This is a very complicated project involving demolishing the whole block and excavating a massive 34m deep hole in the ground, right next to a busy area with the need to have heavy constraints on access, noise, dust and vibration.
A myriad of potential unknowns could block progress along critical paths; for example, as I mentioned in a previous post, the scheme was altered with the NW corner of the new building “chopped off” to allow for a UK Power Networks tunnel that had been “discovered” during enabling works!
I hadn’t actually realised that the replacement cinema opening date had been pushed back but progress did seem to be slow indeed. At this stage there should be less in the way of unknowns to scupper things…
IMAX adjust the colour for their IMAX versions of films, and this would be different for the version supplied to conventional (Xenon lamp) IMAX Digital and IMAX with Laser venues.
I’ve certainly seen excellent images from Xenon lamp light source IMAX Digital projectors.
Regarding the sound systems:
For 15/70 at the BFI: The 6 track “Sonics” system for 15/70 with the PCM data losslessly stored on CD-ROMs and sync’d to the film on playback. (N.B. IMAX never use a separate LFE channel, 6 = left, centre, right, left surround, right surround and then the additional upper centre or so-called “Voice of God” channel—which I don’t think is used much, if at all, these days, certainly not for feature films?)
For digital at either location: 6 track lossless digital. Additionally, as of the laser projector installation, the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square supports IMAX’s 12 track system with two of the extra channels assigned as left/right side and the other four for overheads.
AFAIK the BFI uses the older generation IMAX/Sonics speakers; see:
There is a mess of additional speakers which I assume are, along with the rear array that’s installed, for non-IMAX presentations. The left/centre/right IMAX speakers can be seen with the upper centre “Voice of God”—the left speaker has someone standing next to it wearing a “hi-vis” jacket. If that’s not clear: Photo of a rather battered example of one.
Not sure why there are two sets of these non-IMAX speakers; maybe they old set were left behind the screen after an upgrade in 2010?
Also not entirely clear on the subwoofers for IMAX presentations, e.g. there’s just not enough resolution in that video to identify the 4 units (2 drivers in each) at the bottom of the screen.
Incidentally, notice that the Leicester Square IMAX does include a “Voice of God” speaker, whilst many new IMAX Digital installations don’t.
The main screen speakers are the newer IMAX “Kanga” speakers for larger IMAX auditoria: high resolution photo.
Subwoofers with 12" high excursion drivers are at the bottom of that photo; a number of these can be seen being installed in the video.
Both the BFI and the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square IMAX have 19" rackmount units for IMAX’s NEXOS Audyssey-based EQ system installed, but I’m not sure if this is used for digital presentations only at the BFI.
The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square has 6 additional smaller speakers on the sidewalls and ceilings, again installed concurrently with the IMAX with Laser projection system, for the IMAX 12 channel system.
Acoustics: The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square doesn’t have absolute isolation from the Superscreen (there’s a limit to what multiple layers of plasterboard and mineral wool can do—the screens are back to back!)—but then again you will rarely hear any leakage from the Superscreen (happens with peak LFE use) in the average IMAX “blockbuster” title as it’ll be masked by the film’s own audio.
The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square does suffer acoustically from not being a purpose-built IMAX venue.
Compared to the old Empire 1, in which the slap echo issue could be a real problem for dialogue intelligibility, it’s much improved but it’s still a wide auditorium.
On the other hand the width might improve matters as instead of having the sidewalls square to the screen edges, causing earlier lateral reflections, there’s more space.
As for 15/70 projection, it seems like a retrograde step for a film shot digitally, with very heavy CGI use, and edited and finished digitally also.
Christopher Nolan apparently used an all-optical process with no digital finishing for “Dunkirk,” although in my view it looks inconsistent, grainy and less than sharp compared to current generation high-end digital material.
Speaking of “Dunkirk,” the full 1.43:1 frame wasn’t shown at the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square, but most IMAX content is now 1.9:1 maximum height anyway.
As for the screen widths, the auditoriums are around the same depth, the BFI being about a row deeper IIRC; I’ve seen 26.5m as well as 26m quoted as the screen width at the BFI whilst Empire Cinemas stated the Leicester Square IMAX screen width as 26.5m. Whether or not it’s 0.5m wider I think is a fairly moot point though as the screens are both very wide and both auditoria place the audience in the “correct” location relative to the screen per IMAX specifications.
I think that’s enough of a “brain dump” for one day, over and out for now… :–)
joeswin: Fascinating indeed—sounds like a great project! :–)
Visiting the Westminster Archives has long been on my “to do” list and I hadn’t realised those plans were held there, did you find it at all difficult to gain access?
Please upload a copy of your project somewhere if you are able to, I’d (and I trust anyone else reading this would) very much appreciate it?
LARGE_screen_format: The cinema was closed in January of this year to strip out the foyer and to get it to a state which allowed for ongoing building works whilst keeping the cinema open to the public.
The former Screen 2 had been stripped by the end of August 2017 according to the member of staff I spoke to at that time.
With the public areas of the main foyer and vestibule from Leicester Square and the 4DX complete Cineworld publicised the changes they’d made in April 2018—e.g.YouTube Video of Gala Opening.
No idea what further phases Cineworld have planned but the information I had last month from talking to a member of staff was that Cineworld weren’t planning on doing anything to the IMAX and Superscreen at the moment as the conversion of the old Screen 1 was completed at a time that is still fairly recent.
As can be seen from this application, it was made on behalf of London Clubs Management. The cinema is sublet from the Casino who hold the head lease (building owned by London and Regional Properties)—no idea what the arrangements are but it might reasonably be surmised that Cineworld can’t redo the canopy/signage unilaterally.
There is a building control application dated March 2017 for a full refubishment of the Casino. That scheme doesn’t seem to have been taken forward but it might be the case that an overhaul is in the pipeline.
From my previous post linking to a conceptual proposal for complete redevelopment of the Empire site by London and Regional Properties, the casino is branded as “Caesars Palace” in the drawings of the facade and as Caesars Entertainment now operate the casino it might be the case that any replacement would take that name along with Cineworld branding.
Zappomatic: Hmm, I’d assumed they do sequential numbering of Screens 1-3 from the front-to-back (or left-to-right) of the foyer…
The former Screen 4 (96 seats) is the one that uses the space that was previously toilets; you took a photo of it from the foyer in a stripped out state a couple of months ago.
I, too, found that performances were scheduled for Screen 2 a couple of days ago. I can’t remember what seating layout was shown, though. (i.e. Whether it was the former Screen 4 or 5!)
Incidentally, there is an article on these screens in the September 2008 issue of Cinema Technology Magazine—complete with a picture taken from the roof above the former Screen 5 showing Swiss Centre in a mostly demolished state!
Now I’m getting confused. Isn’t Screen 2 the former Screen 4? Also had a good look through listings on the Cineworld site for Friday this week, couldn’t find any performances in Screens 1 or 2…
Addendum to previous post: This scheme seems to be somewhat “pie in the sky” in terms of its feasibility given the potential constraints on adding significant basement depth with numerous adjacent properties and obscuring windows of the Premier Inn and the new hotel (Hotel Indigo) in 1-4 Leicester Sq. (The cross-sectional view doesn’t make sense at all in terms of cinema auditoria size and positioning, but of course that could soon be changed were this project taken forward.)
I hope theatreofvarieties' suggestion that London & Regional Properties (who own 5-6 Leicester Square) weren’t planning on demolishing the building any time soon was correct (also, decades left on the cinema lease…)
But here’s a nightmare conceptual proposal commissioned by L&R to create an utter carbuncle with below ground cinemas:
It says that their role is the enabling works before fit-out, including “demolition, asbestos removal, form new openings and structural alterations.”
It goes on to say that only “extent of the removal works both and in turn the demolition and structural alterations” were not known at project commencement and only after “existing services, asbestos and structure [are] uncovered” will it be possible to ascertain the scope required.
Given that their stated project duration is 12 weeks, and that from what I currently think I can see externally the foyer works appear to be far from complete, it might be the case that the works have turned out to be more extensive than originally estimated, with consequential effects on the reopening date.
Correction to previous post: The screen is not filled by the pre-show slides, (out of focus) photo uploaded showing the right side unmasked screen area.
They are involved with the fit-out of the 7 screen extension phase, with scheduled completion by the end of 2018.
The O2 Cineworld will then be the “largest cinema complex in London.” (Not clear on what metric they are using, presumably gross area; surely not screen count?)
4DX confirmed for extension, which will also include VIP screens.
The pages include photos of auditoria and lobby areas, including a shot of the Superscreen clearly showing the speakers added for Atmos, as well as ironically demonstrating the folly of what looks like a floating screen. (I suppose tabs and movable masking wouldn’t make for a “cutting edge cinema”!)
I’m slightly confused by the photo of the auditorium fitted with purple-coloured stretch fabric wall finishes, as it doesn’t seem to fit with Cineworld’s current house style?
A selection of photos taken yesterday relevant to the 4DX have now been uploaded, mostly of the access from foyer level down to the auditorium entrance.
PhilipWW: I’ve uploaded a photo of the screen, when one of the slides before the programme was displayed, although I don’t think it quite filled the whole screen. Staff were eager to get everyone safely seated and, following the end credits, to clear the auditorium for the next screening, so I didn’t want to start wandering around the auditorium to take photos.
(That reminds me: Given the various issues discussed on CT regarding lighting in Cineworld auditoria, the lighting were well dimmed during the main feature, although they were slightly distracting due to the low ceiling. They were raised up when the end credits started, and raised up again after with the red sidewall concealed lighting and the “4DX Leicester Square” sidewall signs also turned on. Or rather, “sign,” as the one on the right wall had failed! “Non-sync” music playback was also concurrently initiated.)
The two photos you mention were most certainly taken before the 4DX conversion; a photo taken from the back of the auditorium is included in this linked article, and though hardly an accurate method, it does measure ~2.4:1 in that photo.
Based on these photos, referencing to the front right exit door location, the screen does seem to have been increased in size from the Empire Cinemas makeover; it’s about the widest screen that would fit given various constraints including sightlines due to the columns, access to the doors left/right of the screen, and perhaps the arrangement of the void/walls behind.
(Incidentally, IMAX have a patented system, intended for use in conversions of existing auditoria, which allows for the screen to cover front wall exits, and in case of an emergency, part of the screen is automatically moved!)
The non-IMAX version of the film was released in 2.39:1 ratio, with 1.90 used for the IMAX Digital version. IIRC, some shots actually didn’t quite fill the screen horizontally.
It was shot on Arri Alexa 65 cameras, which have slightly larger than 65mm film CCDs for digital capture; full frame = 2.11:1. Of course, in a such a CGI heavy film, some sections may hardly have been “shot” in the first place!
Based on the licensing plans, I’d guess the screen is just under 30ft. wide.
So, the above is a ridiculously long winded way of saying, no, they haven’t put in a “flat” ratio screen!
Visiting the 4DX today to attend a screening of “Avengers: Infinity War,” I must first say that the whole experience was tainted by what must be the worst film I’ve seen in a cinema in a very long time—quite possibly ever.
I’m not someone who would normally watch a “Marvel franchise” film, and for me it was 160 minutes of incomprehensible drivel, interspersed with “jokes” (albeit, whilst I rolled my eyes, they were a good source of mirth for the other patrons.)
Onto the 4DX auditorium. As I fumbled around with my phone to check my seat number, a member of staff actually picked my up bag and 3D glasses off the floor, and carried them over to my seat. Fantastic!
The auditorium is exactly as expected—I previously posted the notion that the average patron “might even think that it was entirely purpose-built,” and that was absolutely the case. (I should add that the auditorium and the lobby/foyer areas still retained some of the scent of being new.)
The projection was very well aligned, with slight barrel distortion towards the bottom of the screen, and it did seem to fill the entire screen during the main feature, for which—given the dark surroundings—the lack of masking was not objectionable. There was some fall off of brightness towards the edge of the screen, but this was only really noticeable during the end credits.
However, the projection had poor black levels, whilst this was ameliorated by the 3D glasses, and colours seemed to be reasonably well calibrated, dark areas were clipped, and the brightness was not really sufficient for 2D, let alone 3D.
Klipsch rear array speakers are used. The sound was pretty good, and at times loud, although it seemed to ultimately lack LFE capability and seemed pushed and limited at peak levels. The screen speakers also sounded slightly too dull.
The 4DX seating seems to be upholstered in what I assume is microfibre-type material. The seats are well padded, but the armrests are not, and I suspect wear and tear will take its toll. They are certainly not as comfortable as they look!
Onto technical aspects of 4DX: the seating motion is impressive, the water and stobbing effects aren’t, and the fog and scent effects are reasonable, albeit the fog tends to “drift” in the current direction of airflow within the auditorium.
It worked very well indeed for the 4DX trailer, but it felt very much “tacked on” to the feature itself, and for me it tended to draw my attention out of the film rather than adding to the immersion. As an example, when an on-screen character was physically attacked, the seating poked my back! Frankly, in the context of a feature film, a sound system with good LFE capability is more effective at providing a visceral augmentation of the picture.
A word of caution: the 4DX Safety Warnings, also prominently displayed at the entrance to the 4DX, must be carefully read and understood before entry, and adhered to in the auditorium. For the sake of adding context, for example, the guidelines state that “4DX motion chairs employ strong motion,” and they mean it: the seats move rapidly with tremendous force at times, almost reminiscent of certain rollercoasters (“Saw: The Ride” at Thorpe Park, for instance.)
I think it would be a fantastic system for theme park use, it just doesn’t really work for feature films not created as 4DX-specific content from the outset.
I imagine, however, that the rest of the patrons in attendance enjoyed both the movie and the 4DX element; Cineworld have certainly made something out of a “dud” auditorium, and the limitations of 4DX may well be forgiveable in the context of a film that I liked.
Finally, the auditorium was too hot; it wasn’t stuffy, so the air change rate was adequate, but I didn’t expect to have to rely on blasts from the 4DX fans to cool off!
A few more observations and photos, particularly of the staircase down to the auditorium, to follow.
I (finally!) managed to have a “proper” visit to the Cineworld (Empire) LSQ today; alas, I should have heeded my earlier apprehension over seeing “Avengers: Infinity War”—I did see it in the 4DX auditorium, and I will post comments on that part of the cinema on the Cineworld Cinema – Leicester Square 4DX page, and this comment will cover aspects applicable to the venue as a whole.
Having had a chance to have a thorough look at the main foyer section area under the IMAX stadia, it did feel more spacious and comfortable than the “old” foyer, and certainly one can sit and relax in the sofas, which, whilst not the omega of luxury, are a definite improvement over what was there before, and they certainly look very attractive.
My previous observations about the very high fit-out standard continue to apply, except that, from what I could tell, the cove LED lighting is simply LED tape that’s been—perhaps slightly hastily—adhered to the surface. My previous concern that the foyer would be too dark wasn’t the case—it was certainly the LED display modules that made it look that way by comparison—but I’d put a question mark over the long term performance of the installation.
The reflectively lacquered stretched fabric ceiling also gives a sense of height in a space lacking it; I had to remind myself that I was looking at a reflection, and not a magically raised ceiling!
On this occasion, a forgettable selection of background music was playing throughout the main foyer area and upper vestibule, to a medicore standard of sound quality. I’m sure what was playing during my last visit was considerably louder, and seemed to have a fair bit of low frequency energy, and watching Zappomatic’s video again— in which the music seems to be played over speakers in the upper vestibule only—it seems that I’m not misremembering.
However, it must be said that the arrangement of LED display modules on the stair risers and on the curved wall section rather break the rules of showmanship, with the “finale” coming first, and, at least in the case of the 4DX, a progressive dive towards a largely featureless black box. Also, the black wall above the entrance section, with its lower ceiling, I found jarring on exiting the venue; the marble cladding served to “ease” one back into the brighter outside world. Whether that was ever an intended aspect of the 1962 design, it’s these subtle features and thought that make places special.
The foyer air conditioning was excellent, and exactly what was called for to cool off on a hot day. (Which was not the case in the 4DX!)
I had a brief conversation with a member of staff, who worked there prior to the Cineworld acquisition; they were positive about how things were going under Cineworld, and said that it (foyer refurbishment/4DX) had been a “long build,” but that it had been “worth it.”
Asked if Cineworld intended to refurbish the IMAX and Superscreen, they said that they did not that think they were at the present time, as they were only completed a few years ago.
They seemed to have their antennas up and picked up that I might be concerned about “corporatisation” of the cinema, and on telling them that I thought that the new foyer looked fantastic, they said “but it did mean the loss of the classic look that it had,” but that they supposed that it was a move “onto better and brighter things.”
Finally, the staff are to be commended for first rate and very willing customer service throughout my visit—not just as I experienced it, but from what I observed of their interactions with others. Whether or not Cineworld truly understand the special nature of what they are stewarding, and it seems that they do but perhaps not deeply enough, it’s most certainly still being run as a flagship West End venue.
The exterior gives off a strong scent of being designed by Richard Seifert and Partners, with similar “H” shaped pre-cast concrete sections as Centre Point.
This supposition on my part turns out to be correct:
Plans are held dated 1964 (plans and cross-section – R. Seifert and Partners), 1965-6 (plans – Casson Conder and Partners), and 1968 (plan – proposed alterations to the advanced booking office and battery room – “unspecified architect of Rank Theatres Ltd.”)
It says that the walls and ceiling were constructed of more than 1000 tons of Kalite sound-absorbing plaster, and the reverberation time was estimated at >1 second, noting that this is a very short time for an auditorium of such volume. Of course, today this could hardly be considered acceptable for the screening of movies.
This is a very complicated project involving demolishing the whole block and excavating a massive 34m deep hole in the ground, right next to a busy area with the need to have heavy constraints on access, noise, dust and vibration.
A myriad of potential unknowns could block progress along critical paths; for example, as I mentioned in a previous post, the scheme was altered with the NW corner of the new building “chopped off” to allow for a UK Power Networks tunnel that had been “discovered” during enabling works!
I hadn’t actually realised that the replacement cinema opening date had been pushed back but progress did seem to be slow indeed. At this stage there should be less in the way of unknowns to scupper things…
Zappomatic: Extreme minutiae is exactly what I like. ;–)
Thanks for the update on the ongoing refurb.
LARGE_screen_format: Regarding the “washed out” colour you might wish to take a look at, for whatever it’s worth, a video commentary on the colour grading style used with Marvel Studios' films.
IMAX adjust the colour for their IMAX versions of films, and this would be different for the version supplied to conventional (Xenon lamp) IMAX Digital and IMAX with Laser venues.
I’ve certainly seen excellent images from Xenon lamp light source IMAX Digital projectors.
Regarding the sound systems:
For 15/70 at the BFI: The 6 track “Sonics” system for 15/70 with the PCM data losslessly stored on CD-ROMs and sync’d to the film on playback. (N.B. IMAX never use a separate LFE channel, 6 = left, centre, right, left surround, right surround and then the additional upper centre or so-called “Voice of God” channel—which I don’t think is used much, if at all, these days, certainly not for feature films?)
For digital at either location: 6 track lossless digital. Additionally, as of the laser projector installation, the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square supports IMAX’s 12 track system with two of the extra channels assigned as left/right side and the other four for overheads.
AFAIK the BFI uses the older generation IMAX/Sonics speakers; see:
London BFI IMAX Screen Replacement video (Direct link to the time in the video when the old screen had been removed.)
There is a mess of additional speakers which I assume are, along with the rear array that’s installed, for non-IMAX presentations. The left/centre/right IMAX speakers can be seen with the upper centre “Voice of God”—the left speaker has someone standing next to it wearing a “hi-vis” jacket. If that’s not clear: Photo of a rather battered example of one.
Not sure why there are two sets of these non-IMAX speakers; maybe they old set were left behind the screen after an upgrade in 2010?
Also not entirely clear on the subwoofers for IMAX presentations, e.g. there’s just not enough resolution in that video to identify the 4 units (2 drivers in each) at the bottom of the screen.
Installation of the Empire Leicester Square IMAX Video (Direct link to start of relevant section.)
Incidentally, notice that the Leicester Square IMAX does include a “Voice of God” speaker, whilst many new IMAX Digital installations don’t.
The main screen speakers are the newer IMAX “Kanga” speakers for larger IMAX auditoria: high resolution photo.
Subwoofers with 12" high excursion drivers are at the bottom of that photo; a number of these can be seen being installed in the video.
Both the BFI and the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square IMAX have 19" rackmount units for IMAX’s NEXOS Audyssey-based EQ system installed, but I’m not sure if this is used for digital presentations only at the BFI.
The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square has 6 additional smaller speakers on the sidewalls and ceilings, again installed concurrently with the IMAX with Laser projection system, for the IMAX 12 channel system.
Acoustics: The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square doesn’t have absolute isolation from the Superscreen (there’s a limit to what multiple layers of plasterboard and mineral wool can do—the screens are back to back!)—but then again you will rarely hear any leakage from the Superscreen (happens with peak LFE use) in the average IMAX “blockbuster” title as it’ll be masked by the film’s own audio.
The Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square does suffer acoustically from not being a purpose-built IMAX venue.
Compared to the old Empire 1, in which the slap echo issue could be a real problem for dialogue intelligibility, it’s much improved but it’s still a wide auditorium.
On the other hand the width might improve matters as instead of having the sidewalls square to the screen edges, causing earlier lateral reflections, there’s more space.
As for 15/70 projection, it seems like a retrograde step for a film shot digitally, with very heavy CGI use, and edited and finished digitally also.
Christopher Nolan apparently used an all-optical process with no digital finishing for “Dunkirk,” although in my view it looks inconsistent, grainy and less than sharp compared to current generation high-end digital material.
Speaking of “Dunkirk,” the full 1.43:1 frame wasn’t shown at the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square, but most IMAX content is now 1.9:1 maximum height anyway.
As for the screen widths, the auditoriums are around the same depth, the BFI being about a row deeper IIRC; I’ve seen 26.5m as well as 26m quoted as the screen width at the BFI whilst Empire Cinemas stated the Leicester Square IMAX screen width as 26.5m. Whether or not it’s 0.5m wider I think is a fairly moot point though as the screens are both very wide and both auditoria place the audience in the “correct” location relative to the screen per IMAX specifications.
I think that’s enough of a “brain dump” for one day, over and out for now… :–)
joeswin: Fascinating indeed—sounds like a great project! :–)
Visiting the Westminster Archives has long been on my “to do” list and I hadn’t realised those plans were held there, did you find it at all difficult to gain access?
Please upload a copy of your project somewhere if you are able to, I’d (and I trust anyone else reading this would) very much appreciate it?
LARGE_screen_format: The cinema was closed in January of this year to strip out the foyer and to get it to a state which allowed for ongoing building works whilst keeping the cinema open to the public.
The former Screen 2 had been stripped by the end of August 2017 according to the member of staff I spoke to at that time.
With the public areas of the main foyer and vestibule from Leicester Square and the 4DX complete Cineworld publicised the changes they’d made in April 2018—e.g.YouTube Video of Gala Opening.
AFAIK the former Screens 4/5 (now 1 and 2) are still closed at the moment, see Zappomatic’s photo into the former Screen 4 in a stripped state.
No idea what further phases Cineworld have planned but the information I had last month from talking to a member of staff was that Cineworld weren’t planning on doing anything to the IMAX and Superscreen at the moment as the conversion of the old Screen 1 was completed at a time that is still fairly recent.
joeswin: The signage illumination and the LED colour dot matrix display certainly need attention as they’re not working properly anymore!
(Albeit IMO the current canopy always looked dreadful…!)
No planning application for a replacement (or alterations to the existing) are listed at the moment.
The 2006 planning application for the existing canopy and signage.
As can be seen from this application, it was made on behalf of London Clubs Management. The cinema is sublet from the Casino who hold the head lease (building owned by London and Regional Properties)—no idea what the arrangements are but it might reasonably be surmised that Cineworld can’t redo the canopy/signage unilaterally.
There is a building control application dated March 2017 for a full refubishment of the Casino. That scheme doesn’t seem to have been taken forward but it might be the case that an overhaul is in the pipeline.
From my previous post linking to a conceptual proposal for complete redevelopment of the Empire site by London and Regional Properties, the casino is branded as “Caesars Palace” in the drawings of the facade and as Caesars Entertainment now operate the casino it might be the case that any replacement would take that name along with Cineworld branding.
IOW, I’d guess a refresh is due but not just yet…
The Wurlitzer Organ of the Empire Leicester Square Installed at the Home of Mr. Len Rawle.
A few facts according to this document:
Zappomatic: Hmm, I’d assumed they do sequential numbering of Screens 1-3 from the front-to-back (or left-to-right) of the foyer…
The former Screen 4 (96 seats) is the one that uses the space that was previously toilets; you took a photo of it from the foyer in a stripped out state a couple of months ago.
I, too, found that performances were scheduled for Screen 2 a couple of days ago. I can’t remember what seating layout was shown, though. (i.e. Whether it was the former Screen 4 or 5!)
Incidentally, there is an article on these screens in the September 2008 issue of Cinema Technology Magazine—complete with a picture taken from the roof above the former Screen 5 showing Swiss Centre in a mostly demolished state!
Now I’m getting confused. Isn’t Screen 2 the former Screen 4? Also had a good look through listings on the Cineworld site for Friday this week, couldn’t find any performances in Screens 1 or 2…
Addendum to previous post: This scheme seems to be somewhat “pie in the sky” in terms of its feasibility given the potential constraints on adding significant basement depth with numerous adjacent properties and obscuring windows of the Premier Inn and the new hotel (Hotel Indigo) in 1-4 Leicester Sq. (The cross-sectional view doesn’t make sense at all in terms of cinema auditoria size and positioning, but of course that could soon be changed were this project taken forward.)
Good news (from April 2017!):
“Curzon Mayfair cinema saved as developers back off” – City A.M.
Alas the “wrecking ball” may eventually be on the horizon as the freehold owner is applying for a Certificate of Immunity from listing:
SAVE Britain’s Heritage calls for urgent listing of last surviving grand 1920s West End cinema.
N.B. The façade is within the Haymarket Conservation Area.
I hope theatreofvarieties' suggestion that London & Regional Properties (who own 5-6 Leicester Square) weren’t planning on demolishing the building any time soon was correct (also, decades left on the cinema lease…)
But here’s a nightmare conceptual proposal commissioned by L&R to create an utter carbuncle with below ground cinemas:
The Empire Leicester Square Redevelopment Project.
Cineworld will be doing a large scale rollout of laser projection:
Cineworld Group Signs Deal for 600 Movie Screens Worldwide with Barco Laser Projectors.
IMAX and Cineworld Group Sign Agreement to Install New IMAX with Laser Experience in 55 Cineworld and Regal IMAX Locations.
Hopefully, this means that the LSQ Superscreen will benefit from new Barco laser projectors.
Surrounds look like they’re still JBL 8330s from the original 1993 installation.
8build’s website now has a page on the OLS works.
It says that their role is the enabling works before fit-out, including “demolition, asbestos removal, form new openings and structural alterations.”
It goes on to say that only “extent of the removal works both and in turn the demolition and structural alterations” were not known at project commencement and only after “existing services, asbestos and structure [are] uncovered” will it be possible to ascertain the scope required.
Given that their stated project duration is 12 weeks, and that from what I currently think I can see externally the foyer works appear to be far from complete, it might be the case that the works have turned out to be more extensive than originally estimated, with consequential effects on the reopening date.
Correction to previous post: The screen is not filled by the pre-show slides, (out of focus) photo uploaded showing the right side unmasked screen area.
The website of architectural practice Chapman Taylor has the following pages of relevance:
Chapman Taylor’s industry-leading cinema expertise.
Project page – Refurbishing, extending and equipping the largest cinema venue in London.
Summary of selected information from this pages:
The pages include photos of auditoria and lobby areas, including a shot of the Superscreen clearly showing the speakers added for Atmos, as well as ironically demonstrating the folly of what looks like a floating screen. (I suppose tabs and movable masking wouldn’t make for a “cutting edge cinema”!)
I’m slightly confused by the photo of the auditorium fitted with purple-coloured stretch fabric wall finishes, as it doesn’t seem to fit with Cineworld’s current house style?
Chapman Taylor – Cineworld Leicester Square – Refurbishment of a World-Famous Movie Premiere Location.
Architectual practice Chapman Taylor now have a project page for the refurbishment, which includes a photo of the 4DX auditorium.
According to the page, the 4DX is 410 sq. metres (=4400 sq. ft.) in area.
Chapman Taylor – Cineworld Leicester Square – Refurbishment of a World-Famous Movie Premiere Location.
Architectual practice Chapman Taylor now have a project page for the refurbishment, which includes a number of photos.
According to the page, the lobby areas are 660 sq. metres (=7100 sq. ft.) in area.
A selection of photos taken yesterday relevant to the 4DX have now been uploaded, mostly of the access from foyer level down to the auditorium entrance.
PhilipWW: I’ve uploaded a photo of the screen, when one of the slides before the programme was displayed, although I don’t think it quite filled the whole screen. Staff were eager to get everyone safely seated and, following the end credits, to clear the auditorium for the next screening, so I didn’t want to start wandering around the auditorium to take photos.
(That reminds me: Given the various issues discussed on CT regarding lighting in Cineworld auditoria, the lighting were well dimmed during the main feature, although they were slightly distracting due to the low ceiling. They were raised up when the end credits started, and raised up again after with the red sidewall concealed lighting and the “4DX Leicester Square” sidewall signs also turned on. Or rather, “sign,” as the one on the right wall had failed! “Non-sync” music playback was also concurrently initiated.)
The two photos you mention were most certainly taken before the 4DX conversion; a photo taken from the back of the auditorium is included in this linked article, and though hardly an accurate method, it does measure ~2.4:1 in that photo.
Based on these photos, referencing to the front right exit door location, the screen does seem to have been increased in size from the Empire Cinemas makeover; it’s about the widest screen that would fit given various constraints including sightlines due to the columns, access to the doors left/right of the screen, and perhaps the arrangement of the void/walls behind.
(Incidentally, IMAX have a patented system, intended for use in conversions of existing auditoria, which allows for the screen to cover front wall exits, and in case of an emergency, part of the screen is automatically moved!)
The non-IMAX version of the film was released in 2.39:1 ratio, with 1.90 used for the IMAX Digital version. IIRC, some shots actually didn’t quite fill the screen horizontally.
It was shot on Arri Alexa 65 cameras, which have slightly larger than 65mm film CCDs for digital capture; full frame = 2.11:1. Of course, in a such a CGI heavy film, some sections may hardly have been “shot” in the first place!
Based on the licensing plans, I’d guess the screen is just under 30ft. wide.
So, the above is a ridiculously long winded way of saying, no, they haven’t put in a “flat” ratio screen!
Visiting the 4DX today to attend a screening of “Avengers: Infinity War,” I must first say that the whole experience was tainted by what must be the worst film I’ve seen in a cinema in a very long time—quite possibly ever.
I’m not someone who would normally watch a “Marvel franchise” film, and for me it was 160 minutes of incomprehensible drivel, interspersed with “jokes” (albeit, whilst I rolled my eyes, they were a good source of mirth for the other patrons.)
Onto the 4DX auditorium. As I fumbled around with my phone to check my seat number, a member of staff actually picked my up bag and 3D glasses off the floor, and carried them over to my seat. Fantastic!
The auditorium is exactly as expected—I previously posted the notion that the average patron “might even think that it was entirely purpose-built,” and that was absolutely the case. (I should add that the auditorium and the lobby/foyer areas still retained some of the scent of being new.)
The projection was very well aligned, with slight barrel distortion towards the bottom of the screen, and it did seem to fill the entire screen during the main feature, for which—given the dark surroundings—the lack of masking was not objectionable. There was some fall off of brightness towards the edge of the screen, but this was only really noticeable during the end credits.
However, the projection had poor black levels, whilst this was ameliorated by the 3D glasses, and colours seemed to be reasonably well calibrated, dark areas were clipped, and the brightness was not really sufficient for 2D, let alone 3D.
Klipsch rear array speakers are used. The sound was pretty good, and at times loud, although it seemed to ultimately lack LFE capability and seemed pushed and limited at peak levels. The screen speakers also sounded slightly too dull.
The 4DX seating seems to be upholstered in what I assume is microfibre-type material. The seats are well padded, but the armrests are not, and I suspect wear and tear will take its toll. They are certainly not as comfortable as they look!
Onto technical aspects of 4DX: the seating motion is impressive, the water and stobbing effects aren’t, and the fog and scent effects are reasonable, albeit the fog tends to “drift” in the current direction of airflow within the auditorium.
It worked very well indeed for the 4DX trailer, but it felt very much “tacked on” to the feature itself, and for me it tended to draw my attention out of the film rather than adding to the immersion. As an example, when an on-screen character was physically attacked, the seating poked my back! Frankly, in the context of a feature film, a sound system with good LFE capability is more effective at providing a visceral augmentation of the picture.
A word of caution: the 4DX Safety Warnings, also prominently displayed at the entrance to the 4DX, must be carefully read and understood before entry, and adhered to in the auditorium. For the sake of adding context, for example, the guidelines state that “4DX motion chairs employ strong motion,” and they mean it: the seats move rapidly with tremendous force at times, almost reminiscent of certain rollercoasters (“Saw: The Ride” at Thorpe Park, for instance.)
I think it would be a fantastic system for theme park use, it just doesn’t really work for feature films not created as 4DX-specific content from the outset.
I imagine, however, that the rest of the patrons in attendance enjoyed both the movie and the 4DX element; Cineworld have certainly made something out of a “dud” auditorium, and the limitations of 4DX may well be forgiveable in the context of a film that I liked.
Finally, the auditorium was too hot; it wasn’t stuffy, so the air change rate was adequate, but I didn’t expect to have to rely on blasts from the 4DX fans to cool off!
A few more observations and photos, particularly of the staircase down to the auditorium, to follow.
I (finally!) managed to have a “proper” visit to the Cineworld (Empire) LSQ today; alas, I should have heeded my earlier apprehension over seeing “Avengers: Infinity War”—I did see it in the 4DX auditorium, and I will post comments on that part of the cinema on the Cineworld Cinema – Leicester Square 4DX page, and this comment will cover aspects applicable to the venue as a whole.
Having had a chance to have a thorough look at the main foyer section area under the IMAX stadia, it did feel more spacious and comfortable than the “old” foyer, and certainly one can sit and relax in the sofas, which, whilst not the omega of luxury, are a definite improvement over what was there before, and they certainly look very attractive.
My previous observations about the very high fit-out standard continue to apply, except that, from what I could tell, the cove LED lighting is simply LED tape that’s been—perhaps slightly hastily—adhered to the surface. My previous concern that the foyer would be too dark wasn’t the case—it was certainly the LED display modules that made it look that way by comparison—but I’d put a question mark over the long term performance of the installation.
The reflectively lacquered stretched fabric ceiling also gives a sense of height in a space lacking it; I had to remind myself that I was looking at a reflection, and not a magically raised ceiling!
On this occasion, a forgettable selection of background music was playing throughout the main foyer area and upper vestibule, to a medicore standard of sound quality. I’m sure what was playing during my last visit was considerably louder, and seemed to have a fair bit of low frequency energy, and watching Zappomatic’s video again— in which the music seems to be played over speakers in the upper vestibule only—it seems that I’m not misremembering.
However, it must be said that the arrangement of LED display modules on the stair risers and on the curved wall section rather break the rules of showmanship, with the “finale” coming first, and, at least in the case of the 4DX, a progressive dive towards a largely featureless black box. Also, the black wall above the entrance section, with its lower ceiling, I found jarring on exiting the venue; the marble cladding served to “ease” one back into the brighter outside world. Whether that was ever an intended aspect of the 1962 design, it’s these subtle features and thought that make places special.
The foyer air conditioning was excellent, and exactly what was called for to cool off on a hot day. (Which was not the case in the 4DX!)
I had a brief conversation with a member of staff, who worked there prior to the Cineworld acquisition; they were positive about how things were going under Cineworld, and said that it (foyer refurbishment/4DX) had been a “long build,” but that it had been “worth it.”
Asked if Cineworld intended to refurbish the IMAX and Superscreen, they said that they did not that think they were at the present time, as they were only completed a few years ago.
They seemed to have their antennas up and picked up that I might be concerned about “corporatisation” of the cinema, and on telling them that I thought that the new foyer looked fantastic, they said “but it did mean the loss of the classic look that it had,” but that they supposed that it was a move “onto better and brighter things.”
Finally, the staff are to be commended for first rate and very willing customer service throughout my visit—not just as I experienced it, but from what I observed of their interactions with others. Whether or not Cineworld truly understand the special nature of what they are stewarding, and it seems that they do but perhaps not deeply enough, it’s most certainly still being run as a flagship West End venue.
The exterior gives off a strong scent of being designed by Richard Seifert and Partners, with similar “H” shaped pre-cast concrete sections as Centre Point.
This supposition on my part turns out to be correct:
National Archives – City of Westminster Archives Centre Architectural Plans of Cinemas in the City of Westminster 1926-1981 – Odeon Cinema, St. Martin’s Lane.
Plans are held dated 1964 (plans and cross-section – R. Seifert and Partners), 1965-6 (plans – Casson Conder and Partners), and 1968 (plan – proposed alterations to the advanced booking office and battery room – “unspecified architect of Rank Theatres Ltd.”)
Article on Radio City Music Hall with photos, cut-away diagram published in a 1933 issue of Popular Science, and a 2013 plan for “America’s Got Talent.”
The auditorium’s acoustics are mentioned in the book “Spaces Speak, Are You Listening?: Experiencing Aural Architecture”, by Barry Blesser and Linda-Ruth Salter, pp109-11. (Direct link to p109.)
It says that the walls and ceiling were constructed of more than 1000 tons of Kalite sound-absorbing plaster, and the reverberation time was estimated at >1 second, noting that this is a very short time for an auditorium of such volume. Of course, today this could hardly be considered acceptable for the screening of movies.