Be sure to click into the theatre’s listing above and read the comments that descend from it. Just one triumphant post after another as the place is restored. Great fun to read. If only they could all be this way … .
Be SURE to follow the ABC Wakefield link above, and then to follow the blog link posted Dec. 20, 2007. Wonderful (if that’s the word) shots of this place as it is today.
After the last show, the doors were locked and this theatre was left almost as it was. Now, urban archaeologists are entering and exploring it. I’m not sure they are actually theater buffs; there are no shots inside the projection booth, for example, and no general shots of the lobbies and restrooms. But even so, these are great and sad shots of a sweet old place left to rot.
The article refers to the “tallest” fly-loft west of the Mississippi (geez, I love typing that name).
I’m not convinced. If the place was built in 1937, as a movie house, in a small town, there’s virtually no reason it would have a fly-loft. It would scarcely have a stage.
So I still wonder what the writer is talking about.
Warren, yes. You are surely correct. The beige went on when the city took the place over in the mid 80s. I worked at The Oregonian a block up Broadway. I last saw the theatre in 1988. I’m sure they’ve gone in by now with even more beige to touch up the wear and tear.
I have a few dim memories of the place before they subdued it. Its colors were just raucous in places, and in all ways different from what exists today (except for the stonework). I hope to hell that someone made a good color inventory, and took pictures, before they powered up the spray guns. It deserved at least that much respect.
It’s wonderful that it was saved. I believe it’s the last remaining movie palace left in Portland, which once had its fair share of them.
Unfortunately, the exuberant colorful decoration indicated in the BW shots linked above (shoeshoe14, Aug. 23, 2005) has been brought to its knees by hundreds of gallons of beige paint. This paint could be scraped off some day, and I hope it is. But for now the place is a monument to misguided “good taste.”
Ian, thanks for your post. I wondered earlier if the narrow proscenium indicated that it was built only to show movies. Your note about the lack of a stage house further suggests that.
Had the earthquake(s) weakened the building?
.
The Movie House in Portland, OR, was also a reverse. I’m not sure it was built for movies; it may have been a remodel of an existing auditorium.
Any chance that you can update the listing above with some photos? Interior—auditorium, proscenium, sidewalls, booth—especially?
.
How many photos in the exhibit?
Is there a catalog?
Be sure to click into the theatre’s listing above and read the comments that descend from it. Just one triumphant post after another as the place is restored. Great fun to read. If only they could all be this way … .
Phill,
Let me add my thanks for the additional shots.
I’ve never done what you do. I can only imagine the difficulties, particularly those of lighting. You have my admiration and great thanks.
Be SURE to follow the ABC Wakefield link above, and then to follow the blog link posted Dec. 20, 2007. Wonderful (if that’s the word) shots of this place as it is today.
After the last show, the doors were locked and this theatre was left almost as it was. Now, urban archaeologists are entering and exploring it. I’m not sure they are actually theater buffs; there are no shots inside the projection booth, for example, and no general shots of the lobbies and restrooms. But even so, these are great and sad shots of a sweet old place left to rot.
Be SURE to follow the blog link posted above on Dec. 20. Fabulous—and sad—shots of this place.
Mr. Gray,
Thanks much. Still a mystery.
The article refers to the “tallest” fly-loft west of the Mississippi (geez, I love typing that name).
I’m not convinced. If the place was built in 1937, as a movie house, in a small town, there’s virtually no reason it would have a fly-loft. It would scarcely have a stage.
So I still wonder what the writer is talking about.
Do follow the link above.
Such a handsome, restrained auditorium.
Too say that it had “the largest fly-loft west of the Mississippi” is saying quite a bit, if true.
Anyone have an idea what’s actually meant here?
What an incredible time capsule this appears to be. It seems even to have the original seating. You could almost—almost—dust it off and use it.
Don’t fail to go to the website and click through the shots.
Warren, yes. You are surely correct. The beige went on when the city took the place over in the mid 80s. I worked at The Oregonian a block up Broadway. I last saw the theatre in 1988. I’m sure they’ve gone in by now with even more beige to touch up the wear and tear.
I have a few dim memories of the place before they subdued it. Its colors were just raucous in places, and in all ways different from what exists today (except for the stonework). I hope to hell that someone made a good color inventory, and took pictures, before they powered up the spray guns. It deserved at least that much respect.
It’s wonderful that it was saved. I believe it’s the last remaining movie palace left in Portland, which once had its fair share of them.
Unfortunately, the exuberant colorful decoration indicated in the BW shots linked above (shoeshoe14, Aug. 23, 2005) has been brought to its knees by hundreds of gallons of beige paint. This paint could be scraped off some day, and I hope it is. But for now the place is a monument to misguided “good taste.”
Clicking the link brings up “page not found.”
So far, fast as changing channels on a TV set. VERY nice. Thanks.
Ian, thanks for your post. I wondered earlier if the narrow proscenium indicated that it was built only to show movies. Your note about the lack of a stage house further suggests that.
The stage/proscenium seems unusually narrow. Is that true? If so, what’s the reason—built only to show movies, perhaps?