LARGE_screen_format: You’re right that I am, but I’ve come down with a bit of cold I’m afraid. :–(
The OSC IMAX did indeed originally have non-recliners installed at the time of the IMAX retrofit, as shown in the above-linked YouTube video at about 17 seconds in.
I’m not aware of any other IMAXs in the UK with reclining seats—albeit I’m half asleep now!—however, an ODEON Cinemas Group press release claims it to be the first IMAX in London with all-reclining seats.
I had thought that I’d not want to recline seats, but, once you hit the “down” button it’s just too comfortable to raise back up! However, I have done this or physically raised my head up somewhat for key “active”/“busy” scenes where I wanted to better hear the stereo imaging provided by the surrounds/overheads.
Ian: Perhaps I should explain the purpose behind my “super cinema” comment?
LARGE_screen_format has made various contributions to this site and opened up numerous discussions that I’ve enjoyed responding to and learning from, which I very much hope will continue.
However, LARGE_screen_format seemed eager for the OLS to have a “giant” screen installed, even though the licensing application plans suggest otherwise, and I thought I’d post what I thought was a gentle reminder about heritage considerations.
I’m afraid that I didn’t forsee any controversy!
I think Terry’s definition is about the same as the one I’d have in mind for classic “super” cinemas; ultimately, “super” or not, maybe we should just be glad that the venues you mention still exist?!
Indeed it is contestable that the OLS is still in its original form.
Of course you’re right that most of the original decorative elements have been removed.
To be clear, by “form” I was referring more to the (three dimensional) shape, in particular of the auditorium, rather than decorative details, and that’s what the refurbishment seems to retain, c.f. a more radical scheme to shoehorn in a truly “giant” screen.
We shall just have to wait and see what the ongoing refurbishment yields!
BUT, I am also aware of the lazy journalism around, and the fact that this site is the pre-eminent source of cinema history in the UK (if not worldwide), and felt the need to contest the impression that the OLS was the last “super” in which to see a movie. […]
[…] It will be interesting to see if the Empire (former Carlton and built in conjunction with Paramount) Haymarket, which contains more original features than the OLS (despite sub-division), is successful in the current listing application.
Ah, OK—I think I see what you’re getting at?
My uninformed view on its future is not optimistic, but I wish all involved in “saving” the Empire (Carlton) Haymarket all the very best in their endeavours.
with the reclining seats (why do people need to lie down to watch a film?) […]
To compete with bed + video on demand + 65" TV = no trip to cinema…
[…] I suspect the OLS will look even less like a “super” when it reopens.
Recliners will surely adjust the perceived scale and massing; however, the new “rear” circle seating capacity won’t be too different to the existing; the seating will be wider whilst keeping the same back-to-back distance; however, the added rows and removed centre aisle compensate for this.
I fully realise that I am a dinosaur who fondly remembers the days of stalls and balcony luxury cinemas (Gaumont Manchester aged around 5), with screen tabs, separate performances, masking and all the other extras which have been junked in most venues. I do find it depressing that the only – I think – place you can now regularly view a film authentically in a large “super” is at the .which is grade 2* listed.
Not sure all of those elements are going the way of the dinosaur exactly, it just depends on the market segment?
I can understand that seeing the physical instantiations of one’s memories “bulldozed” time and again is not an enviable set of experiences—however, there are lots of interesting developments in the cinema world today which I think are worthy of attention—it isn’t all doom and gloom. :–)
No disrespect was intended from my post – I am hugely appreciative of CF100’s updates (particularly the links to the plans) of the OLS.
Thank you Ian—I should express my gratitude to this site for providing a repository which holds a wealth of material on cinemas, I trust for posterity—as well as a focal point for what most people would consider to be a rather strange avocation—without it I would never have been able to fully develop my own interest in this subject.
[Random text to overcome “Your comment appears to be spam” message/restriction which is preventing reposting text that has been edited to a minor extent.]
Searching for “085811” will lead to 1 result, namely, an October 2017 licensing application—plans are available under the “Documents” tab of its page.
I previously recall reading 60ft. as the width of the Swiss Cottage IMAX screen—estimating it from the plans, it’s ~17.5m wide (= ~57.5ft) by the chord.
On the centre line, distance from the screen to the row before last (the last has the booth in the middle of it!) is ~1.15, and to the first row (also ruined by having the vomitory access in the middle) is 0.42. So, in this respect, it’s just a bit off the classic IMAX specification.
And after all that, it turns out the screen size is on Odeon’s site under the “Auditorium Info” tab:
“IMAX Screen Size – 8.86m high x 17.58m wide.”
Which, for the metric-phobic, converts to ~57.7ft. x ~29ft. to ~57.7ft. x ~29ft.
(I’m amazed that my estimate seems to have been pretty close to Odeon’s published figure!)
The Giant Screen Cinema Association has published specifications for giant screens, which state 70ft./21.3m to be the minimum width*, and the maximum distance to the last row not to exceed screen width.
(*Or alteratively an minimum area of 3100sq.ft./288sq.m.; or 60ft./18.3m diameter for “dome” screens.)
I’ll leave it to anyone reading this to consider what the motivations are or aren’t behind these specs, but suffice to say that their stated aim is essentially to differentate the “classic” institutional-type venue from the increasing screen sizes found in multiplexes.
Personally, I think 60ft. wide is probably acceptable for an IMAX auditorium (as long as the geometry requirements are essentially met); anything much smaller is surely pushing it though? Swiss Cottage is a retrofit so it seems reasonable to cut it a bit of slack c.f. the purpose-built “classic” venues from which the GSCA has derived its requirements.
I’m afraid I haven’t visited the OSC since attending a screening of “The Last Days of Disco”(!) Certainly looks like a comfortable place to see a film with the recliners (plus the bonus of the retained ceiling features from the original auditorium.)
Oops, looks like daniels3d had already replied. D'oh—sorry!
“Luxe” upgrade of the IMAX auditorium – Shows the construction of the adjusted stadia, installation of new stretched fabric on the sidewalls and “IMAX” logo feature on the right sidewall, seating installation (duh!), and the auditorium back in a finished state.
LARGE_screen_format: Are you able to scan it or maybe take a photo of it? Please? :–)
Better than nothing, and sometimes Photoshop can work wonders (if the information actually exists it can be “pulled out”…)
Can’t say I remember the “Licence to Thrill” experience, must have been before SegaWorld opened? (I did go to the “Guinness World of Records” that was there before SegaWorld and the Pepsi IMAX)—as an aside, I have a suspicion that many of those exhibits ultimately found a new home in the “Ripley’s Believe It or Not!” attraction in the (former) London Pavilion!
Looking at the licensing plans, the stalls have steps up to each of the last three rows. Revisiting the old cross-sectional drawing, it’s clear that these are needed to raise up the new rear of the stalls to entrance foyer level.
It is also obvious from the cross-sectional drawing that the revised stalls seating obviates the rear stalls sightline issue, where for the very rear seats the balcony only just avoided obscuring the top of the screen. Presumably a 1.9:1 screen (~25ft. high) could now be installed.
With the screen (at least according to the licensing plans!) moved slightly forward, all of the “recliner” seats will be within, by my estimates, 1.5x screen distance away from the screen. If not “IMAX” standard, this is still sort of in line with what Odeon brands as “immersive” for their iSense auditoria.
LARGE_screen_format: Certainly have been many spectaculars attached to the OLS over the years! IIRC “Europe’s Premiere Cinema” was written across the main doors from LSQ right up until it was closed for refurbishment; it’s certainly still there in the October 2017 dated Google Streetview shot. I guess it must have been changed from “Europe’s Largest Cinema” at some point?
Great to hear about the ABC Globe restoration (which I wasn’t aware of), and fascinating to watch the videos that you linked to on its Cinema Treasures page.
Just getting over-excited… (and I’m afraid mid-Hampshire is about as far out of London that I’ve got this year.) I would have thought the new information on the OLS refurb would be received as very good news here?
That’s a huge outlay if the main changes are just seats and extra restrooms compared to what has gone on across the square at Cineworld, LSQ over the past five years.
I thought so too—but let’s do a crude “back of an envelope” cost calculation:
“At the top of the range a specialist exhibitor would expect to pay around £2,000 per square metre [for fitting out.]”
No idea when this guide was published, plus all the other factors that would need to be taken into consideration—
however, the cost/sq.m. can be estimated for recent refurbishments of the neighbouring cinemas:
(*Lobbies/4DX area according to Chapman Taylor; other refurbished screens estimated.)
Unweighted average for Empire/Vue/Cineworld = ~£2600/sq.m.
Using this figure for the OLS – Estimated ~3000sq.m. (including former Studios but excluding stage house, basement, etc.) = ~£8m.
The scheme does involve structural alterations, particularly to the foyer areas; the addition of lifts and escalators, and a new “glazed box” balcony/canopy on the LSQ elevation.
Also, the building fabric may require attention—the asbestos roof was replaced a couple of years ago, and the enabling works for the refurbishment also involved asbestos removal.
I agree that a giant screen in the OLS would be nice, but at the same time the fact that the auditorium looks like it will be reinstated in a state highly respectful to the heritage is a huge relief. It is the last “super cinema” still essentially in its original form operated as a cinema in the UK!
I’m trying to find the requirements for a Dolby Cinema—a What Hi-Fi? article says that the “The minimum screen size necessary is about 14m, but seat-wise there’s no specific size an auditorium needs to be to qualify for renovation.”
I don’t know if the plans mean that it won’t be a Dolby Cinema, just that having conjured up possible schemes based on inferring the implications of the publically disclosed information from Odeon, not to mention the apparent secrecy and high projected cost, I’m very surprised.
Great news in the sense that it remains intact as it was, but compared to the ideas I had for more radical schemes it’s, well, boring—and I’ve got egg on my face now for my predictions (other than the change to the rear stalls) being so far off the mark!
Still, Dolby Cinema or not, I’m looking forward to the reopening…
100° (2D) and 50° (3D) sightlines are also drawn on the former Studios auditoria, and one might well expect that they will still be using polarisation-based 3D. Hmm…
FWIW the screen shown on the old licensing plans (drawing dated 2005) measures ~48ft. wide (by the chord.)
Rear stalls largely removed to make way for toilets, switch room, “food prep” area, and concessions (namely, “Snacks and Cold Food; Order Hot Food,” “Hot Food Collection,” and “Coffee.”)
Stalls accessed through double sets of doors on the left side ONLY, via a small “lobby” area. (One pair of doors into the lobby, another into the auditorium.)
The last three rows of the new stalls are under the balcony; the rear of the auditorium, compared to previous, is about the position of the seat backs 7 rows from the rear. (5 in the centre section which omitted the last two rows.)
All seats are recliners.
Circle:
Royal Circle is now 3 rows deep, except it is 2 rows deep in the centre section. Seating capacity – 90.
Additional new wide centre vomitorium access to Royal Circle.
Back row of the new Royal Circle in line with the 5th row of the previous (formerly 6 rows deep.)
All seats (in the new Royal Circle) are recliners. Existing two aisles at sidewalls removed.
Rear circle – 14 rows of seats to rear wall. Rows in the same position as existing except 2 additional rows to rear wall. New seats of increased width; no centre aisle.
Front of auditorium:
Splay walls in same location.
Increased stage width shown.
Screen width identical as drawn but moved forward to be just behind proscenium opening. (Albeit this is probably not a reliable source for the absolute size and position.)
*Theatre lighting rail shown on “Second Floor” plan.
Alterations to ground floor and circle foyers:
Other substantive details than new concessions offer already covered in Odeon’s planning application and summarised in previous posts on Cinema Treasures.
Seating capacity of stalls and rear circle:
I’m not yet quite crazy enough to bother!
Former Odeon Mezzanine/Studios (now integrated with the OLS as the ground floor foyers are connected internally):
Screen 2: 34 seats (Former Screen 3 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 3: 41 seats (Former Screen 2 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 4 :40 seats (Former Screen 4 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 5: 34 seats (Former Screen 5 of Odeon Studios.)
In all auditoria, most rows are 6 seats wide (the maximum) and all seats are increased width being drawn identically to the new rear circle seats. Row locations adjusted.
Projection rooms removed, alterations to access areas including new lift to all levels.
Stairwell adjacent to external wall to LSQ removed and Screen 3 (former Screen 2) extended forward.
Can’t be bothered to enumerate other changes to the former Odeon Mezzanine/Studios!
Looks like the main auditorium of the OLS will survive the refurbishment very much intact after all. Seems odd that Odeon were talking about installing a PLF screen… wonder if it will be a Dolby Cinema location after all?
This being said, the “First Floor” plan shows sightlines for 2D and 3D, with a 100° angle for 2D and 50° for 3D. (As drawn, about half of the Royal Circle seats are thus outside of the 3D seating area!) Not sure what the allowed angles are for Dolby Cinema, but it might be interesting to compare to the LSQ IMAX and/or other systems using wavelength multiplexed 3D.
HowardBHaas: No idea about the accuracy of the opening programme although maybe that was the size of the screen on its frame.
Perhaps I should have asked if LARGE_screen_format’s screen size figure pertained to the 1990s as stated or if it was for the post-2006 upgrades—albeit as you intimate none of this is needed for relative comparisons between venues where the differences are >10ft.!
The replacement screen was larger than the previous, and necessitated the removal of the contour curtain (which came down in vertical sections from above the screen.)
According to the Gala Opening Programme, the original screen installed during the 1962 reconstruction was 63ft. x 30ft. (Masked sizes for various formats not given.)
Not sure if the size you’ve quoted for the Odeon Marble Arch is for the original Dimension 150 screen before it was replaced?
Update on OLS works as seen from LSQ as of yesterday: Same as previous post.
HowardBHaas: Having to convert between metric and imperial (or “English” as I believe you guys call it; or, as Wikipedia informs me, strictly “United States customary units!”) is indeed a giant PIT*! I, too, prefer imperial for screen sizes.
LARGE_screen_format: Indeed, 2000 was before the emergence of IMAX in the feature film sector and the development of PLF screens as “competitors” of sorts.
Besides, 20m wide would be on the very large side (outside of perhaps “drive-in” locations!) for 35mm and 5/70mm film projection?
Remember also that the “classic” viewing distrance guidelines were based on the limitations of conventional projection of 35mm film prints, i.e. placing the audience far enough away that their perception of the inherent artifacts was kept at an acceptable level; and, also, that IMAX introduced their “DMR” process, initially so that 35mm sources would be acceptable when blown up to 15/70 and shown in an IMAX auditorium, including the use of digital noise reduction to reduce grain.
IOW… it would make no sense to stick in an IMAX-sized screen relative to the auditorium size without suitable projection (and content!) to match…
Or to put it another way, if you like super large screens, then consider yourself lucky that today there’s an ever-expanding embarrassment of riches to choose from thanks to digital. ;–)
LARGE_screen_format: According to the above linked ES Global Solutions page, the “Skyscape” building took 16 weeks to build, 8 weeks to dismantle, and cost £10m(!) As the “project completion” date was April 2002, I assume that’s when “dismantling” had been completed.
The page also says: “Skyscape was required for the duration of the Millennium Dome event as dual cinema venues each having capacity for 2,500 people. The East cinema was also designed to be deployed as a 5,500 capacity auditorium for music shows and other events.”
The former gasworks on Greenwich Peninsula have been (and continues to be) built out since the “Millennium Experience”—on the Dome site per se AFAIK the only (major?) buildings left are the Dome itself—if an oversized tent* can be called a “building”!—and the above-ground part of North Greenwich station.
(*Not to demean it… excepting that the fabric seems to permanently be in a state requiring cleaning, it looks cool and is definitely iconic, and I’d be fairly annoyed if it was ever torn down!)
According to the above Skyscape promotional video it was the UK’s largest cinema with 3,300 seats!
Looking at an interior photo courtesy of ES Global Solutions, it looks fairly “barebones” and—hard to say from this photo—but it doesn’t look like there’s any acoustic treatment to the ceiling.
The “purple” wall coverings you mentioned in a previous post are in fact a midnight blue colour and are part of the original decor, unaltered in Cineworld’s recent refurbishment.
The fabric coverings sure look (and measure in Photoshop!) purple as shown in the photo on Chapman Taylor’s site, with blue wall carpet on the vomitory walls and lower sidewalls.
The lighting features on the sidewalls are exactly the same as are/were (at least on opening) fitted to the IMPACT/Superscreen in Basildon, and can also be seen in an Eomac Case Study. It would have been better if the wall and stadia steps carpets had been replaced, though.
Slightly odd that Cineworld have left bits and pieces untouched, particularly as this must be one of their premiere sites.
Incidentally, during the period when the “dome” and environs were operating as the “Millennium Experience” exhibition, there was a Sky-sponsored cinema in a temporary building adjacent to the dome:
I did visit the “Millennium Experience” in 2000, although I don’t remember visiting Skyscape—frankly it was all so dire that I was quite glad to get out of there ASAP!
I do wonder why the “Sky Superscreen” was opened as a disproportionately large auditorium by today’s standards, unless it actually was part of the original “Millennium Experience” structures built inside the “dome”?
Zappomatic: Thanks for the photos, your comprehensive observations of the ScreenX auditorium and update on the O2 “Project Loop” construction.
yes it’s the school holidays but the majority of the audience was made up of adult couples and groups
I am minded to visit today on the way back from dropping someone off at Heathrow, but even the last performance is heavily booked. Argh!
Ventilation grilles are visible above the side projectors.
Hmm, were these there before?
Finally it seemed as though there was a very slight lag between the main screen and the side projectors, noticeable in jump cuts and scenes with a lot of movement and I can see this causing motion sickness in some people if not corrected.
Yikes—that’s very jarring. I imagine that the hardware/software to split the picture over all those projectors adds a bit of lag.
Looking at a photo of the ScreenX auditorium, it looks like the sidewalls are indeed stretched fabric, as the “seams” between fabric sections (where the fabric meets the profiles to which it’s attached) are visible.
Oddly, these appear to be rectangular sections of fabric, as both vertical and horizontal “seams” are visible, whereas usually the fabric width would relate to horizontal “seams”—Eomac recommends 168cm “usable”—and the fabric length would far exceed this thus requiring fewer vertical “seams.”
The fabric sections also appear not to be entirely colour matched, either.
LARGE_screen_format: The £35m figure is for the entire “Project Loop-Leisure and Cinema Extension” scheme, which also includes an indoor “trampoline park.” I assume Cineworld will be taking a lease on the space and their primary upfront capital cost will be for the fit-out.
As shown on the above-linked planning drawings, the largest auditorium will have an ~18m (~59ft.) wall-to-wall screen, with a centreline screen to last row distance of ~24m (~80ft.); so the last row will be ~1.35x screen width from the screen. (First row ~0.4x screen width from screen in centreline.)
Thus there will be plenty of “immersive” seating positions, and it will be interesting to see if Atmos is installed also.
(FYI, this auditorium is about ~29m deep, for a total area of ~530sq.m. (~5700sq.ft.))
LARGE_screen_format: You’re right that I am, but I’ve come down with a bit of cold I’m afraid. :–(
The OSC IMAX did indeed originally have non-recliners installed at the time of the IMAX retrofit, as shown in the above-linked YouTube video at about 17 seconds in.
LARGE_screen_format: You’re very welcome. :–)
I’m not aware of any other IMAXs in the UK with reclining seats—albeit I’m half asleep now!—however, an ODEON Cinemas Group press release claims it to be the first IMAX in London with all-reclining seats.
I had thought that I’d not want to recline seats, but, once you hit the “down” button it’s just too comfortable to raise back up! However, I have done this or physically raised my head up somewhat for key “active”/“busy” scenes where I wanted to better hear the stereo imaging provided by the surrounds/overheads.
Ian: Perhaps I should explain the purpose behind my “super cinema” comment?
LARGE_screen_format has made various contributions to this site and opened up numerous discussions that I’ve enjoyed responding to and learning from, which I very much hope will continue.
However, LARGE_screen_format seemed eager for the OLS to have a “giant” screen installed, even though the licensing application plans suggest otherwise, and I thought I’d post what I thought was a gentle reminder about heritage considerations.
I’m afraid that I didn’t forsee any controversy!
I think Terry’s definition is about the same as the one I’d have in mind for classic “super” cinemas; ultimately, “super” or not, maybe we should just be glad that the venues you mention still exist?!
Of course you’re right that most of the original decorative elements have been removed.
To be clear, by “form” I was referring more to the (three dimensional) shape, in particular of the auditorium, rather than decorative details, and that’s what the refurbishment seems to retain, c.f. a more radical scheme to shoehorn in a truly “giant” screen.
We shall just have to wait and see what the ongoing refurbishment yields!
Ah, OK—I think I see what you’re getting at?
My uninformed view on its future is not optimistic, but I wish all involved in “saving” the Empire (Carlton) Haymarket all the very best in their endeavours.
To compete with bed + video on demand + 65" TV = no trip to cinema…
Recliners will surely adjust the perceived scale and massing; however, the new “rear” circle seating capacity won’t be too different to the existing; the seating will be wider whilst keeping the same back-to-back distance; however, the added rows and removed centre aisle compensate for this.
Not sure all of those elements are going the way of the dinosaur exactly, it just depends on the market segment?
I grew up with “showman” theatrical presentation in the West End cinemas; concurrently, however, the average local Cannon/Coronet/etc. were hardly being fit for purpose.
I can understand that seeing the physical instantiations of one’s memories “bulldozed” time and again is not an enviable set of experiences—however, there are lots of interesting developments in the cinema world today which I think are worthy of attention—it isn’t all doom and gloom. :–)
Thank you Ian—I should express my gratitude to this site for providing a repository which holds a wealth of material on cinemas, I trust for posterity—as well as a focal point for what most people would consider to be a rather strange avocation—without it I would never have been able to fully develop my own interest in this subject.
[Random text to overcome “Your comment appears to be spam” message/restriction which is preventing reposting text that has been edited to a minor extent.]
LARGE_screen_format:
L.B. of Camden – Search the Public Licensing Register.
Searching for “085811” will lead to 1 result, namely, an October 2017 licensing application—plans are available under the “Documents” tab of its page.
I previously recall reading 60ft. as the width of the Swiss Cottage IMAX screen—estimating it from the plans, it’s ~17.5m wide (= ~57.5ft) by the chord.
On the centre line, distance from the screen to the row before last (the last has the booth in the middle of it!) is ~1.15, and to the first row (also ruined by having the vomitory access in the middle) is 0.42. So, in this respect, it’s just a bit off the classic IMAX specification.
And after all that, it turns out the screen size is on Odeon’s site under the “Auditorium Info” tab:
“IMAX Screen Size – 8.86m high x 17.58m wide.”
Which, for the metric-phobic, converts to ~57.7ft. x ~29ft. to ~57.7ft. x ~29ft.
(I’m amazed that my estimate seems to have been pretty close to Odeon’s published figure!)
The Giant Screen Cinema Association has published specifications for giant screens, which state 70ft./21.3m to be the minimum width*, and the maximum distance to the last row not to exceed screen width.
(*Or alteratively an minimum area of 3100sq.ft./288sq.m.; or 60ft./18.3m diameter for “dome” screens.)
I’ll leave it to anyone reading this to consider what the motivations are or aren’t behind these specs, but suffice to say that their stated aim is essentially to differentate the “classic” institutional-type venue from the increasing screen sizes found in multiplexes.
Personally, I think 60ft. wide is probably acceptable for an IMAX auditorium (as long as the geometry requirements are essentially met); anything much smaller is surely pushing it though? Swiss Cottage is a retrofit so it seems reasonable to cut it a bit of slack c.f. the purpose-built “classic” venues from which the GSCA has derived its requirements.
I’m afraid I haven’t visited the OSC since attending a screening of “The Last Days of Disco”(!) Certainly looks like a comfortable place to see a film with the recliners (plus the bonus of the retained ceiling features from the original auditorium.)
Oops, looks like daniels3d had already replied. D'oh—sorry!
Just spotted a “3D Glasses Store” off the circle foyer. Might just be another clue that it will be a Dolby Cinema…!
ODEON IMAX SEATING UPGRADE TIMELAPSE.
“Luxe” upgrade of the IMAX auditorium – Shows the construction of the adjusted stadia, installation of new stretched fabric on the sidewalls and “IMAX” logo feature on the right sidewall, seating installation (duh!), and the auditorium back in a finished state.
LARGE_screen_format: Are you able to scan it or maybe take a photo of it? Please? :–)
Better than nothing, and sometimes Photoshop can work wonders (if the information actually exists it can be “pulled out”…)
Can’t say I remember the “Licence to Thrill” experience, must have been before SegaWorld opened? (I did go to the “Guinness World of Records” that was there before SegaWorld and the Pepsi IMAX)—as an aside, I have a suspicion that many of those exhibits ultimately found a new home in the “Ripley’s Believe It or Not!” attraction in the (former) London Pavilion!
New seating capacity (as I counted on the licensing plans)–
Royal Circle: 90 (recliner) + 2 disabled. Circle: 446. Stalls: 258 (recliner) + 4 disabled.
Total = 794 + 6 disabled.
Looking at the licensing plans, the stalls have steps up to each of the last three rows. Revisiting the old cross-sectional drawing, it’s clear that these are needed to raise up the new rear of the stalls to entrance foyer level.
It is also obvious from the cross-sectional drawing that the revised stalls seating obviates the rear stalls sightline issue, where for the very rear seats the balcony only just avoided obscuring the top of the screen. Presumably a 1.9:1 screen (~25ft. high) could now be installed.
With the screen (at least according to the licensing plans!) moved slightly forward, all of the “recliner” seats will be within, by my estimates, 1.5x screen distance away from the screen. If not “IMAX” standard, this is still sort of in line with what Odeon brands as “immersive” for their iSense auditoria.
LARGE_screen_format: Certainly have been many spectaculars attached to the OLS over the years! IIRC “Europe’s Premiere Cinema” was written across the main doors from LSQ right up until it was closed for refurbishment; it’s certainly still there in the October 2017 dated Google Streetview shot. I guess it must have been changed from “Europe’s Largest Cinema” at some point?
Thank you Terry.
Great to hear about the ABC Globe restoration (which I wasn’t aware of), and fascinating to watch the videos that you linked to on its Cinema Treasures page.
Sorry Ian! :–(
Just getting over-excited… (and I’m afraid mid-Hampshire is about as far out of London that I’ve got this year.) I would have thought the new information on the OLS refurb would be received as very good news here?
LARGE_screen_format:
I thought so too—but let’s do a crude “back of an envelope” cost calculation:
According to Independent Cinema Office – How to Start a Cinema – Capitalisation:
“At the top of the range a specialist exhibitor would expect to pay around £2,000 per square metre [for fitting out.]”
No idea when this guide was published, plus all the other factors that would need to be taken into consideration— however, the cost/sq.m. can be estimated for recent refurbishments of the neighbouring cinemas:
Empire 1 IMAX conversion – Estimated ~1500sq.m., cost £4m = £2700/sq.m.
Vue West End refurbishment – ~6000sq.m., cost £6.7m. = £1100/sq.m.
Cineworld (Empire) LSQ – Lobbies/4DX conversion/Screens 1-3 and 5-7 refurbishment – Estimated ~1300sq.m.*, suggested cost £5m = £3850/sq.m.
(*Lobbies/4DX area according to Chapman Taylor; other refurbished screens estimated.)
Unweighted average for Empire/Vue/Cineworld = ~£2600/sq.m.
Using this figure for the OLS – Estimated ~3000sq.m. (including former Studios but excluding stage house, basement, etc.) = ~£8m.
The scheme does involve structural alterations, particularly to the foyer areas; the addition of lifts and escalators, and a new “glazed box” balcony/canopy on the LSQ elevation.
Planning application in relation to above paragraph.
Also, the building fabric may require attention—the asbestos roof was replaced a couple of years ago, and the enabling works for the refurbishment also involved asbestos removal.
I agree that a giant screen in the OLS would be nice, but at the same time the fact that the auditorium looks like it will be reinstated in a state highly respectful to the heritage is a huge relief. It is the last “super cinema” still essentially in its original form operated as a cinema in the UK!
I’m trying to find the requirements for a Dolby Cinema—a What Hi-Fi? article says that the “The minimum screen size necessary is about 14m, but seat-wise there’s no specific size an auditorium needs to be to qualify for renovation.”
Addendum (again!):
In the process of editing, I seem to have accidentally deleted the following:
I don’t know if the plans mean that it won’t be a Dolby Cinema, just that having conjured up possible schemes based on inferring the implications of the publically disclosed information from Odeon, not to mention the apparent secrecy and high projected cost, I’m very surprised.
Great news in the sense that it remains intact as it was, but compared to the ideas I had for more radical schemes it’s, well, boring—and I’ve got egg on my face now for my predictions (other than the change to the rear stalls) being so far off the mark!
Still, Dolby Cinema or not, I’m looking forward to the reopening…
Addendum:
Licensing Application – Dated as Received 7th August 2018.
In summary:
Stalls:
Rear stalls largely removed to make way for toilets, switch room, “food prep” area, and concessions (namely, “Snacks and Cold Food; Order Hot Food,” “Hot Food Collection,” and “Coffee.”)
Stalls accessed through double sets of doors on the left side ONLY, via a small “lobby” area. (One pair of doors into the lobby, another into the auditorium.)
The last three rows of the new stalls are under the balcony; the rear of the auditorium, compared to previous, is about the position of the seat backs 7 rows from the rear. (5 in the centre section which omitted the last two rows.)
All seats are recliners.
Circle:
Royal Circle is now 3 rows deep, except it is 2 rows deep in the centre section. Seating capacity – 90.
Additional new wide centre vomitorium access to Royal Circle.
Back row of the new Royal Circle in line with the 5th row of the previous (formerly 6 rows deep.)
All seats (in the new Royal Circle) are recliners. Existing two aisles at sidewalls removed.
Rear circle – 14 rows of seats to rear wall. Rows in the same position as existing except 2 additional rows to rear wall. New seats of increased width; no centre aisle.
Front of auditorium:
Splay walls in same location.
Increased stage width shown.
Screen width identical as drawn but moved forward to be just behind proscenium opening. (Albeit this is probably not a reliable source for the absolute size and position.)
*Theatre lighting rail shown on “Second Floor” plan.
Alterations to ground floor and circle foyers:
Seating capacity of stalls and rear circle:
Former Odeon Mezzanine/Studios (now integrated with the OLS as the ground floor foyers are connected internally):
Screen 2: 34 seats (Former Screen 3 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 3: 41 seats (Former Screen 2 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 4 :40 seats (Former Screen 4 of Odeon Studios.)
Screen 5: 34 seats (Former Screen 5 of Odeon Studios.)
In all auditoria, most rows are 6 seats wide (the maximum) and all seats are increased width being drawn identically to the new rear circle seats. Row locations adjusted.
Projection rooms removed, alterations to access areas including new lift to all levels.
Stairwell adjacent to external wall to LSQ removed and Screen 3 (former Screen 2) extended forward.
Can’t be bothered to enumerate other changes to the former Odeon Mezzanine/Studios!
Looks like the main auditorium of the OLS will survive the refurbishment very much intact after all. Seems odd that Odeon were talking about installing a PLF screen… wonder if it will be a Dolby Cinema location after all?
This being said, the “First Floor” plan shows sightlines for 2D and 3D, with a 100° angle for 2D and 50° for 3D. (As drawn, about half of the Royal Circle seats are thus outside of the 3D seating area!) Not sure what the allowed angles are for Dolby Cinema, but it might be interesting to compare to the LSQ IMAX and/or other systems using wavelength multiplexed 3D.
HowardBHaas: No idea about the accuracy of the opening programme although maybe that was the size of the screen on its frame.
Perhaps I should have asked if LARGE_screen_format’s screen size figure pertained to the 1990s as stated or if it was for the post-2006 upgrades—albeit as you intimate none of this is needed for relative comparisons between venues where the differences are >10ft.!
LARGE_screen_format: The screen sizes for the old Empire 1 following the 2006 overhaul from a Cinema Treasures post by Laurence Claydon*:
(*Then at Bell Theatre Services.)
“Cinemascope: 18.38x7.62m
“Widescreen: 14.95x8.06m
“70mm: 18.04x8.23m.”
The replacement screen was larger than the previous, and necessitated the removal of the contour curtain (which came down in vertical sections from above the screen.)
According to the Gala Opening Programme, the original screen installed during the 1962 reconstruction was 63ft. x 30ft. (Masked sizes for various formats not given.)
Not sure if the size you’ve quoted for the Odeon Marble Arch is for the original Dimension 150 screen before it was replaced?
Update on OLS works as seen from LSQ as of yesterday: Same as previous post.
HowardBHaas: Having to convert between metric and imperial (or “English” as I believe you guys call it; or, as Wikipedia informs me, strictly “United States customary units!”) is indeed a giant PIT*! I, too, prefer imperial for screen sizes.
LARGE_screen_format: Indeed, 2000 was before the emergence of IMAX in the feature film sector and the development of PLF screens as “competitors” of sorts.
Besides, 20m wide would be on the very large side (outside of perhaps “drive-in” locations!) for 35mm and 5/70mm film projection?
Remember also that the “classic” viewing distrance guidelines were based on the limitations of conventional projection of 35mm film prints, i.e. placing the audience far enough away that their perception of the inherent artifacts was kept at an acceptable level; and, also, that IMAX introduced their “DMR” process, initially so that 35mm sources would be acceptable when blown up to 15/70 and shown in an IMAX auditorium, including the use of digital noise reduction to reduce grain.
IOW… it would make no sense to stick in an IMAX-sized screen relative to the auditorium size without suitable projection (and content!) to match…
Or to put it another way, if you like super large screens, then consider yourself lucky that today there’s an ever-expanding embarrassment of riches to choose from thanks to digital. ;–)
LARGE_screen_format: According to the above linked ES Global Solutions page, the “Skyscape” building took 16 weeks to build, 8 weeks to dismantle, and cost £10m(!) As the “project completion” date was April 2002, I assume that’s when “dismantling” had been completed.
The page also says: “Skyscape was required for the duration of the Millennium Dome event as dual cinema venues each having capacity for 2,500 people. The East cinema was also designed to be deployed as a 5,500 capacity auditorium for music shows and other events.”
The former gasworks on Greenwich Peninsula have been (and continues to be) built out since the “Millennium Experience”—on the Dome site per se AFAIK the only (major?) buildings left are the Dome itself—if an oversized tent* can be called a “building”!—and the above-ground part of North Greenwich station.
(*Not to demean it… excepting that the fabric seems to permanently be in a state requiring cleaning, it looks cool and is definitely iconic, and I’d be fairly annoyed if it was ever torn down!)
Looking at an interior photo courtesy of ES Global Solutions, it looks fairly “barebones” and—hard to say from this photo—but it doesn’t look like there’s any acoustic treatment to the ceiling.
Having said that, it turns out that it was fully equipped in terms of film projection and “A-chain” sound equipment—in70mm.com – 70mm DTS at the Millennium Dome—to quote:
“Cinemeccanica Victoria 8 35/70 & Console 7kW Xenon. Cinemeccanica 70 CNR Platter. DTS 6AD with ES Processors. Screen size 20m wide.”
Zappomatic:
The fabric coverings sure look (and measure in Photoshop!) purple as shown in the photo on Chapman Taylor’s site, with blue wall carpet on the vomitory walls and lower sidewalls.
The lighting features on the sidewalls are exactly the same as are/were (at least on opening) fitted to the IMPACT/Superscreen in Basildon, and can also be seen in an Eomac Case Study. It would have been better if the wall and stadia steps carpets had been replaced, though.
Slightly odd that Cineworld have left bits and pieces untouched, particularly as this must be one of their premiere sites.
Incidentally, during the period when the “dome” and environs were operating as the “Millennium Experience” exhibition, there was a Sky-sponsored cinema in a temporary building adjacent to the dome:
ES Global Solutions – Skyscape.
Skyscape – Promotional Video.
I did visit the “Millennium Experience” in 2000, although I don’t remember visiting Skyscape—frankly it was all so dire that I was quite glad to get out of there ASAP!
I do wonder why the “Sky Superscreen” was opened as a disproportionately large auditorium by today’s standards, unless it actually was part of the original “Millennium Experience” structures built inside the “dome”?
Zappomatic: Thanks for the photos, your comprehensive observations of the ScreenX auditorium and update on the O2 “Project Loop” construction.
I am minded to visit today on the way back from dropping someone off at Heathrow, but even the last performance is heavily booked. Argh!
Hmm, were these there before?
Yikes—that’s very jarring. I imagine that the hardware/software to split the picture over all those projectors adds a bit of lag.
Addendum to last post: If they’re using the Armstrong Tectum product mentioned in a linked interview I previously posted on the LSQ page, then based on Armstrong’s product literature then perhaps they are using pre-fabricated panels.
LARGE_screen_format: Indeed! I’ll probably visit myself next week…
Looking at a photo of the ScreenX auditorium, it looks like the sidewalls are indeed stretched fabric, as the “seams” between fabric sections (where the fabric meets the profiles to which it’s attached) are visible.
Oddly, these appear to be rectangular sections of fabric, as both vertical and horizontal “seams” are visible, whereas usually the fabric width would relate to horizontal “seams”—Eomac recommends 168cm “usable”—and the fabric length would far exceed this thus requiring fewer vertical “seams.”
The fabric sections also appear not to be entirely colour matched, either.
LARGE_screen_format: The £35m figure is for the entire “Project Loop-Leisure and Cinema Extension” scheme, which also includes an indoor “trampoline park.” I assume Cineworld will be taking a lease on the space and their primary upfront capital cost will be for the fit-out.
As shown on the above-linked planning drawings, the largest auditorium will have an ~18m (~59ft.) wall-to-wall screen, with a centreline screen to last row distance of ~24m (~80ft.); so the last row will be ~1.35x screen width from the screen. (First row ~0.4x screen width from screen in centreline.)
Thus there will be plenty of “immersive” seating positions, and it will be interesting to see if Atmos is installed also.
(FYI, this auditorium is about ~29m deep, for a total area of ~530sq.m. (~5700sq.ft.))
The scheme for the “Leisure and Cinema Extension” is known as “Project Loop.”
McLaren Group – Topping Out Ceremony on Project Loop at The O2 – July 2018.
Project cost according to this page is £35m. (Presumably excluding fit-out.)