama was called by some as something like Super Cinerama, but it lacked the impact of the original process. Many Cinerama theatres took the three strip process out replaced it with 70mm.

I was glad you brought up the EPA ruling for film labs, not too many people understand that was another nail in the coffin that added to the demise of magnetic prints.

Theaterbuff, well obviously I loved what you wrote, most folks were not aware of what on behind the scenes. I had a great feeling of accomplishment and joy at the end of the day after running a perfect show. I t was very important to me that no one in the audience be made aware of what was going on in the booth, and you did that by making perfect changeovers, keeping those carbons aligned to maintain perfect light, and of course exact focus. Today the boys simply thread the film, push a button and walk away, then what ever happens, happens. Today’s projectionists will never know the thrill of running a 70mm roadshow. The excitement began when the print arrived and you opened the cans, put on your white gloves, and reel by reel gave the print a loving inspection, looking carefully for any imperfections.That print was going to be your responsibility for the next few months, it was important that it be given loving care.
Next would come the technical rehearsal (dry run) where we got a chance to see the movie on the screen for the first time, deciding how best to run the lights for the overture, and checking the curtain cues to be sure the curtains closed at the right time and speed. Often when the overture had several short segments from songs in the movie, like for example in “South Pacific”, the house lighting could be dimmed in stages, dancing with the music if you will. Occasionally the director or studio would send cue sheets with suggested ways of handling the overtures, and sound levels. I always loved when we would get input from people who made the film, basically saying “take care of our baby; it’s in your hands now”. It’s important to know that the film makers cared a great deal about how the movie was projected. They recognized the fact that all the hard work they put into making the movie could be ruined by a bad presentation in the theatre. But trust me when I tell you, those of us who were in the booth in those days cared about the presentation as much as the film makers did. When something went wrong in the booth and the movie was interrupted or the showing flawed in any way, whether it was a mechanical problem or through my own carelessness, we would feel I had let the film maker and my audience down.
Now comes opening night, the house is full and it’s five minutes to overture. You have checked with management about the starting time and wait for the clock to hit the time to start. The blood starts pumping as you look out over the audience and go over the music cues in your head one last time.
It’s Showtime!, I can not describe to you the feeling you get as the film begins to roll and the music starts. It’s simply, as the kids say today, “awesome”.
When the show is over and all the lighting and curtain cues went without a hitch, and every changeover was executed perfectly, you would go home felling good, and anticipating tomorrow, when you get to do it all again.
That’s what it was like for me to run a 70mm roadshow.

Theater buff, you got that right! and what a great idea. I loved that movie, “Hotel” it’s one of my favorites. The public may not appreciate how much hard work goes into running a theatre, the hours are long, and the holidays are just another working day. Then of course there is the drama; in the front of the house you have staff that does not show up, the ice machine or HVAC (heat/ac) that breaks down
And of course all those charming customers (bless them) who have absolutely no patience or interest in the problems that you may be facing, screaming “I want to speak to a manager”.
In the booth, we have mechanical breakdowns big and small, like when a take up belt breaks and you have to turn the reel by hand for 10-15 minutes, or when the exciter lamp blows in the middle of a reel.
Then there is “Oh my god, what is that burning smell coming from the generator”?
I could go on and on, my point being I think it would make a great story.We could not leave out the great tales that would come out of live theatre as well; like drunken talent,and all the backstage madness. Imagine the fun of running a theatre in the days of the old NY Palace with 8 acts of vaudeville and a movie, or the NY Paramount running movies and a live stage show. There has to be some wonderful stories there. I wonder if anyone here can relate any.
Meantime, should anyone have questions I might be able to answer about my experiences during my 56 years in the biz, both in front of the house or in the booth, please ask away.
The topic is 70mm World Premieres now listed in introductions of New York City movie palaces. I have often thought about starting a thread about running a theatre, but perhaps Howard would be gracious enough to let us share this one, keeping for the most part to his original thought. Surely there must be others out there who have movie palace stories to share.

Here is one for you. REndres is going to love this one.
We had a near nightmare when I played “Sweet Charity”. The print arrived two days before the opening, and later that day I inspected the print to find I had 2 reel two’s and no reel three.
The manager quickly notified his home office and the search was on to find a reel three. The thought was that some other theatre must have received two reel three’s and I had their reel two.
After investigating, it was discovered that was not the case, and no one had called in with a similar situation. So a rush was put in to find a reel three to complete my print. Early the next morning, the day before the movie opened, a new reel arrived by special courier. There was just one problem, it was another reel two. So now I had
3 reel two’s and still no reel three.
At this stage of the game all they could do was to supply a 35mm print in time for the opening.
I got to thinking why not run the bulk of the movie in 70mm and the third reel in 35mm. After all, to switch the projectors from 70mm to 35mm only took a few minutes. (at this point I can see REndres nodding his head in agreement as he reads this) I went to the manager with my idea and he agreed.

Think that was it? Well think again, later that day the 35mm print arrived, but it was a mono print. Once again I went rushing to the manager “the print is mono, we at least need a four track print”. Well one source told us there weren’t any mag prints struck and another said even if there are any we would never get it to you in time for the opening.
Well, by now I am this close to taking the gas pipe, but the manager and I agreed, let’s run it in 70mm and see how the third reel in 35mm looks and sounds. Well of course the difference in the print and sound quality was very noticeable, raising the sound two points did not help much. But we decided to go that way anyway;
after all, it was better than running the whole movie in 35mm with mono sound.

Think that was it, Well think again. The morning of the show this person from Universal showed up, heard what we were going to do, and said NO, NO, we are not advertising 70mm any way, so run the 35mm print. I pulled the manager aside and said “you gag him, tie him up, and throw him in a closet, I’ll lock the booth door and show it the way we planned”. Well we both had a good laugh and then my manager, bless him, went to his boss who said “I like your idea of how to run the movie, tell that Universal guy this is my theatre and we will run it as I see fit”.
At the start of the show the District Manager went out to the stage and announced what had happened, and how we were going to show the film. His announcement was meet with approval from the crowd, and we were off and running.
If nothing else our audience got a side by side comparison of 70mm with six track and 35mm with mono sound.
Like Durante said, “I got a million of em folks”

Oh, the Universal guy we were going to put in a closet? He did not attend the opening.

End of the story, they found our missing reel three and delivered in time for the second night.

It’s been almost 40 years since this happened, but I tried to tell the story as best as I can remember.

Vito: If you got a million of those stories, could we have a few more, please, when you have time? It’s great the way you make us relive these experiences with you, from all those 70mm roadshows I never got to see. Your stories are the next best thing.

VITO,
I’ve always read and enjoyed your posts on this and other theater sites. Here’s a few things you might want to write about. I can’t remerber if you ever worked at a 3 strip CINERAMA site. What was the longest any movie was ever shown at any theater you ever worked at? What was the record number of times you used the same print? Was it 70mm? Did you have 2 in the booth when you had 70mm? Did you always have a curtain? Did the curtain ever not open, what did you do? Etc., etc., etc.?

Thanks for all the fun info you always give!

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

Another grade-A post, Vito. You describe everything so well, I feel like I can actually see what you’re remembering in my own imagination.

“The Wonderful World of the Brothers Grimm” in Cinerama is one of my Holy Grail titles, but I guess it’ll never come to pass. I don’t think any Cinerama materials for that film have survived, unless they turn up in a vault somewhere, someday.

Bill, I am so glad to hear you have enjoyed my trip down memory lane.
If any questions come to mind about those magnificent days,
please let me know. I am glad you got the Durante reference, I was afraid no one would know who I was talking about.

Theatrebuff, I would certainly agree that a movie or some sort of documentary about what went on behind the scenes of a movie palace would be appreciated by those of us who have such fond memories of attending and working in those magnificent theatres. I would also think that many younger people who never had that opportunity would enjoy reading about what it was like in the days of the movie palaces. It is after al a part of our culture, an important part of movie history that must never be forgotten.
I always get a warm and satisfying feeling when ever I hear about a palace that has been saved; I wish you much luck and success with the Boyd.

A few years ago I had the good fortune of being asked to help with the restoration of a palace I attended as a kid and later worked in. When I first stepped inside, all kinds of wonderful memories began to swirl around in my head, and as I toured the theatre I was transformed back in time, it was a thrilling experience. I spent many hours peeking around in closets and store rooms looking for what ever I could find that could help bring back to life that magnificent gem. A simple thing like the original lobby stanchions and velvet ropes was to me as good as finding gold. While touring the stage and old dressing rooms I felt a bittersweet feeling because great structures like this one were dying and being destroyed. But there was hope that perhaps this one could be saved.
Perhaps the saving of the Boyd could be documented as part of a movie about movie palaces. Of course I would be happy to give you any other information, or answer any other any questions you may have
About my experiences working in a movie palace or Roadshow

Oh Bill, I wonder if after he died he ever found Mrs Calabash.
Have fun tonight!

The Friends of the Boyd, Inc., www.FriendsOfTheBoyd.org, the nonprofit organization dedicated to ensuring that the Boyd is restored and reopened as a theater (and which I am President of) in have one focus at this time: ensuring that the Boyd is saved, restored, and reopened. Our goals include a film series, exhibits of the Boyd’s history, and public tours. The Boyd will primarily be a live events theater. Any commercial movie or documentary about the role of projectionists sounds lovely, but isn’t within our mission and would need wait for the Boyd’s restoration so it would appear to be a working theater.

Vito, given the year I was born, seeing the premiere of BEN HUR at the Boyd with my family in the late 1950s when I was a very small child was the closest I ever came to experiencing what you describe. It was back in the days of Philadelphia’s can-do days, an era in totally stark contrast to the Philadelphia of today — where for the most part “nothing is possible.” Or at least that’s the constant message that everyday folks here get when they seek to do this or that. In other words, Ben Franklin, who was one of this city’s most major shapers in the past, would hardly find a very warm welcome if he were to arrive to here today. Nonetheless, I feel very fortunate to have seen some glimpses of Philadelphia back when it was still great, the premiere of BEN HUR at the Boyd being one of the best instances I recall. When at its height, the Boyd was one of just a few theaters in the U.S. that featured Cinerama, to be sure, a very daring and bold step for its time. But it’s just to show how in Philadelphia’s can-do zeitgeist at the time, the city went all out to make sure it was at the forefront of every latest breakthrough. But alas, today this city is so the opposite. Case in point, though Philadelphia still remains a major U.S. city to some degree (last year it fell behind Phoenix), it has yet to see the emergence of one single digital cinema anywhere within its sizeable boundaries. So given that scenario, the general outlook is, “Of course the Boyd could never be brought back to life again doing what it did best, and anyone who thinks they have great memories of that era when it really shined and the rest of the city shone along with it is ‘dillusional’ and ‘just imagining things’.”

As for Mr. Haas' website, as you can see, and thanks Howard for re-providing us the link, it hasn’t been updated since March 3. To semi-quote from a great movie past: The great and powerful Haas has spoken!

Howard, you keep saying “daily movies,” and that is where your major flaw is. The Boyd should be a special events theater ONLY, and special events do not happen every day. They happen once in a blue moon, and that’s what we want the Boyd fully restored for. But to try to have it so the Boyd hosts a special event 365 days a year is as unrealistic as it gets. To me the Boyd should be locked and sealed except for the moments when a special events theater is needed, which I would say would be two or three times out of the year at best. And that’s it. What’s the big mystery here? And while I’m certainly not opposed to its hosting live performances, it has plenty of competition in that regard, and the competition keeps growing. In addition to the Kimmel Center, the Pearlman, the American Academy of Music, the Tower Theater, the Prince, the Wachovia Center, and more live performance playhouses than I can count, the Suzanne Roberts Theatre has just been recently added to the growing list, and other live performance venues are on the way.

But where can people in Philadelphia go to see movie exhibition at its finest? That is, in a palatial setting? More significantly, wat currently operating Philadelphia movie theater is possibly capable of combining Cinerama of the past with digital cinema of the future? Only ONE. And it’s spelled B.O.Y.D.

You say “all things take time.” But I can offer up a perfect response to that by drawing from the Marlon Brando classic, VIVA ZAPATA…

I’m tired of hearing about the Boyd when we have lost so many Palaces in cities across the country. In Boston they really only saved 2 big theatres and 4 almost as big. The 2 were the 3800 seat Metropolitan which was at one time the Sack Music Hall and then became the Wang Center For The Performing Arts and then the CITI Wang Center. It now presents Broadway shows and concerts. At one time it used to have big screen movie festivala. Alas: no longer. The RKO Keiths Memorial of 2900 seats was also preserved as a Broadway theatre. After being the RKO it became the Sack Savoy grind house and home of the Boston Opera and was let fall to pieces. It was then bought by Live Nation fully restored for many millions of dollars and now houses big Broadway stage shows. Neither of these theatres operate 365 days a year. The Paramount, and Modern were torn down and rebuilt by Emerson College and Suffolk Law School. They rebuilt with small theatres and are used for small live presentations anf the Paramount is used for films. Both theatres were made to keep the front facade and look great. We have one more large theatre the old Lowes Orpheum about 2800 seats which closed in the early 70’s and became the Aquarius and several years later it returned to being the ORpheum, It is now a live theatre for Concerts and from what I read it is being refurbished(which it drastically needs) to the tune of a few million dollars. This is the theatre that Dennis Leary holds his annual comedy night festival. We have lost so many other theatres in the last 25 years that I can;t list them all. So finally, if you want to save the Boyd, which I think should be, then get off your rear and get a grass movement started and get to some of Philly’s big businesses like the Phillies, Eagles, Flyers, Sixers and Union. also what about Penn and other colleges. If they tell you they have no money don’t believe them. Saving the Boyd can be done but it will take a group effort. aLSO get the Media(TV, Radio and Print involved. Think of this as a PBS FUND RAISER.