There is much additional history of the Embassy/ABC/Cannon Peterborough on this webpage as well several pictures and memorabilia (scroll down a bit past the information about the Hippodrome/Palladium/Palace.
This article indicates that the theater reopened in 2011 as the Historic Blairstown Theatre in 2011, its current name, and that it opened in 1913 as Roy’s Hall and showed silent movies. Its website indicates that it is now a performing arts venue.
That use of those color filters at certain points in the film has been controversial since the time of the film’s original release. Some people think it was some odd photographic choice, but actually it was Logan’s carrying over from his stage production this use of color filters to establish a mood. It appears to have worked on stage, but many (including myself) do not think it is effective on film. It is just another example of Logan’s inadequacy as a film director.
Considering what could have been done with a lush tropical setting, this version of “South Pacific” (which is well-acted with that wonderful score) looks very static with many scenes evidencing a “nail the camera to the floor” (or, in this case, “anchor the camera in the sand”) approach. One can only wonder what the film would have been like if Robert Wise had been chosen as the director; now there’s someone who understood what a Rodgers and Hammerstein musical could look like in Todd-AO.
According to the the list at the in70mm.com website they are. Let us hope that they have staff or can at least temporarily hire some people who know how to project it properly. I would guess, based on some other showings I am aware of, that the distributors are allowing the film to run from a platter, so it is likely that at least the Kendall Square will not have to worry about inexperienced staff trying to run a changeover system (unless their 70mm installation runs that way).
I basically agree Cinemark fan; however, I think certain theaters – such as the Dome, the Seattle Cinerama, the Music Box, the Castro, the AFI Silver, and some others basically serve their cities in some respects as a film historical center, something akin to the Pictureville Cinema in Bradford, England and need to have these multiple projection capabilities on an ongoing basis because of the nature of their programming.
I admit that the Austin situation might appear to show that new 70mm installations would work, but I would speculate that the new installation there is largely due to the fact that this growing chain is run by an film enthusiast with a special love for Austin, has a fairly distinctive business model, a film production arm, and other characteristics far away from from a chain like AMC or even Landmark; that particular situation situation may not be all that typical or comparable. (I think it unlikely that the other franchises that are a part of the Drafthouse group will follow suit in installing 70mm). In addition, Austin has benefited from 70mm showings at their still 70mm-equipped Paramount over the years, so most likely there is an appreciation for the format there perhaps somewhat out of proportion to the city’s size.
That I said, I certainly agree that Chicago ought to have, shall I say, a mainstream commercial venue with a large (hopefully curved) screen where, when something like this situation involving “The Master” arises, can quickly be convert to a premiere 70mm venue. In some ways, the Music Box does or could serve the role, but at least in this instance, it appears it could not be arranged, and, as you noted, this theater, built well before the wide-screen era, cannot provide the full 70mm experience. It is a crying shame, when one thinks of all the venues both in the Loop or in the Chicago suburbs that once were 70mm capable, that only Music Box appears to remain. It clearly a very special niche in Chicago, but obviously only runs 70mm film occasionally.
Another sad reality that militates against new 70mm installations, even for revival showings, is that good quality 70mm prints, even of classic titles, are increasingly hard to acquire, and studios, if they are interested at all in maintaining access to classic films shot in 70mm, would rather make digital restorations than strike new 70mm prints.
Even the Dome cannot run some existing 70mm prints of some titles because the print sources, in some cases, will not allow the prints to run off a platter system, and the Dome at present cannot run 70mm without using a platter. In addition, there are fewer and fewer skilled projectionists who really know how to run 70mm film properly, especially if it has to be shown on a changeover basis.
Finally, even if a few films are shot in 70mm now and in the future, there is no guarantee that they will be projected that way; look at what is happening with “Samsara”. There is not much incentive to install a 70mm projector (and all that goes with it) if there is not going to be a regular flow of product. Lack of regular product is one factor (surely not the only one) that contributed to the demise of Cinerama and the original Todd-AO.
This is hardly surprising; looking at it from Landmark’s POV; it is just not an investment they would be willing to make. There is much excitement over the “The Master” right right now, but there’s no evidence that there are any significant numbers of new 70mm films in the offing, which would mean that installing a 70mm film projector would probably mean it would just sit there until a revival of a 70mm film came along. There may also have been concerns about whether the booths at the Century could accommodate the machine.
From a practical standpoint, 70mm projectors are not that easy to come by as they are not currently being manufactured. The one that is being installed at the Village East in NYC required a search for parts. I suspect that the additional one installed in Auditorium #3 at the Hollywood Arclight is a DP 70 or 75 or a Century JJ pulled out of mothballs somewhere in LA, possibly out of the Pacific Theaters warehouse.
If it is the same print of “South Pacific” that was shown at the 70mm Festival at the Seattle Cinerama last year you might be a little disappointed; that print was in fair condition, but the film deserves some sort of award for the “Least Imaginative Use of Wide-Screen Photography.” Joshua Logan was a great Broadway director, but I do not think he had any insight into how to use Todd-AO.
As far as AMC running this theater into the ground – I think it is more likely that chains, regardless of whether it is a big one such as AMC or a smaller one such as Clearview, simply have unimaginative business models that do not really allow for a cost-effective operation of large single screen theaters, which, admittedly, is a challenge.
A blockbuster-type film, even several weeks into its run, probably fills a larger percentage of the house than many of the films that are typically released during this time of the year. AMC’s reduction of showings to one-a-day seems to me similar to Clearview’s closing down the Ziegfeld in NYC when no big event film is available. However, even single-screen houses with imaginative and varied programming, such San Francisco’s Castro Theater, have taken to closing the theater on days such as Mondays and Tuesdays because the audience just is not there.
Hmm; I just tried searching under “Ada”, “Boise, ID,” and “Egyptian” and all three yielded this theater in the results. I wonder why it does not work for you.
I would love to be proven wrong, but I think the short closures are for a total transition to digital; I doubt very much that there will be a 70mm installation. The notes about upcoming films do include mention of “The Master” but nothing about it being presented in 70mm whereas the notes about “Samsara” point out that although it was lensed in 70mm there will not be any 70mm showings anywhere. If management saw fit to note this fact about “Samasara: I am sure that they would have pointed out that "The Master” would be a 70mm presentation if it really was going to be shown in that format.
I would suspect that at some point a 70mm print will return to the Music Box where it it had a recent preview showing.
As a side note, I am puzzled with regard to both these showings of “Samsara” and “The Master,” (even the latter’s 70mm showings), though for slightly different reasons. Aside from the higher image quality, why go to the trouble and expense of shooting a film in Panavision Super 70, (which typically renders an image of 2.20:1 in most cases) if you are going to specify that it be shown in a 35mm format (in the case of “Samasara” – which also means the height of the image will be reduced from five pfs to four), or in the case of “The Master,” projecting it, as announced, in a standard 1.85:1 ratio which means that probably some sort of matting was used to scale down the image?
How true, Tim; well, at least here in the States we have a few cities such as Seattle and Chicago (though mostly on the north side of the river) and a few others that have some truly downtown movie theaters, but it sure is not as it once was. And, even though I love Toronto, I cannot help but remember what Yonge and Bloor Streets used to be in terms of theaters that one could choose.
Now owned by Shaquille O'Neal: View article
There is much additional history of the Embassy/ABC/Cannon Peterborough on this webpage as well several pictures and memorabilia (scroll down a bit past the information about the Hippodrome/Palladium/Palace.
Here is a picture of the theatre as the Hippodrome.
An exterior photo of the megaplex can be seen here.
A video about the fire that destroyed the Strong and State theaters as well as a cathedral and other buildings can be seen here.
Status should be changed to closed.
A picture of the theatre as the Broadway KInema can be seen here.
This Google Books photo shows the former theater building.
This article indicates that the theater reopened in 2011 as the Historic Blairstown Theatre in 2011, its current name, and that it opened in 1913 as Roy’s Hall and showed silent movies. Its website indicates that it is now a performing arts venue.
That use of those color filters at certain points in the film has been controversial since the time of the film’s original release. Some people think it was some odd photographic choice, but actually it was Logan’s carrying over from his stage production this use of color filters to establish a mood. It appears to have worked on stage, but many (including myself) do not think it is effective on film. It is just another example of Logan’s inadequacy as a film director.
Considering what could have been done with a lush tropical setting, this version of “South Pacific” (which is well-acted with that wonderful score) looks very static with many scenes evidencing a “nail the camera to the floor” (or, in this case, “anchor the camera in the sand”) approach. One can only wonder what the film would have been like if Robert Wise had been chosen as the director; now there’s someone who understood what a Rodgers and Hammerstein musical could look like in Todd-AO.
According to the the list at the in70mm.com website they are. Let us hope that they have staff or can at least temporarily hire some people who know how to project it properly. I would guess, based on some other showings I am aware of, that the distributors are allowing the film to run from a platter, so it is likely that at least the Kendall Square will not have to worry about inexperienced staff trying to run a changeover system (unless their 70mm installation runs that way).
I basically agree Cinemark fan; however, I think certain theaters – such as the Dome, the Seattle Cinerama, the Music Box, the Castro, the AFI Silver, and some others basically serve their cities in some respects as a film historical center, something akin to the Pictureville Cinema in Bradford, England and need to have these multiple projection capabilities on an ongoing basis because of the nature of their programming.
I admit that the Austin situation might appear to show that new 70mm installations would work, but I would speculate that the new installation there is largely due to the fact that this growing chain is run by an film enthusiast with a special love for Austin, has a fairly distinctive business model, a film production arm, and other characteristics far away from from a chain like AMC or even Landmark; that particular situation situation may not be all that typical or comparable. (I think it unlikely that the other franchises that are a part of the Drafthouse group will follow suit in installing 70mm). In addition, Austin has benefited from 70mm showings at their still 70mm-equipped Paramount over the years, so most likely there is an appreciation for the format there perhaps somewhat out of proportion to the city’s size.
That I said, I certainly agree that Chicago ought to have, shall I say, a mainstream commercial venue with a large (hopefully curved) screen where, when something like this situation involving “The Master” arises, can quickly be convert to a premiere 70mm venue. In some ways, the Music Box does or could serve the role, but at least in this instance, it appears it could not be arranged, and, as you noted, this theater, built well before the wide-screen era, cannot provide the full 70mm experience. It is a crying shame, when one thinks of all the venues both in the Loop or in the Chicago suburbs that once were 70mm capable, that only Music Box appears to remain. It clearly a very special niche in Chicago, but obviously only runs 70mm film occasionally.
Another sad reality that militates against new 70mm installations, even for revival showings, is that good quality 70mm prints, even of classic titles, are increasingly hard to acquire, and studios, if they are interested at all in maintaining access to classic films shot in 70mm, would rather make digital restorations than strike new 70mm prints.
Even the Dome cannot run some existing 70mm prints of some titles because the print sources, in some cases, will not allow the prints to run off a platter system, and the Dome at present cannot run 70mm without using a platter. In addition, there are fewer and fewer skilled projectionists who really know how to run 70mm film properly, especially if it has to be shown on a changeover basis.
Finally, even if a few films are shot in 70mm now and in the future, there is no guarantee that they will be projected that way; look at what is happening with “Samsara”. There is not much incentive to install a 70mm projector (and all that goes with it) if there is not going to be a regular flow of product. Lack of regular product is one factor (surely not the only one) that contributed to the demise of Cinerama and the original Todd-AO.
This is hardly surprising; looking at it from Landmark’s POV; it is just not an investment they would be willing to make. There is much excitement over the “The Master” right right now, but there’s no evidence that there are any significant numbers of new 70mm films in the offing, which would mean that installing a 70mm film projector would probably mean it would just sit there until a revival of a 70mm film came along. There may also have been concerns about whether the booths at the Century could accommodate the machine.
From a practical standpoint, 70mm projectors are not that easy to come by as they are not currently being manufactured. The one that is being installed at the Village East in NYC required a search for parts. I suspect that the additional one installed in Auditorium #3 at the Hollywood Arclight is a DP 70 or 75 or a Century JJ pulled out of mothballs somewhere in LA, possibly out of the Pacific Theaters warehouse.
There are some pictures of this theater’s signage on its gallery page at Drive-ins.com.
If it is the same print of “South Pacific” that was shown at the 70mm Festival at the Seattle Cinerama last year you might be a little disappointed; that print was in fair condition, but the film deserves some sort of award for the “Least Imaginative Use of Wide-Screen Photography.” Joshua Logan was a great Broadway director, but I do not think he had any insight into how to use Todd-AO.
As far as AMC running this theater into the ground – I think it is more likely that chains, regardless of whether it is a big one such as AMC or a smaller one such as Clearview, simply have unimaginative business models that do not really allow for a cost-effective operation of large single screen theaters, which, admittedly, is a challenge.
A blockbuster-type film, even several weeks into its run, probably fills a larger percentage of the house than many of the films that are typically released during this time of the year. AMC’s reduction of showings to one-a-day seems to me similar to Clearview’s closing down the Ziegfeld in NYC when no big event film is available. However, even single-screen houses with imaginative and varied programming, such San Francisco’s Castro Theater, have taken to closing the theater on days such as Mondays and Tuesdays because the audience just is not there.
Hmm; I just tried searching under “Ada”, “Boise, ID,” and “Egyptian” and all three yielded this theater in the results. I wonder why it does not work for you.
This theater closed in August, 2012. See this note, posted on the Big Screen Cinema Guide site.
After a brief closure in August, 2012, the Times Theater has reopened under new management. See this note, posted on the Big Screen Cinema Guide site.
A view of the theater fron a different angle is here.
Another view of the former cinema: View link
I would love to be proven wrong, but I think the short closures are for a total transition to digital; I doubt very much that there will be a 70mm installation. The notes about upcoming films do include mention of “The Master” but nothing about it being presented in 70mm whereas the notes about “Samsara” point out that although it was lensed in 70mm there will not be any 70mm showings anywhere. If management saw fit to note this fact about “Samasara: I am sure that they would have pointed out that "The Master” would be a 70mm presentation if it really was going to be shown in that format.
I would suspect that at some point a 70mm print will return to the Music Box where it it had a recent preview showing.
As a side note, I am puzzled with regard to both these showings of “Samsara” and “The Master,” (even the latter’s 70mm showings), though for slightly different reasons. Aside from the higher image quality, why go to the trouble and expense of shooting a film in Panavision Super 70, (which typically renders an image of 2.20:1 in most cases) if you are going to specify that it be shown in a 35mm format (in the case of “Samasara” – which also means the height of the image will be reduced from five pfs to four), or in the case of “The Master,” projecting it, as announced, in a standard 1.85:1 ratio which means that probably some sort of matting was used to scale down the image?
How true, Tim; well, at least here in the States we have a few cities such as Seattle and Chicago (though mostly on the north side of the river) and a few others that have some truly downtown movie theaters, but it sure is not as it once was. And, even though I love Toronto, I cannot help but remember what Yonge and Bloor Streets used to be in terms of theaters that one could choose.
There is a picture of the Orient Theatre on this webpage. (p. 1138)
An effort has been launched to save the theater: View article