According to this source: View link opened in 1903 as the Greenwall. Also “Orpheum” appears on the marquee; I wonder if at one time it was part of the Orpheum Circuit of vaudeville houses.
Here is a picture of the Palace from the Historic New Orleans Collection: View link
The theater’s site is now occupied by a parking garage, but the the skybridge, partially visible at the left, connecting the building behind the theater to one across the street is still there though refaced.
It turns out that this this theater was already listed as the Rio; it should be listed though as the Avenue, because this picture of the theater as the Rio is clearly older than the one I posted above which shows it as the Avenue: View link
MR, the IMAX technology used at Universal and some other locales,is, in most cases, a variation of their OMNIMAX installations which requires a domed screen and a fisheye projection lens. Let me refer you to the IMAX entry on Wikipedia, as we are getting way off topic here.
Aside now from the MJT in Harlem, are there any others still open? I know the ones in or near Cleveland and Atlanta have either closed or changed ownership.
I did not want to suggest that these faux-IMAX installations can’t be an enjoyable place to see a film. My objection, and that of others, is to call them IMAX is misleading.
I wanted to be objective when I posted this, but now, as a commentator, I really want to vent. Frankly I think is horrendous. The Cleveland Playhouse (CPH) has not been the prestige regional theater it used to be for many years. Unfortunately, not unlike other venerable arts organizations in other cities, it has fallen victim to egos, conflicting “artistic visions,” complicated by funding issues common these days to many institutions that depend both on audiences and philanthropy.
But what really gets my dander up is the fact that in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the CPH went on a major and successful fundraising drive to build their previous home, the Bolton complex, which was designed by the distinguished architect (and Cleveland native) Philip Johnson, that gave them a state-of- the-art-theater and education complex in Cleveland’s University Circle area, not far from the Cleveland Museum of Art and Severance Hall. Then (probably because they had trouble filling seats) they up and sell the complex to the Cleveland Clinic which will probably tear it down, after only about thirty-odd years of use.
Now, they somehow convince the Playhouse Square Association, (PSA) which rescued the Allen (demolition had actually begun at one point) and raised and poured millions into it to make it an appropriate place for Broadway and other big proscenium shows in the 1990s to let them have the theater. Incredibly, the PSA agrees to this desecration, justifying the decision on some flimsy pretext about the diminishing availability of Broadway blockbusters (unconvincing – especially as a Broadway show will be playing there right up until the time the Allen is supposedly to close for this atrocious retrofitting). It is dumbfounding to me that the PSA was convinced (even if it thought, plausibly, that the CPH would be a nice “fit” in Playhouse Square) to allow a stunning, expensively restored, 2,500 seat, C. Howard Crane masterpiece to be turned into a 513 seat “intimate venue” because the CPH deems the place inappropriate for THEIR needs? This is insane. What makes the CPH or the PSA think that, if the Playhouse could not fill the seats at the Bolton complex’s theaters, they will do better downtown at the Allen? What happened to the PSA’s original vision of restoring these theaters? There’s a failure of mission and marketing here on a grand scale. I can’t imagine Chicago, which was a latecomer to downtown movie palace restoration, now allowing the Cadillac Palace, the Ford Center/Oriental, the Chicago, or the Shubert (sorry, Bank of America Theater —– ugh) to be turned into some “intimate space” just because some civic theater deemed it too large.
I guess, though, the handwriting may have been on the wall, when the PSA decided the Hanna would be better off as “cabaret” space. At the time, though I wished for a more traditional renovation, it did not strike me as such a radical departure. Clearly, this was a harbinger of worse things to come.
I understand very well that there is no free lunch and that theater restoration and maintenance costs are high and that no theater is well-served standing around empty. But before embarking on such a scheme, should not the CPH have proved it could bring an audience downtown by staging some shows at the Hanna or the Ohio?
If I were a corporate or a private donor to either the PSA or the CPH, I would be livid. I would demand the CPH pay back all those millions that built the Bolton and not give either the CPH or the PSA a dime for this. While I would not disagree that the CPH might be a good fit for Playhouse Square in general, they should get their donors to build them some black box theaters in some disused office buildings nearby.
Anyone who has seen genuine, authentic IMAX can tell. As other posters have noted, whether you call them IMAX digital, IMAX-lite, Lie-MAX, or fake IMAX, in most cases these Regal IMAX screens are just bigger-than-average screens that use digital projectors from the IMAX Corp. Classic IMAX screens are several stories tall and (at least originally) projected only 15 perf/70mm film running horizontally.
I don’t think this would be as irritating to those of us who see this as a degradation or misuse of the IMAX brand if only IMAX and the theater chains with which they have agreements would use a name that did not suggest that these were classic IMAX installations. Surely some marketing guru could have come up with something. Competing chains have come with their own proprietary names for similar big screens, such as Consolidated’s Titan XC screens and AMC’s ETX screens. An additional annoyance here is that most of these big screens are not any larger than many of the screens installed in the classic roadshow days or in single screen houses built in 1960s. But many of these “experiences” now require a premium-priced ticket and many of these big screens do not have proper masking for all screen ratios which results in a cropped image in some cases.
It is listed on the “Grand Openings” section of the Regal site; if you click on the theater’s name there, it indicates that the grand opening is set for Friday, June 11, 2010; probably this is the date it will appear in the listings with showtimes. The theater had a “soft opening” as of June 7.
And what on earth do they need more lobby space for when there is already that magnificent domed rotunda? Do we really need more space for cocktail parties and black-tie events when what is really needed right now is more people from across the economic spectrum filling auditorium seats?
Frankly, I am disgusted that the Cleveland Playhouse, once one of America’s most distinguished regional theater companies is involved in this travesty. I attended many of their productions growing up in Cleveland and was very impressed with the Johnson complex when it opened (although rather liked their old 77th Street theater which, I think, was once a church or a synagogue, with its thrust stage). I thought (I am sure with many others), that the new complex not only would help revive surrounding area, but assure the longtime vitality of the Playhouse. One can only wonder what all those contributors and benefactors that helped build the Johnson complex and restore the Allen are thinking now. I have friends in the Cleveland theater community who often say that over the last decade or so, the Playhouse, unfortunately like some other venerable arts institutions in other cities, has been plagued with egos, conflicts over vision and purpose, and internal politics. Now this abomination.
I agree, whole-heartedly; I was horrified when I read this news item. It would seem to me that the whole notion of the theater is now too big to be economically viable is a lot of nonsense, and the idea of creating an “intimate space” out of the grand auditorium and obscuring the architectural details of the auditorium, one of Crane’s masterpieces, is simply desecration. I hope something can be done to at least rethink this disastrous proposal.
Plans have been announced to significantly alter the Allen to make it a home for the Cleveland Playhouse and the theater programs of Cleveland State University. Seating would be slashed from the current 2,500 to about 500. The existing balcony would be sealed off (for potential later use), and a new smaller balcony constructed; the current seating under the balcony would be eliminated and the lobby space extended into the vacated area. Although, supposedly, most of the architectural details would remain, they would be partially obscured by new acoustical panels. Two new black box theaters would also be built adjacent to to the theater building.
The rationale for such a drastic alteration is said to be the realization that given the reduced number of Broadway touring shows, the Allen is now too big to be economically viable and that the Palace is sufficient as the “big house” at Playhouse Square.
Here’s an article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer that includes both pictures of the Allen as it is currently, and sketches of the proposed changes and the new theaters: View link
According to this article about the closing of the Fireweed Cinemas and the opening of a new Regal megaplex, the Totem will now operate as bargain cinema: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/151912
The theater has been closed since January, 2010, but will reopen under the ownership of the Chatham Film Club, not-for-profit group: View link
According to this source: View link opened in 1903 as the Greenwall. Also “Orpheum” appears on the marquee; I wonder if at one time it was part of the Orpheum Circuit of vaudeville houses.
Here is a picture of the Palace from the Historic New Orleans Collection:
View link
The theater’s site is now occupied by a parking garage, but the the skybridge, partially visible at the left, connecting the building behind the theater to one across the street is still there though refaced.
It turns out that this this theater was already listed as the Rio; it should be listed though as the Avenue, because this picture of the theater as the Rio is clearly older than the one I posted above which shows it as the Avenue: View link
A picture of the Avenue, alleged to be from 1956: View link
MR, the IMAX technology used at Universal and some other locales,is, in most cases, a variation of their OMNIMAX installations which requires a domed screen and a fisheye projection lens. Let me refer you to the IMAX entry on Wikipedia, as we are getting way off topic here.
Press release here: View link and here: View link
Aside now from the MJT in Harlem, are there any others still open? I know the ones in or near Cleveland and Atlanta have either closed or changed ownership.
I hope they give it a more attractive name; the current one makes it sound like it is part of a prison.
I did not want to suggest that these faux-IMAX installations can’t be an enjoyable place to see a film. My objection, and that of others, is to call them IMAX is misleading.
I wanted to be objective when I posted this, but now, as a commentator, I really want to vent. Frankly I think is horrendous. The Cleveland Playhouse (CPH) has not been the prestige regional theater it used to be for many years. Unfortunately, not unlike other venerable arts organizations in other cities, it has fallen victim to egos, conflicting “artistic visions,” complicated by funding issues common these days to many institutions that depend both on audiences and philanthropy.
But what really gets my dander up is the fact that in the late 1970s and early 1980s, the CPH went on a major and successful fundraising drive to build their previous home, the Bolton complex, which was designed by the distinguished architect (and Cleveland native) Philip Johnson, that gave them a state-of- the-art-theater and education complex in Cleveland’s University Circle area, not far from the Cleveland Museum of Art and Severance Hall. Then (probably because they had trouble filling seats) they up and sell the complex to the Cleveland Clinic which will probably tear it down, after only about thirty-odd years of use.
Now, they somehow convince the Playhouse Square Association, (PSA) which rescued the Allen (demolition had actually begun at one point) and raised and poured millions into it to make it an appropriate place for Broadway and other big proscenium shows in the 1990s to let them have the theater. Incredibly, the PSA agrees to this desecration, justifying the decision on some flimsy pretext about the diminishing availability of Broadway blockbusters (unconvincing – especially as a Broadway show will be playing there right up until the time the Allen is supposedly to close for this atrocious retrofitting). It is dumbfounding to me that the PSA was convinced (even if it thought, plausibly, that the CPH would be a nice “fit” in Playhouse Square) to allow a stunning, expensively restored, 2,500 seat, C. Howard Crane masterpiece to be turned into a 513 seat “intimate venue” because the CPH deems the place inappropriate for THEIR needs? This is insane. What makes the CPH or the PSA think that, if the Playhouse could not fill the seats at the Bolton complex’s theaters, they will do better downtown at the Allen? What happened to the PSA’s original vision of restoring these theaters? There’s a failure of mission and marketing here on a grand scale. I can’t imagine Chicago, which was a latecomer to downtown movie palace restoration, now allowing the Cadillac Palace, the Ford Center/Oriental, the Chicago, or the Shubert (sorry, Bank of America Theater —– ugh) to be turned into some “intimate space” just because some civic theater deemed it too large.
I guess, though, the handwriting may have been on the wall, when the PSA decided the Hanna would be better off as “cabaret” space. At the time, though I wished for a more traditional renovation, it did not strike me as such a radical departure. Clearly, this was a harbinger of worse things to come.
I understand very well that there is no free lunch and that theater restoration and maintenance costs are high and that no theater is well-served standing around empty. But before embarking on such a scheme, should not the CPH have proved it could bring an audience downtown by staging some shows at the Hanna or the Ohio?
If I were a corporate or a private donor to either the PSA or the CPH, I would be livid. I would demand the CPH pay back all those millions that built the Bolton and not give either the CPH or the PSA a dime for this. While I would not disagree that the CPH might be a good fit for Playhouse Square in general, they should get their donors to build them some black box theaters in some disused office buildings nearby.
Anyone who has seen genuine, authentic IMAX can tell. As other posters have noted, whether you call them IMAX digital, IMAX-lite, Lie-MAX, or fake IMAX, in most cases these Regal IMAX screens are just bigger-than-average screens that use digital projectors from the IMAX Corp. Classic IMAX screens are several stories tall and (at least originally) projected only 15 perf/70mm film running horizontally.
I don’t think this would be as irritating to those of us who see this as a degradation or misuse of the IMAX brand if only IMAX and the theater chains with which they have agreements would use a name that did not suggest that these were classic IMAX installations. Surely some marketing guru could have come up with something. Competing chains have come with their own proprietary names for similar big screens, such as Consolidated’s Titan XC screens and AMC’s ETX screens. An additional annoyance here is that most of these big screens are not any larger than many of the screens installed in the classic roadshow days or in single screen houses built in 1960s. But many of these “experiences” now require a premium-priced ticket and many of these big screens do not have proper masking for all screen ratios which results in a cropped image in some cases.
It is listed on the “Grand Openings” section of the Regal site; if you click on the theater’s name there, it indicates that the grand opening is set for Friday, June 11, 2010; probably this is the date it will appear in the listings with showtimes. The theater had a “soft opening” as of June 7.
I think you probably are thinking about this item, announcing good news on the fundraisng efforts on behalf of the Denis: View link
There is a small one included in this article about the efforts to preserve the theater: View link
Peoria is the largest city in the country? Who would have guessed? 8-)
The demolition is just about completed; picture here: View link
Apparently after coming to new terms with the Galleria Mall management, this theater is going to remain open after all: View link
The Palace was damaged by a tornado that ravaged Elmwood on June 5, 2010: View link
And what on earth do they need more lobby space for when there is already that magnificent domed rotunda? Do we really need more space for cocktail parties and black-tie events when what is really needed right now is more people from across the economic spectrum filling auditorium seats?
Frankly, I am disgusted that the Cleveland Playhouse, once one of America’s most distinguished regional theater companies is involved in this travesty. I attended many of their productions growing up in Cleveland and was very impressed with the Johnson complex when it opened (although rather liked their old 77th Street theater which, I think, was once a church or a synagogue, with its thrust stage). I thought (I am sure with many others), that the new complex not only would help revive surrounding area, but assure the longtime vitality of the Playhouse. One can only wonder what all those contributors and benefactors that helped build the Johnson complex and restore the Allen are thinking now. I have friends in the Cleveland theater community who often say that over the last decade or so, the Playhouse, unfortunately like some other venerable arts institutions in other cities, has been plagued with egos, conflicts over vision and purpose, and internal politics. Now this abomination.
Recent article about the community support the Castle is currently enjoying: View link
I agree, whole-heartedly; I was horrified when I read this news item. It would seem to me that the whole notion of the theater is now too big to be economically viable is a lot of nonsense, and the idea of creating an “intimate space” out of the grand auditorium and obscuring the architectural details of the auditorium, one of Crane’s masterpieces, is simply desecration. I hope something can be done to at least rethink this disastrous proposal.
A timeline of the Allen’s history: View link
Plans have been announced to significantly alter the Allen to make it a home for the Cleveland Playhouse and the theater programs of Cleveland State University. Seating would be slashed from the current 2,500 to about 500. The existing balcony would be sealed off (for potential later use), and a new smaller balcony constructed; the current seating under the balcony would be eliminated and the lobby space extended into the vacated area. Although, supposedly, most of the architectural details would remain, they would be partially obscured by new acoustical panels. Two new black box theaters would also be built adjacent to to the theater building.
The rationale for such a drastic alteration is said to be the realization that given the reduced number of Broadway touring shows, the Allen is now too big to be economically viable and that the Palace is sufficient as the “big house” at Playhouse Square.
Here’s an article from the Cleveland Plain Dealer that includes both pictures of the Allen as it is currently, and sketches of the proposed changes and the new theaters: View link
According to this news item, Rave plans to close this theater soon: View link
According to this article about the closing of the Fireweed Cinemas and the opening of a new Regal megaplex, the Totem will now operate as bargain cinema: http://community.adn.com/adn/node/151912