Odeon London Covent Garden
135 Shaftesbury Avenue,
London,
WC2H 8AH
135 Shaftesbury Avenue,
London,
WC2H 8AH
10 people
favorited this theater
Showing 1 - 25 of 41 comments
I’m updating a link I previously posted to Thomas Hauerslev’s in70mm.com website and its article about the ABC Shaftesbury Avenue.
https://www.in70mm.com/news/1998/shaftsbury/index.htm
I was working for ABC - EMI at the time of purchase… The Theatre was purchased off Bernard Delfont Who was also The Chairman of EMI Cinemas Ltd., which was part of EMI Film and Theatre Corp., Ltd., Eye Brows were raised at the time..
closing date 11/8/24
Definitely closed !? sigh
Current views of the Odeon Covent Garden (December 2023) here:-
SCREEN 1
SCREEN 2
SCREEN 4
ABC 1 & 2 OPENING
Lionel: Yes, I could not make out whether the surrounds had the characteristic angled baffles (fronts) of the 8330’s. I’m really not sure what speakers were standard in the “early” days of Dolby Stereo? “Local” cinemas had surround speakers that looked like they had been taken from a 1970’s “stereo centre” domestic “hi-fi” system!
That’s very nice of you. :–)
There is nothing that can replace the magical, majestical, and unique masterpiece that was the old Empire 1, and it is probably fair to say that there never will be. At least some of its design, form and spirit lives on in the IMAX.
Cineworld’s refurbishment of the rest of venue is impressive but absolutely disrespectful of the heritage; it really is their cinema now. With the changeover to their own management, the continuity with the past (i.e. MGM->CIC->UCI->Empire Cinemas) has been further eroded, too. I wonder what happened to those old uniforms that you photographed in the manager’s office?
However… I hoped that the Superscreen info/photos might encourage you to keep some interest in cinemas as they are today. :–)
It may well be relatively “generic” in decor and lacking in the old theatrical embellishments. But… the screen is almost 70ft. wide, and the sound system is top-of-the-line and very powerful. The auditorium also has a lot of height at the screen end, which helps it to feel spacious, too. Once the main feature started, it honestly reminded me of past times in the greatest West End cinemas. :–)
I, too, used to do that, although I don’t think I would have attempted it in the old Empire 1. Hmm, although I may have done. :–(
I would usually try to multiply the rows by seats per row, then (where the sidewalls “splay” inwards, i.e. not a “box” shaped auditorium) compensate for the reduction in seats per row towards the screen by working out how many seats to deduct from the basic calculation.
Fortunately, with plans usually readily available (in the UK) these days thanks to the Internet, there is no need to count seats. :–) Or at least, it can be done at home, if you do not trust the seat counts given on the plans… ;–)
P.S. Counted the seats on the old Empire 1 plans, cross-checked against photos, it was definitely 1330. (688 stalls, 642 circle.)
I believe these surround speakers aren’t 8330 because their enclosure is rather rectangular. I lost interest in the Empire since they turned it into an Imax theatre but looked at your Superscreen pictures out of solidarity for your own obsessive-compulsiveness. :–) My case however is improving a little bit over time, as I no longer count the seats of the theatre I’m into. I remember having counted those of the Empire in 1993, because different sources mentioned different figures.
Lionel: Great photos, thanks for the links. Looks like some have only been added a year or so ago.
Wonder if Thomas Hauerslev has higher resolution versions available?
I’m afraid that I, too, cannot make out the rear speakers, despite adjusting the image in photo editing software. I can make out two “blobs” on each of the sidewalls. Is it just possible that they were JBL 8330’s, or maybe that’s being too optimistic? ;–)
Never! :–) You might like to look at the photos that I’ve uploaded of the Superscreen at the Cineworld Leicester Square for some more “obsessive-compulsiveness.” ;–)
On his comprehensive site https://www.in70mm.com, Thomas Hauerslev published an article about the ABC Shaftesbury Avenue with informations and pictures dating from the nineties: https://www.in70mm.com/newsletter/1998/55/shaftsbury/index.htm
I asked Thomas about the speaker system in use back then, but he had no recollection.
This is the introductory page to his articles about his visit to West End cinemas in the early nineties: https://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/london/index.htm
And here is the link to his picture gallery with two more pictures of the ABC at the bottom: https://www.in70mm.com/news/2015/london/gallery/index.htm
I used graphic software to strongly enhance the light of the picture and see the surround speakers but wasn’t able to identify the model. Well, never mind, I must get rid of these obsessive-compulsive habits ;–) .
SethLewis: I like your idea and indeed the proposed scheme (if the developer is to be believed) was intended to have delivered something closer to your suggestions than another West End cinema playing the same first-run mainstream fare.
From the Planning Statement document of the refused application:*
“A new four-screen cinema providing a total of 260 seats would be provided at basement level. The cinema would be operated by the Applicant and would be based on the second viewing cinema principles successfully operated by Light Cinemas.”
(*Relinked since the link in a previous post does not work.)
Regarding the above discussion on “less than substantial harm,” reading through the “Refusal Report,” this (confusingly!) appears to be correctly worded—there would be harm to the building’s heritage, but not as severe as “substantial harm.”
Essentially, in this case, the proposals need some alterations/refinements to be acceptable in heritage and other aspects, e.g. the form and massing of the additional floors above existing roof level. A revised scheme was submitted; however, further changes are/were sought.
(Full details beginning at the bottom of p21 of the “Refusal Report,” under the heading “Design Review Panel.”)
In gaining permission from Camden Council, the primary stumbling block for the developer would seem to be the provision of sufficient evidence to demonstrate that full scale use of the building as a cinema, theatre, or other “cultural/leisure” activities would be unviable. For this planning application, they did not carry out an acceptable marketing exercise in relation to finding potential operator of such, which the “Refusal Report” states:
“…should be undertaken over a period of not less than 12 months and be based on a realistic price/rent which is supported by the Council.”
According to Camden Council’s planning database, at this time, the refused application has not been appealed.
Addendum: On reflection, my previous post suggests that Tom Holman/Lucasfilm/THX were the fountainhead of the new speaker designs whereas key developments occurred elsewhere.
Very briefly: The JBL 4675 incorporated key developments such as their patented “Bi-Radial” “constant directivity” horn design and were the first THX certified screen speakers. A THX installation required a baffle wall and use of the THX time-aligned active crossover unit.
In 2001, JBL engineers were honoured with an Academy Award for Scientific and Technical Achievement for “The Concept, Design and Engineering of the Modern Constant-Directivity, Direct-Radiator Style Motion Picture Loudspeaker Systems.”
Not to sideline the achievements at Lucasfilm; and the THX programme played a key role in promulgating the use of new sound systems, as well heavily acoustically-treated and isolated auditorium designs.
A “TL;DR” historical overview of the new speakers can be read on p55 and p57 (PDF page numbers) in “The History and Legacy of JBL.” Elsewhere in the document, information on earlier cinema speakers (Western Electric/Altec Lansing) is available.
(Just realised that I know little about the Vitavox screen speakers that were common in the UK, so that might just be something to add to the never-ending research to-do list!)
2 sold out previews of Uncut Gems at the Prince Charles last night (was at the 21:00)…London and the West End need more of this than another ‘Luxe’ multiplex playing the same as everyone else…Retwin it and run more repertory programming!
Addendum: In case anyone reading this is interested in a more detailed account of the changes to cinema speaker systems as mentioned in the previous post, a 1990 interview with Tom Holman from “Speaker Builder” magazine is available.
Lionel: I do not know what was installed back in the day; in the flickr photoset that you linked to, DP75 projectors can be seen in a booth.
In the 1980s, cinema sound systems had not changed for decades, still using the old Altecs or Vitavox designs dating back to the mid 20th century.
After Dolby Stereo was introduced, cinemas simply upgraded the (so-called) “A-chain” with a Dolby Stereo decoder.
The THX programme in particular motivated changes to the “B-chain” side, with the JBL 4675 as the canonical example of the new screen speaker design (eliminating the bass horn and using a modern so-called “constant directivity” horn for the midrange/high frequencies) as specified by Tom Holman et al at Lucasfilm.
(N.B. The new speaker types were installed industry-wide, not THX-certified auditoria only.)
My suspicion is that an upgrade of the screen speaker system would not have occurred at the time that your Father visited. Still, the old screen speakers, whilst not state-of-the-art at that time, were very capable and indeed the old Altec “Voice of the Theater” speakers are now sought after by collectors (see eBay prices!) As an aside, with the immense technological progress in the 70 years or so, it is ironic that speakers were available then that still eat today’s average consumer “Bluetooth” speakers for dinner!
So even if still using the old speaker types, as long as the system was properly serviced, which seems more likely here than the local “flea-pit,” it may well have provided better than average sound.
Looking at photos of two of the current auditoria, the rear array speakers look like JBL 8330s (OK, but now obsolete and the design pre-dated the “new” digital formats, e.g. Dolby Digital. I’m also not sure if there are a sufficient number for adequate coverage?) The sidewalls are covered in (dirty looking!) stretched fabric or “Soundfold” pleated fabric, presumably hiding acoustic absorption behind. Of very limited interest with the spectacular Odeon Leicester Square’s Dolby Atmos installation available close by…
I never had the opportunity to see a film there, but my father went twice in the eighties, to see Altered States in 70mm and A Handful of Dust in 35mm. He said the sound was excellent. Though the quality was partially due to good Dolby Stereo recordings, he seemed to say that the auditorium sound system and acoustics were extremely good. Do some of you remember what equipment was in use, and in which of the two auditoria these films played?
Photo album on Flicker when it was 2 screens :
https://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcinemaphotos/albums/72157603446610536
£26 million…someone is being greedy Agree there is a long term decision to be made here – an up to date West End legitimate theatre would be great…it would give operators space to renew some of the older ones As for a cinema it’s a shame that there may not even be a low-end ROI…clean up the seats…don’t go LUXE not everyone needs it…and look for gaps that PictureHouse Central and Curzon don’t fill…a BFI West End for longer runs of revivals at convenient times? Old and imperfect still can be fun!
Howard I typed it as it was written on the letter on the planniing site but did wonder if it was correct. I think in retrospect it is probably a mistake by council.
Jason, did you mean to type in your 1st post above, “more than substantial harm” rather than “less”?
Additional comments on the application from March 19: “A number of further credible operators have come forward with specific interest. This site represents the last and only opportunity in the West End to provide a large scale cultural venue such as a theatre with a fly tower, as it still has the volume and footprint to provide one. It has the potential to offer an auditorium seating up to around 1,400 seats”
Looks like planning application to turn it into hotel has been refused. Which is good news. The refusal says “The proposed rooftop extension, by reason of the proposed height, mass,detailed design and materials would compromise the form, architectural character and historic interest of the host listed building, and in combination with the change of its main use to a hotel, would result in less than substantial harm to the significance of the host listed building and nearby surrounding Seven Dials and Denmark Street Conservation Areas, contrary to Policy D2 (Heritage) of the Camden Local Plan 2017.
I know it won’t happen but it would be nice if it became a one auditorium building again and the art deco was recreated. Wealthy theatre owners take note.
Jasonmullen: Thank you for the heads up—the main planning application.
There is a separate listed building application, in which a Historic England response advises that the additional roof levels could harm the “cubist” aspect of the building’s original external design, but the benefits of the scheme could outweigh this loss. They have authorised Camden Council to “decide as [they] see fit” with the application.
Some excerpts from the “Construction Method Statement and Basement Impact Statement”:
-Original building: “Steel frame with a masonry façade.”
–“Two storey basement formed with large reinforced concrete retaining walls.”
-1970s: Conversion to two screen cinema and partial conversion to offices, with “a completely remodelled auditorium.”
-2000s: “Extensive remodelling” to form four screens.
–“The new cinema layout constructed in the 1970s is predominately a steel frame, and […] has almost entirely replaced any of the original structure inside the retained façade.”
–“[Proposals are to remove] all of the internal structure of the existing building, leaving the façade and retaining wall to the existing two storey basement.”
–“The [proposed] superstructure [is] a traditional RC frame…”
–“The existing façade in the front atrium will be supported by new steel columns in the assumed location of the existing steel frame.”
Just in case anyone reading this (if anyone is still reading this post!) wondered how the proposed works are to proceed without walls tumbling over, details and drawings are provided on pp276-280 (!) of the PDF.
Onto a summary of some aspects of the proposed cinema.
The two largest auditoria are on the North West side of the building, with the screens positioned adjacent to Shaftesbury Avenue and New Compton Street. Alas, this means that the auditoria are not quite symmetrical. Both auditoria are about 100sq.m. in size, and the largest screen is, as marked on the drawings, according to my estimates, almost 40ft. wide, with the other a little smaller.
The first row in the largest auditoria is only ~0.25 screen widths away—too close!—but the screens are generously sized.
The two smaller auditoria are about 50sq.m. in size, and the screens I estimate to be about 20ft. wide.
Seating looks to be generously sized with ample legroom.
FWIW, “The Need for Renewal” document says “it would cost approximately £26 million to refurbish the building to a modern standard where it could continue to be let to a cinema operator.” It is certainly in a state of disrepair!
There is therefore plenty of potential for high quality modern auditoria, but that might be of little comfort given that this is essentially a façade retention scheme, and ~40ft. wide “immersive” screens are, perhaps, not suggestive of “art house” programming.
I think there was a brief period after Odeon took it over in 2000 when it was known as “Odeon Shaftesbury Avenue”, before it became “Odeon Covent Garden”: I have a ticket for ‘Hamlet’ from 29/12/2000 with “Odeon Shaftesbury” printed as the name.
Night shot of the Odeon Covent Garden facade – January 2018 – here:–
ODEON COVENT GARDEN