The theater facade got a bit of a facelift recently; this article has a picture and a link to another one showing what it looked like before the recent work began: View link
It’s a licensing ploy by the IMAX and AMC to make you think that you are going to see a movie in the original IMAX process (specially projected 70mm film on a screen about six stories high) when all you get is a somewhat larger screen and digital projection. There’s a good article about this bogusness here: View link
This theater’s days are probably numbered; AMC is in negotiations with the City of Santa Monica to build a new theater nearby, and the closing of this theater appears to be a condition for the project to move ahead. The City wants to avoid an “oversaturation” of theaters. Here is an article about the situation: View link
As a native Clevelander, this project makes me proud of my city and congratulate and admire those who made this stunning project a reality.
My only wish though, was that not one of these magnificently restored structures was envisioned as a place primarily for the exhibition motion pictures which was the primary historic purpose of most of these true treasures. Couldn’t one of them (the State or the Ohio would have my choices) been turned into something like the Pictureville Cinema in Bradford, England or the Cinerama in Seattle equipped to show any projection format/ I know that films are still occasionally shown, but that is not my point. I wonder if something could have been worked out with the Cleveland Museum of Art (which runs a fine film series) or another organization for the programming.
It is hard to believe that this was “the largest theater south of Atlanta” in 1922 with only 500 seats. The Strand in Tampa opened in 1917 with at least 850 seats; I am sure that there were other larger theaters in Miami and other cities prior to 1922.
I am sorry if I inadvertently triggered an off-topic discussion; At the time I posted the comment about the Victory above, I was primarily interested in the issue raised by Joe Vogel about the whether the New Yorker was or was not at one time the Victoria.
However, at the time of the posting, “Victory” was listed in the aka list for the New Yorker, and I could not find any support for that name. Quite possibly, Victory was confused with Victoria by someone in the past. It has since been deleted from the aka list above the headnote, but now my remark seems out of place. My attempt at killing two birds with one stone had an unintended result.
According to this article from the Toronto Star, this theatre opened as the Cineplex 10 Carlton on July 1, 1981, based on the microfilm that the author consulted. Did the theatre lose a screen somewhere along the line? View link
The theater facade got a bit of a facelift recently; this article has a picture and a link to another one showing what it looked like before the recent work began: View link
According to this article, the theater has been sold, but will continue in operation: View link
It’s a licensing ploy by the IMAX and AMC to make you think that you are going to see a movie in the original IMAX process (specially projected 70mm film on a screen about six stories high) when all you get is a somewhat larger screen and digital projection. There’s a good article about this bogusness here: View link
This theater may get a second life: View link
Two additional recent articles, one with a picture:
View link
View link
Here is a news article about an effort that has been initiated to restore this theater and a link to a page about its history:
View link
View link
This theater’s days are probably numbered; AMC is in negotiations with the City of Santa Monica to build a new theater nearby, and the closing of this theater appears to be a condition for the project to move ahead. The City wants to avoid an “oversaturation” of theaters. Here is an article about the situation: View link
As a native Clevelander, this project makes me proud of my city and congratulate and admire those who made this stunning project a reality.
My only wish though, was that not one of these magnificently restored structures was envisioned as a place primarily for the exhibition motion pictures which was the primary historic purpose of most of these true treasures. Couldn’t one of them (the State or the Ohio would have my choices) been turned into something like the Pictureville Cinema in Bradford, England or the Cinerama in Seattle equipped to show any projection format/ I know that films are still occasionally shown, but that is not my point. I wonder if something could have been worked out with the Cleveland Museum of Art (which runs a fine film series) or another organization for the programming.
It should now be listed as the Evergreen Theater according to this article View link
It is hard to believe that this was “the largest theater south of Atlanta” in 1922 with only 500 seats. The Strand in Tampa opened in 1917 with at least 850 seats; I am sure that there were other larger theaters in Miami and other cities prior to 1922.
Three additional pictures of the Cumberland 4:
View link
View link
View link
There is a picture of this theatre’s opening day ad on Eric Veillette’s 32 Elvis Movies site here: http://www.32elvismovies.com/?p=647
A picture of the Cumberland 4 is here: View link
A picture of the theater shortly before its closing: View link
It is here: /theaters/595/
There are links to few pictures of the spire on the theater’s page here on CT.
This story, towards the end, talks about the Roxy; apparently parts of it got recycled at another location: View link
I am sorry if I inadvertently triggered an off-topic discussion; At the time I posted the comment about the Victory above, I was primarily interested in the issue raised by Joe Vogel about the whether the New Yorker was or was not at one time the Victoria.
However, at the time of the posting, “Victory” was listed in the aka list for the New Yorker, and I could not find any support for that name. Quite possibly, Victory was confused with Victoria by someone in the past. It has since been deleted from the aka list above the headnote, but now my remark seems out of place. My attempt at killing two birds with one stone had an unintended result.
The photo slideshow still seems to be accessible without charge at the site.
Go to the webpage cited by Bill Huelbig (above) on January 27.
Then this theater should have an aka of Cineplex 10 Carlton.
I saw a couple of films there of times after 1990, and somehow “Elegant Theatre” seems a bit, shall we say, exaggerated?
According to this article from the Toronto Star, this theatre opened as the Cineplex 10 Carlton on July 1, 1981, based on the microfilm that the author consulted. Did the theatre lose a screen somewhere along the line? View link
An old picture of the theater as Proctor’s Twenty-third Street:
View link
Another old picture of the Herald Square: View link
There’s an old picture of the Broadway here: http://www.josephhaworth.com/broadway_theatre.htm