I reside in the San fernando Valley not far from this theatre. I drove by the other day and noticed the place is currently closed. The traveling circus taking up residency in the parking lot is open, though! There’s a big sign on the building encouraging patrons to visit the other Regency locations.
Vito…were you working in Honolulu in 1986? If so, perhaps I have you or one of your colleagues to thank for a killer 70mm presentation of “Top Gun” I saw at one of the Waikiki Twins. (I was so impressed I saw it twice during the week I was there vacationing!) I also saw a 70 of “Cobra” around the corner.
“Star Wars” opened in Honolulu on June 8, 1977 in 35mm at the CINERAMA and KAPIOLANI. The CINERAMA’s upgrade to a 70mm presentation, according to its promotion in the local newspapers, was during October ‘77. (That Oct. start date for the 70mm matches by a couple of weeks the date of install of the Dolby CP100 according to Dolby Labs’ master installation records.)
All still-circulating prints of “Star Wars” (save for a print in Portland, OR) were pulled by Fox during the first week of September 1978, suggesting that the duration of the Honolulu 70mm engagement was less than one year.
A list of 70mm engagements of the original “Star Wars” can be found at: View link
Also regarding Todd-AO, it is written near the top of this page that the MICHAEL TODD Theatre was the second Todd-AO roadshow theatre. I don’t think this is correct. It’s certainly not correct as far as worldwide 70mm-equipped venues is concerned, which makes me think the intent of the writer was to claim the MICHAEL TODD was the second 70mm venue in the city of Chicago.
But I don’t believe that’s correct either. My research suggests the first theatre in Chicago to equip for 70mm presentations was the McVICKERS with the CINESTAGE being the second such theatre to be so equipped.
The short answer: For projection, Todd-AO was a system that utilized a 70-millimeter print and six-channel magnetic stereophonic sound. This resulted in exceptional presentation quality compared to the standard 35-millimeter process which utilized between one- and four-channel optical or magnetic soundtracks. Many of the films shown at the MICHAEL TODD and CINESTAGE theaters in Chicago during the 1950s and ‘60s were shown in 70mm.
Thanks. The Wikipedia page addresses those places being a part of Oyster Bay, but it does not address why the ‘60s era newspaper ads listed the PLAINVIEW in Hicksville.
What was the date of the “HTWWW” engagement, you ask? The premiere date and duration of the engagement is included in the article to which I provided a link in my previous post. Click it! You won’t be disappointed.
Thanks for the history of the theatre. If I may, I’d like to offer a clarification regarding your comment about 1-strip Cinerama: my research indicates that before showing 70mm presentations the COOPER was indeed equipped for 3-strip Cinerama presentation. Among the films they ran in genuine 3-strip was “How The West Was Won,” which had a very successful 34-week run in Oklahoma City.
There’s no need to dig up the movie ads from the Oklahoma City newspaper since I did just that two years ago when I was researching the “2001” article.
Did you see “2001: A Space Odyssey” at the CONTINENTAL during a return engagement, or were the CONTINENTAL and the COOPER alternate names for the same theatre? I ask because the research I did on the original showings of “2001” indicates the Oklahoma City first-run roadshow engagement was at the COOPER.
No, your memory appears to be intact. I forgot about it, though!
There was a week-long 70mm fest preceding the run of “Far And Away.” I believe the films were “Oklahoma!,” “West Side Story” and “2001.” I suspect the purpose of the fest was to tune up the theatre in anticipation of the heavily-promoted release of “Far And Away.” It was common in major markets to run some 70mm prior to a major new 70mm release to get the equipment and staff up to speed in an effort to reduce the chances for any hiccups during the all-important first day/weekend.)
I agree all of this Dome commentary is more appropriate for the Dome’s page. That’s why I made certain in my earlier post to sneak in a comment about the ZIEGFELD. :–)
There were some engagements of “2001” at the ZIEGFELD — the subject of this thread — and they’re noted on our companion article, “70mm in New York.”
And…if anyone’s interested in the original 1968-69 roadshow engagements, Thomas Hauerslev posted a piece I researched on his in70mm site. The list on page 2 includes all of the original U.S. & Canadian “In Cinerama” bookings, most of the domestic “In 70mm” bookings and some of the international. Enjoy!
By the way, I’m not certain there were ever any “rectified” prints of “2001.” It may have been just the Ultra Panavision productions that received rectification treatment on the prints intended for Cinerama houses with deeply-curved screens.
Was the PLAINVIEW in Plainview? I ask because newspaper advertisements during the ‘60s list it as being located in Hicksville. And further research suggests Plainview, Hicksville, Syosset, Woodbury, etc. are all a part of Oyster Bay. Anyone know for sure?
Hmmm. “Plutarchic”? The Greek biographer? “Plutarchian” maybe? Not sure what you mean…but I’ll take it as a compliment. :–)
On the subject of “The Empire Strikes Back” and the DAYTON MALL, I’ll take this opportunity to share the link to a list of the original engagement locations when the movie was first put into limited market release. It’s a pretty interesting list and was definitely fun to research. Lots of long-gone theatres on there including some definite “Cinema Treasures”!
In analyzing the list, what jumps out at me regarding Dayton and Ohio, is that Dayton (a mid size market?) got TWO bookings of “Empire” during this limited-release timeframe. Cincinnati, not surprisingly, got two. Columbus: two. Toledo: one. But the big surprise: Cleveland, which didn’t get the film at all in that initial lauch! And when they did get it upon the wide break a month later, they got it only in 35mm; no 70mm engagements for Cleveland.
The CINEMA CARRIAGE SQUARE opened as a single screen on Feb. 18, 1966. Over the years, the theatre went through a series of owners, including Statewide, Loew, SRO and Pacific.
Jeff S.: what do mean “Pete is correct”? Don’t you mean “Mike and Pete are correct”? After all, I correctly stated the “To Be Continued” credit was never in the original theatrical version a couple of posts prior to Pete’s. Just pointing out it seems my post was overlooked. But in fairness to Pete, he probably was just emphasizing the fact to counter the dude who replied after me insisting the credit was present.
Anyway, to offer futher evidence (just because I enjoy beating a dead horse), I saw “Back To The Future” 14 times during its original 1985-86 run in nearly as many theaters and in both 35mm and 70mm versions. Even saw a 16mm version at a special screening arranged for my high school. NONE of those screenings had the “To Be Continued” credit, no doubt because at that time there were no plans for any sequels. (This is similar to the original “Star Wars” not initially having an episode number.)
And to be certain memory isn’t playing any tricks, I saw “Back To The Future” two more times after its video release —– in 1988 at a special “Steven Spielberg Day” at the Cinerama Dome, and in 1990 at the Avco Westwood during the “See The Future Back To Back To Back” Triple Feature preceding the release of “Part III” —– and again no “To Be Continued” credit.
Now, as has been mentioned by others, “Part II” did have a “To Be Continued” credit, and it is this that people are probably remembering.
I’ve lived in Southern California for many, many years, but have attended a movie at the FAIRFAX only a few times. In fact, I don’t recall ever attending a “regular” showing of anything; my visits were all during the spring/summer 1990 Sunday morning 70mm series.
Among the films I saw were “Blade Runner,” “The Great Race,” and “Raiders Of The Lost Ark.”
That “Blade Runner” screening was noteworthy, for those familiar with the film’s history, for it was when it was “discovered” that an alternative cut of the film existed. (Apparently, the film cans were either mislabeled or simpy identified the film’s title without clarifying it as being an early “test” print.)
You don’t make it clear whether those who posted the articles in question cited their sources. I suspect they didn’t.
As long as publication name, article name, author, and original publication date is cited in one’s post, then where’s the problem? (I can see where a newspaper requiring a subscription to access a web version of an article may object to whole text being posted.)
Hopefully, Cinema Treasures posters will see Patrick’s post above and take a moment to remind themselves to start attributing more often their sources of information. There seems to be an ALARMING amount of information on this website posted without any attribution…and, worse, much of the info is just plain wrong.
This website has incredible potential, but the nature of user-submitted information sites is, in my opinion, a major credibility threat.
I reside in the San fernando Valley not far from this theatre. I drove by the other day and noticed the place is currently closed. The traveling circus taking up residency in the parking lot is open, though! There’s a big sign on the building encouraging patrons to visit the other Regency locations.
Vito…were you working in Honolulu in 1986? If so, perhaps I have you or one of your colleagues to thank for a killer 70mm presentation of “Top Gun” I saw at one of the Waikiki Twins. (I was so impressed I saw it twice during the week I was there vacationing!) I also saw a 70 of “Cobra” around the corner.
“Star Wars” opened in Honolulu on June 8, 1977 in 35mm at the CINERAMA and KAPIOLANI. The CINERAMA’s upgrade to a 70mm presentation, according to its promotion in the local newspapers, was during October ‘77. (That Oct. start date for the 70mm matches by a couple of weeks the date of install of the Dolby CP100 according to Dolby Labs’ master installation records.)
All still-circulating prints of “Star Wars” (save for a print in Portland, OR) were pulled by Fox during the first week of September 1978, suggesting that the duration of the Honolulu 70mm engagement was less than one year.
A list of 70mm engagements of the original “Star Wars” can be found at:
View link
Yes (assuming the premiere dates matched the decision to equip).
The original Todd-AO installations for “Oklahoma!”:
View link
Also regarding Todd-AO, it is written near the top of this page that the MICHAEL TODD Theatre was the second Todd-AO roadshow theatre. I don’t think this is correct. It’s certainly not correct as far as worldwide 70mm-equipped venues is concerned, which makes me think the intent of the writer was to claim the MICHAEL TODD was the second 70mm venue in the city of Chicago.
But I don’t believe that’s correct either. My research suggests the first theatre in Chicago to equip for 70mm presentations was the McVICKERS with the CINESTAGE being the second such theatre to be so equipped.
The short answer: For projection, Todd-AO was a system that utilized a 70-millimeter print and six-channel magnetic stereophonic sound. This resulted in exceptional presentation quality compared to the standard 35-millimeter process which utilized between one- and four-channel optical or magnetic soundtracks. Many of the films shown at the MICHAEL TODD and CINESTAGE theaters in Chicago during the 1950s and ‘60s were shown in 70mm.
For more details, I’d recommend visiting www.widescreenmuseum.com and www.in70mm.com For a list of where some of the Todd-AO films played, I’d suggest www.FromScriptToDVD.com
What company currently owns and operates the PARIS?
Thanks. The Wikipedia page addresses those places being a part of Oyster Bay, but it does not address why the ‘60s era newspaper ads listed the PLAINVIEW in Hicksville.
What was the date of the “HTWWW” engagement, you ask? The premiere date and duration of the engagement is included in the article to which I provided a link in my previous post. Click it! You won’t be disappointed.
Thanks for the history of the theatre. If I may, I’d like to offer a clarification regarding your comment about 1-strip Cinerama: my research indicates that before showing 70mm presentations the COOPER was indeed equipped for 3-strip Cinerama presentation. Among the films they ran in genuine 3-strip was “How The West Was Won,” which had a very successful 34-week run in Oklahoma City.
View link
There’s no need to dig up the movie ads from the Oklahoma City newspaper since I did just that two years ago when I was researching the “2001” article.
Did you see “2001: A Space Odyssey” at the CONTINENTAL during a return engagement, or were the CONTINENTAL and the COOPER alternate names for the same theatre? I ask because the research I did on the original showings of “2001” indicates the Oklahoma City first-run roadshow engagement was at the COOPER.
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2004/2001/release.htm
No, your memory appears to be intact. I forgot about it, though!
There was a week-long 70mm fest preceding the run of “Far And Away.” I believe the films were “Oklahoma!,” “West Side Story” and “2001.” I suspect the purpose of the fest was to tune up the theatre in anticipation of the heavily-promoted release of “Far And Away.” It was common in major markets to run some 70mm prior to a major new 70mm release to get the equipment and staff up to speed in an effort to reduce the chances for any hiccups during the all-important first day/weekend.)
I agree all of this Dome commentary is more appropriate for the Dome’s page. That’s why I made certain in my earlier post to sneak in a comment about the ZIEGFELD. :–)
The DOME also ran “2001” during their 1988 25th anniversary festival.
I would think that by now those folks with a serious interest in the subject would know where to look. :–)
But since I was asked…
“2001” engagements at the CINERAMA DOME began on:
July 24, 1974
July 17, 1977
Mar. 19, 1993
Nov. 10, 1995
Visit www.fromscripttodvd.com/70mm_in_los_angeles_main_page.htm, then for info on Southern California showings of “2001,” select any of the following years 1968, 1974, 1977, 1980, 2001.
There were some engagements of “2001” at the ZIEGFELD — the subject of this thread — and they’re noted on our companion article, “70mm in New York.”
And…if anyone’s interested in the original 1968-69 roadshow engagements, Thomas Hauerslev posted a piece I researched on his in70mm site. The list on page 2 includes all of the original U.S. & Canadian “In Cinerama” bookings, most of the domestic “In 70mm” bookings and some of the international. Enjoy!
http://www.in70mm.com/news/2004/2001/release.htm
By the way, I’m not certain there were ever any “rectified” prints of “2001.” It may have been just the Ultra Panavision productions that received rectification treatment on the prints intended for Cinerama houses with deeply-curved screens.
Why would the newspapers list it as being located in Hicksville?
Was the PLAINVIEW in Plainview? I ask because newspaper advertisements during the ‘60s list it as being located in Hicksville. And further research suggests Plainview, Hicksville, Syosset, Woodbury, etc. are all a part of Oyster Bay. Anyone know for sure?
Hmmm. “Plutarchic”? The Greek biographer? “Plutarchian” maybe? Not sure what you mean…but I’ll take it as a compliment. :–)
On the subject of “The Empire Strikes Back” and the DAYTON MALL, I’ll take this opportunity to share the link to a list of the original engagement locations when the movie was first put into limited market release. It’s a pretty interesting list and was definitely fun to research. Lots of long-gone theatres on there including some definite “Cinema Treasures”!
View link
In analyzing the list, what jumps out at me regarding Dayton and Ohio, is that Dayton (a mid size market?) got TWO bookings of “Empire” during this limited-release timeframe. Cincinnati, not surprisingly, got two. Columbus: two. Toledo: one. But the big surprise: Cleveland, which didn’t get the film at all in that initial lauch! And when they did get it upon the wide break a month later, they got it only in 35mm; no 70mm engagements for Cleveland.
The FOX THEATRE in Oxnard opened on May 27, 1969.
The CINEMA CARRIAGE SQUARE opened as a single screen on Feb. 18, 1966. Over the years, the theatre went through a series of owners, including Statewide, Loew, SRO and Pacific.
Jeff S.: what do mean “Pete is correct”? Don’t you mean “Mike and Pete are correct”? After all, I correctly stated the “To Be Continued” credit was never in the original theatrical version a couple of posts prior to Pete’s. Just pointing out it seems my post was overlooked. But in fairness to Pete, he probably was just emphasizing the fact to counter the dude who replied after me insisting the credit was present.
Anyway, to offer futher evidence (just because I enjoy beating a dead horse), I saw “Back To The Future” 14 times during its original 1985-86 run in nearly as many theaters and in both 35mm and 70mm versions. Even saw a 16mm version at a special screening arranged for my high school. NONE of those screenings had the “To Be Continued” credit, no doubt because at that time there were no plans for any sequels. (This is similar to the original “Star Wars” not initially having an episode number.)
And to be certain memory isn’t playing any tricks, I saw “Back To The Future” two more times after its video release —– in 1988 at a special “Steven Spielberg Day” at the Cinerama Dome, and in 1990 at the Avco Westwood during the “See The Future Back To Back To Back” Triple Feature preceding the release of “Part III” —– and again no “To Be Continued” credit.
Now, as has been mentioned by others, “Part II” did have a “To Be Continued” credit, and it is this that people are probably remembering.
OK, back to the Ziegfeld (no pun intended)…
The “To Be Continued” credit was added to the video version.
I’ve lived in Southern California for many, many years, but have attended a movie at the FAIRFAX only a few times. In fact, I don’t recall ever attending a “regular” showing of anything; my visits were all during the spring/summer 1990 Sunday morning 70mm series.
Among the films I saw were “Blade Runner,” “The Great Race,” and “Raiders Of The Lost Ark.”
That “Blade Runner” screening was noteworthy, for those familiar with the film’s history, for it was when it was “discovered” that an alternative cut of the film existed. (Apparently, the film cans were either mislabeled or simpy identified the film’s title without clarifying it as being an early “test” print.)
The Metro was one of San Francisco’s 70mm-equipped houses.
View link
You don’t make it clear whether those who posted the articles in question cited their sources. I suspect they didn’t.
As long as publication name, article name, author, and original publication date is cited in one’s post, then where’s the problem? (I can see where a newspaper requiring a subscription to access a web version of an article may object to whole text being posted.)
Hopefully, Cinema Treasures posters will see Patrick’s post above and take a moment to remind themselves to start attributing more often their sources of information. There seems to be an ALARMING amount of information on this website posted without any attribution…and, worse, much of the info is just plain wrong.
This website has incredible potential, but the nature of user-submitted information sites is, in my opinion, a major credibility threat.