Paramount Center

549-59 Washington Street,
Boston, MA 02111

Unfavorite 18 people favorited this theater

Showing 226 - 250 of 266 comments

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on April 14, 2005 at 2:36 pm

The photo is from 1945 and is described here.

Here’s another 1945 photo of the same scene, but taken from the opposite direction. It is described here.

The “RKO Keith’s” theatre shown in both photos is now the Opera House, though if recent news reports are to be believed, it may soon be renamed the Citizens Bank Theatre.

Between the RKO Keith’s and the Paramount in both photos is a marquee and entrance for the original B. F. Keith’s Theatre, which by 1945 was no longer part of the Keith circuit and been renamed several times. In these photos, you can just barely make out the words “NEW NORMANDIE” on top of its marquee. This theatre was torn down in the early 1950s, but the entrance building still stands today.

teecee
teecee on April 14, 2005 at 2:06 pm

Can be seen on the left of this photo along with the Keith:
View link

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on April 14, 2005 at 1:41 pm

Someone should update the description and photo at the top of this page, as both are now out of date.

Here’s Emerson’s official press release about the Paramount.

For a local discussion and some photos of the Paramount and its surroundings, take a look here:

ArchBoston.com forum: Emerson College to redevelop Paramount Theatre

(you’ll need to continue to page 2 of this discussion forum to see the photos)

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on April 13, 2005 at 10:17 am

What the article refers to as the “Arcade building”, at 543-547 Washington Street, used to contain the Bijou Theatre and an entrance to the B.F. Keith’s Theatre. I believe the ‘vacant North Lot parcel’ is the former site of the Keith’s.

Here’s a recent photo and description of the 543-547 Washington Street building.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on April 13, 2005 at 9:45 am

Some good news in today’s Boston Globe!

Emerson College to redevelop Paramount Theatre

The long-awaited renovation of Washington Street’s Paramount Theater moves a large step closer to reality today, with Mayor Thomas M. Menino’s planned announcement of a new partnership with Emerson College. The $70 million Paramount Center project would redevelop the Theater District landmark and two neighboring properties to provide two theaters, rehearsal rooms, student residences, and restaurant space.

Menino plans to join leaders of Emerson College, Millennium Partners-Boston, the American Repertory Theatre, and other local arts groups today to announce the project. Loosely projected to open in 2008, it would include the Arcade building at 543-547 Washington St., next to the Paramount, and a vacant parcel called the North Lot, behind the Arcade.

Emerson’s trustees voted Monday to take on the project and to earmark $70 million for it, bringing the college’s investment in Theater District properties to more than $350 million, according to board chairman Ted Benard Cutler. Millennium Partners acquired the Paramount as part of its deal with the city to develop nearby Millennium Place, and it has already spent $1.6 million on repairs.

Emerson is working with Elkus/Manfredi Architects on preliminary designs. Plans are sketchy but will probably include a theater seating about 450 and a smaller, 75- to 125-seat black-box theater. One of Gund’s designs had featured a 700-seat space, and BRA spokesman Susan Elsbree said yesterday that the final size will depend on the needs of the nonprofit arts groups that the city wants to include.

The project still faces substantial challenges. Built in 1932 as an Art Moderne movie house, the Paramount has a shallow stage — just 11 feet deep — and a nearly flat auditorium floor that creates some bad sightlines. Most of the theater’s original details have not survived its long, slow spiral, which bottomed out in the building’s last incarnation as a porn theater before closing in 1976.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on March 30, 2005 at 9:16 pm

I thought it was a group of airplanes flying in military formation…

JimRankin
JimRankin on March 30, 2005 at 9:11 pm

More likely a bleed through of stains on the back of the original.

dave-bronx™
dave-bronx™ on March 30, 2005 at 5:53 pm

Are those UFOs in the sky above the theatre? I should send this to Art Bell….

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on March 30, 2005 at 5:41 pm

Here’s a 1949 photo of the Paramount and surrounding businesses. The photo is described here.

dave-bronx™
dave-bronx™ on March 20, 2005 at 11:08 am

There is a black & white photo of the interior of the Aurora Paramount on page 160 of “American Picture Palaces” by David Naylor, and it is indeed the same design as shown in the architects renderings of the Boston Paramount mentioned in Mr. Newman’s post of 2/23/05 above.

I remember seeing the Boston Globe in the late 60s or early 70s where the General Cinema directory ad listed the Paramount. Wasn’t the area known as “the Combat Zone” back in the early 70s? If so, that’s probably why GCC closed the Paramount – not enough people bringing their kidlettes to the area to see ‘101 Dalmatians’.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on March 20, 2005 at 5:40 am

According to an unpublished draft manuscript by Douglas Shand-Tucci entitled The Puritan Muse (available in the Fine Arts room of the Boston Public Library), this was the only Washington Street theatre built exclusively to show movies, and the only one never to have a stage show.

The Paramount moved from the New England Theatre circuit to General Cinema in June, 1967.

JimRankin
JimRankin on February 24, 2005 at 11:36 am

Sorry about the link error; I was not saying that the views are to be seen at their site, only that this is the organization that was responsible for the Aurora photos and brochure of Conrad Schmitt’s restoration there.

As to why they appear on a site devoted to the Boston PARAMOUNT, I can only guess that it was a mix up at the advertising or web site producers' offices, or that they wanted to present the impression that their work would equal that done to the Aurora PARAMOUNT.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on February 23, 2005 at 3:01 pm

I’m convinced, especially now that I’ve looked at CinemaTour’s photos of the Aurora Paramount.

Now I wonder why Warren Freedenfeld & Associates would apparently misrepresent their (never-executed) project in this way.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on February 23, 2005 at 2:28 pm

That link doesn’t work. Do you mean www.ConradSchmitt.com ? I don’t see anything there about the Paramount Theatre in Aurora — only a Paramount in Anderson, Indiana.

JimRankin
JimRankin on February 23, 2005 at 2:13 pm

Yes, the photos there are definitely of the restored PARAMOUNT in Aurora, Illinois. Those views are from the brochure about the theatre in Aurora by the restorers: the Conrad Studios outside of Milwaukee at www.ConradSchmittStudios.com

Scott
Scott on February 23, 2005 at 1:51 pm

Ron:

The interior photos look to me like they are of the Paramount in Aurora, Illinois. I’ve never heard of a twin of that in Boston. Something is fishy there.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on February 23, 2005 at 1:08 pm

This page has two breathtaking photos of the Paramount’s interior. I don’t know when these were taken. If any of you have been inside, how do these photos compare with what you saw?

Unfortunately, the project proposed on that page never happened because FD Rich got into bankruptcy trouble and ‘Commonwealth Center’ was not built.

bunnyman
bunnyman on February 15, 2005 at 5:55 pm

Not sure if it belonged to any chain when it was semi-porn.

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on February 14, 2005 at 12:15 am

When the Paramount showed porn movies, was it still a General Cinema? It seems quite out of character for that chain.

bunnyman
bunnyman on January 27, 2005 at 8:39 pm

I went to see Flesh Gordon here during one of its numerous re-issues so the year is suspect but it was one of the last films to play there.
I was amazed how huge the place was and even though very run-down you could still see signs of a true movie palace.

IanJudge
IanJudge on January 23, 2005 at 1:58 am

I agree that the Paramount deserves renovation; it would appear that it is to be renovated sometime soon. I doubt that it would make a great “Broadway in Boston” touring-show kind of theater without a completely new stagehouse (like the nearby Keith Memorial/Opera House). Also, as previously noted above, the proscenium is quite narrow.

I think that the Paramount would be a good home for dance/ballet or possibly a film series, but it is unclear which groups will utilize the space upon renovation.

Many of the interior details are now gone, but could be recreated. Yet this would make it a very expensive renovation, restoring it to the art-deco glory it once was, so any new renovations may not resemble the old Paramount.

jtre123
jtre123 on January 23, 2005 at 1:06 am

Someone needs to restore the Paramount!! I have been admiring it for years, and Boston could really use more historic theaters to perpetuate the Broadway in Boston movement. With the revival of the Opera House, the Paramount would be a great addition to Washington Street’s bustling shopping and dining areas!

Ron Newman
Ron Newman on January 5, 2005 at 12:03 am

Berklee College of Music gutted and modernized the Fenway Theatre in the mid-1970s. It is now a concert hall called the Berklee Performance Center.

BoxOfficeBill
BoxOfficeBill on January 4, 2005 at 11:48 pm

As a kid who grew up in Brooklyn NY in the late ‘40s-early ‘50s, I visited Boston a few times in ‘49-’50 when an aunt lived nearly. I recall that at that time films at the Paramount played day-and-date with a theater named the Fenway, presumably located near the Fenway. When I visited Boston as an adult, I could not locate that theater. Had its name changed? I remember the Paramount vividly. One January day in ’50, we walked down Washington Street, gazing at all the theater lobbies along the way. “Samson and Delilah” was playing at the Paramount (and at the Fenway). I had just seen the film at NYC’s Rivoli, and I marveled at how studios could distribute their films simultaneously across the map of my universe. As a jaded college student a decade later, I visited friends in Boston, and we went to the Paramount to see a revival of “Samson and Delilah.” We sat in the balcony and made snide comments about Victor Mature and Hedy Lamarr. A disgruntled patron complained about us to an usher, who told us to shut up or get out. For all its art deco, the Paramount bore stylized traces of French Renaissance enough so that the theater struck me as a smaller facsimile of the Times Square and Brooklyn Paramounts with their high, narrow prosceniums and sweeping balconies.