Palladium Times Square

To Bill Kallay and Mike Coate: I’m sure all of us on this thread can’t wait to see your upcoming lists. We really appreciate the hard work you put into it and we’re grateful to you for even attempting it. Seeing a list like that will be the next best thing to seeing a beloved movie classic in 70mm.

Thanks to Bill Huelbig for pointing out my collaborator’s “Star Wars” articles on …in70mm.com. Michael Coate put a lot of time and research into this article. Hopefully you got a “kick” out of finding out which places showed the classic in 70mm. He also compiled a list of “The Empire Strikes Back,” “Alien” and “Close Encounters Of The Third Kind” 70mm engagements.

One of the important aspects about the phenomenon of “Star Wars” was the fact that its presentation in 70mm really set it apart from other films. It truly took the way audiences, for a time, experienced a movie. Certainly the Roadshows were on a higher level than their 35mm counterparts, but it was “Star Wars” in 70mm that introduced an new generation to better picture quality and super sound. So if you go through Mike’s list, I hope you can appreciate that a number of theaters upgraded their projection and sound equipment to “wow” audiences with this film. No longer was 70mm Six Track Stereo presentation just for musicals and epics; it was for exciting popcorn movies, too. Some exhibitors figured that great projection of 70mm and six track sound could bring in audiences and $$$$. Why can’t they figure that out nowadays?

I have never been in the Astor Plaza, but based on the information here, this theatre “should be a keeper.” However, I want to make a correction to MikeRa statement on May 26th. “Star Wars” did play at the Eric’s Place Theatre in Philadelphia. However, that theatre did not present films in 70mm. It was too small. The screen area was between two exit doors. The theatre only had no more than 400 seats. It was the Trans-Lux originally before being taken over by Sameric Theatres. “Star Wars” moved from the Eric’s Place to the Eric’s Mark 1 a number of weeks after its opening. The Mark 1 was capable of showing 70mm, but the screen size still did not compare

to the Sameric/Boyd Theatre a few blocks away. Hence when the next two “Star Wars” films were released, they were both shown in “real good” 70mm on the real large screen of the Sameric/Boyd Theatre. Both the Eric’s Place and Mark 1 have long since been closed. The Sameric/Boyd Theatre, the last movie palace in center city, has been closed for two years now. But there is great support to restore and reopen this movie palace. I attended the “roashow” showings of “Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines” and “Ryans Daughter” at the TransLux (Eric’s Place) and on my first visit for “Flying Machines” was extremely disappointed on the screen size for a roadshow presentation.

William were Oliver and Funny Girl presented at the State and the Criterion in NY in blow up 70mm? Neither was filmed in the process and neither were advertised in their original roadshow engagements as being in presented in 70mm. It seems odd that two major films at this time playing at 70mm houses were simply shown in Panavision. Maybe Columbia had a major budget crunch concerning prints. Interestingly these are probably the only two of the hardticket movies at this time that made money.

The studios only made a limited numberof 70MM prints, not like those numbers they do for todays film releases. The major markets would get the major 70MM Roadshow releases. Some of the smaller towns would or might get the feature in 35mm 4-Track Stereo. About 99 & 9/10th % of all those 70MM prints are gone with the wind. The studios would destroy the print instead of paying storage fees and the age of the prints too. The film exchanges would dismount the film and trash it and reuse the shipping cans and reels for later 70MM releases.
One problem about newspaper ads is they would state use the film’s format photography as a selling point. So “Exodus” was photographed in Panavision 70, but sometimes a newspaper ads would word it that way. And other ads would read “Presented in Panavision 70”, and that would be the correct way for presentation. One way show it was photographed in 70MM and the other shows how it was presented in 70MM. That one you have to look out for when doing research in film ad formats.

Guys you should read my post about the Astor Plaza I wrote under the Capitol in response to William’s description of December ‘68 in Times
Square. How ironic that you are all waxing nostalgic about this place. Well as they say one’s man’s junk is another man’s treasure!

As well I would love to know what played in 70mm and where. Did Star Wars play at the Stanley Warner in NJ in 70mm or do we think it did.
When the roadshows played the smaller towns like Montclair and Asbury Park were they 70 or 35? And what in the world happened to all those prints?

Bill, great Star Wars article. It brings back memories as I remember knowing people who saw the film for the first time at a standard 35mm mono sound theater(in those days most were mono) and they either, didn’t see what was the big deal, fell asleep or hated it.
I remember the 3rd and 4th time I saw the film was at the Totowa Cinema 2 and the Willowbrook 3 (former grand theaters then cut up for multiplexing) and I was …well, quite bored. The next time was the 79 re-release and I saw it again in 70MM at the Paramus theater and I loved it. It just goes to show that the 70MM showings made the difference for seeing that movie and for our memories. I assume that’s one of the reasons there’s so many replies to the Astor Plaza.

Rhett: you may be aware of it already, but here is a website that you will definitely enjoy:

in70mm.com

and you’ll like this article for sure:

View link

From Vincent-Can you call Star Wars a 70MM masterpiece when it was not filmed as such? I think if I remember correctly in the late 70’s and 80’s there were many big films released as 70MM blow ups but they never look nearly as good as the real thing.

I think it’s safe to to say that as a 70mm presentation, “Star Wars” was superior to anything else in the market at the time. You got a bright and sharp picture image on the screen, not to mention the fantastic Six Track Dolby Stereo soundtrack. The also prompted many, many theaters to upgrade their projection and sound equipment over time. Sure, when you compare a blow-up to a true 65mm image, the 65mm image is clearly superior. But compared to what we get now, I’ll take a 70mm blow-up anytime.

I’ll agree with Rhett on “Far And Away.” Mikael Soloman’s cinematography is superb, but by shooting the film in foggy and dark locations, the film left most people asking, “What’s so special about 70mm?” But if you recall, when the Oklahoma scenes came up, the picture was awesome.

Bill H: Cherish those memories, because Star Wars: Episode III is on its way! :) I remember those feelings of excitement watching that original film. What a kick it was. Now I’m getting depressed! Another great theater is about to be closed. We don’t have 70mm presentation hardly anymore (except for revivals and IMAX DMR). And George is unleashing the last of a pretty underwhelming trilogy. Who said change was good?

Rhett- The 68' would be for Todd AO and other 70mm films but definitely 100' for Cinerama.
Does anybody know the measurements of the Astor Plaza and Ziegfeld’s screens?

Vincent….well if you wanna get technical??? I saw it at Stanley Warner in Paramus, I was 16,at that time I was working at the Clifton theater where “THe Deep” was playing, Mom picked me up after work,we all stood in line in Paramus and when the opening scene occurred, the audience flipped, I remember thinking, I’ll never have an experience like this again (so for me, a masterpece). If it wasn’t filmed in 70MM, it didn’t matter to me, it was shown in 70MM and the it worked for me. Last night I watched the original version again and it brought back memories.

There were many 70MM flicks I’ve experienced and alot of them made a difference in the viewing. I mean I saw “Staying Alive” in 70MM, it was great. When I saw it again, I thought, “What were they thinking”!! “Far and Away” was shot in 70MM and not only did the film stink, but I was unimpressed by the 70MM…but, Vincent, I hear where you’re coming from and I agree with your wish for a 68ft. screen. To each his own I guess. I also suppose it’s not worth it to venture to the Astor to say goodbye since the quality seems to be slipping. Guess we’ll just keep our own experiences in
memory.

I was in the Astor Plaza on Saturday to see “Shrek 2”. Loew’s has changed those 4 backlit posters as you go downstairs to Loew’s type ads and one of them dates back to last summer with the movie “The Core”. The auditorium was far less then ¼ full at the 5:55PM show. The presentation was just fair, print was damaged with afew scratches and splices. The film just opened three days before. It just shows you how Loew’s feels about this theatre, as long as they get their $10.25 admission.