Paramount Theatre
1501 Broadway,
New York,
NY
10036
1501 Broadway,
New York,
NY
10036
38 people
favorited this theater
Showing 351 - 375 of 508 comments
According to an article in todays New York paper, back in 1939 when Benny Goodman appeared at the Paramount, the movie playing, which was “Zaza” staring Claudette Colbert, never had a thespian’s chance.
Shrill shouts of “We want Benny!” drowned out the soundtrack. Patrons demanded Goodman music felt the movie merely delayed the stage show. I just had to share this with all of you, it was just to fun to pass up.
The information, Warren, is very interesting but misleading. Almost certainly, those examples of longevity were NOT a result of the popularity or quality of the film cited (with the possible exception of “Going My Way”), but rather the popularity of the bands (and other acts) which appeared with them.
Can you cite the bands or acts which appeared during the long runs you cite?
Ernie Nagy
One each of the curved and flat railing sections shown in the photo posted by Warren on Aug. 26 have been incorporated into the railing at the top of the three-storey escalators feeding the garish Famous Players Paramount that opened a few years ago here in downtown Toronto. They are part of a sort of shrine to the Times Square Paramount that has been set up in a no-traffic cul-de-sac on what is the main level of the theatre, on the third floor. Several photos, including this one, are on display along with a short video outlining the original’s history and how this new monstrosity that passes for a movie theatre came to have them. Nice to know that something has survived, even in these depressing surroundings. Problem is, you don’t even see it until you’re on the escalator going down to leave the place.
Does anyone have any information on the clocks and globe at the top of the building?
Warren I didn’t know the office space was for the Times. Another reason to dislike that dreadful paper that has done as much as anything to destroy the glory that was midtown Manhattan.
Vincent—
Mayor Giuliani wasn’t elected until Nov. 1993. That was long after the demise of the Times Square movie palaces.
Interesting that when the Paramount was being torn down there was no public outcry when at the same time the old Met and Penn Station were being torn down as well with the Astor and Capitol and Times Tower to quickly follow. This immediately let to the deterioration of midtown lasting two decades when the rest of historical Times Square was demolished without so much as a hiccup from the public making the real estate developers and Giuliani very rich(especially with all those tax abatements.)
Most likely, when the chandeliers were removed in fear of their falling during foreseen bombings (which did not materialize, of course), they were carted off to some warehouse in LARGE crates where they no doubt incurred large storage fees! After the war it was the 1950s, and the so-called International Style of architecture with its Modern decor was all the rage, and the movie palaces in their period style decors were ‘old hat’ to the Rock ‘n’ Roll kids coming on the scene, so the owners saw no financial benefit to paying the tens of thousands of dollars to have them carted back and rehung. Soooo, it is likely that they stopped paying the storage fees and the warehouse simply sold them for metal scrap. After all, what kind of market exists for 40 or 50-foot high candeliers? Remember that Ben Hall said that they offered the giant Rotunda chandelier in the ROXY to the Cardinal of the Catholic church, gratis, and he turned it down because it was just too big! The situation was really the same for the PARAMOUNT’s owners since no one was building palaces anymore and where else does one put such huge, heavy, and ornate lights? Yes, I would love to see them too, but I, for one, cannot take them off their hands and hang them in my living room (they would be equal to the height of about four of my living rooms), and I know that the spaces of the Theatre Historical Soc. above the lobby of the YORK theatre in Elmhurst, Ill. are nowhere big enough to hang even one of them! Sic Transit Gloria.
What happened to the lobby space and all its decor?
ERD is perfectly right; castigating the current occupants of what has not been a theatre building for around 40 years, serves no purpose. The attempts to recall the original signage at least reminds the younger ones that this was once other than another mere office building. Perhaps some of them will investigate and learn of this and other grand movie palaces of their parents' or grandparents' times and of what we have lost and failed to pass down as their heritage.
At the least, the owner should spring for a sizeable plaque to be mounted where the passerbys can see it, and yet not where metal scavangers can steal it (a common practice by drug addicts who sell such plaques to metal salvage yards who are none too scrupulous about where pricy non-ferrous metals come from!); perhaps inside a vestibule seen through outer locked glass doors? If no one else will volunteer, I will gladly write the historic text for such a plaque, if the owners will but contact me by clicking on my name in blue below, and that will take them to my profile page where there is the CONTACT link. (I do not give it here because of robots that scan the web for E-mails to which to send more spam).
If it raises awareness of the loss of the great theatre that was once there, it is ultimately good for preservation. WWF’s re-creation of the marquee and arch were a big, unprecedented step, too. Would it be better to not remind people of what has been lost?
ERD you make a good point, I am just bitter about the loss of the Paramount and have decided to take offense to the HRC’s use of the Paramount name.
Since a child, I have always loved the movie palaces. I have extenisvely lectured, and even wrote a radio show, that encouraged people to appreciate the theatres that are left. However, we are living in new century with different needs. Sadly because of the huge expenses, just so many movie palaces can be saved. The owners of the Hard Rock Cafe are simply trying to make a living. I do not put them down for using a part of the FORMER Parmount building. They did not destroy it. Our love of the movie palaces must be kept in perspective if we are to have any positive influence.
one more time
View link
i think i got now i hope
View link
Warren, you are quite correct, the Paramount sign on the buildings entrance is all that remains. I already wrote to those idiots at HRC explaining they were not entitled to any claims to the legandary Parmount name and question their rights to try and do so. I have not had a response, which is not a surprise. I am not a fan of the current marquee either, to me it’s just a sad reminder of the devastaion of a great theatre. I do like what McDonalds did, it’s a wonderfull tribute to what once was the Great White Way.
Everything I have ever read about the Times Square Paramount has said it was completely gutted and replaced with office space. Nothing remained to show a theatre had ever been there. The floors were put in throughout and the offices continued across on all floors. Even the windows at the front were taken from the side of the building to match the others at the front. There was no sign a theatre had ever been there.
The Hard Rock Cafe at 1501 Broadway claims to “taking over the former Paramount Theatre” and when I checked their site out it showed pics of them renovating the space. It looked large and cavernous and there was detailed plasterwork. It has space for 700 tables and a concert space. They also have a “space above the historic marquee to entertain†The current marquee is a rather clumsy, but welcome, attempt to re-create the original ornate bronze canopy that was replaced in the early 1950’s. The new façade arch window and marquee being only about 4 years old.
Could there have actually been part of the Paramount left inside the building or is this all hype for the new Café in the bowels of the building?
IM NEW ON PHOTOBUCKET.COm so i hope i get it right this time
View link
Vincent,
I can’t speak for The Paramount (it was long gone before I ever stepped into Times Square) but I know it was not uncommon for original 1.37:1 screens to be shorter as well as so much narrower than Cinemascope and Vistavision screens. When they designed Cinemascope, Fox engineers increased the height of the 35mm film frame to allow more light etc… . From what I understand (and I’m not a projectionist, so I could be totally wrong on this) if you used the same focal length lens on both images, the scope would naturally display it’s increased height (from the taller frame), as well as the extra width.
Here’s an ad for the Alan Freed rock and roll show in the mid fifties.
View link
Many thanks for that ad, Warren. I saw that show. Charlie Spivak, a trumpet player, led one of the more popular bands of the time. I commuted from Metuchen, NJ via railraod to Penn Station. What a time that was!
Ernie Nagy
The last time anyone mentioned the Hard Rock Cafe here was in January.
This web page may be important: View link
Great photos Robert.
Concerning the boxing image. The screen does not seem huge to me. Was this the size of the 35mm screen pre Vistavision-cinemascope?
So if you were in the balconey what did you see if anything? Was it hard to concentrate on an image so small in a house so enormous?
RobertR—
Swell pictures and accompanying captions. Did your photo of the televised boxing match come from Life Magazine? As a kid, I remember seeing such a photo there ca. 1950. Do you have its source and date? And do you have the source for the Beatles' photo, too?
Oh boy – what I wouldn’t give for a trip in a time machine back to 9/21/64, destination Paramount Theatre.