Cinerama Hollywood

I think it’s funny how these 20 year old kids are complaining about Star Wars playing here instead of at Graumans. Of course Graumans is the living legend. But anyone who knows their movie theatres knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the Cinerama Dome is the best movie theatre in LA…if not the whole darn country. It will be a pleasure to see Star Wars here in 2 weeks!

Well that was just the temporary Cinerama screen, I’m talking about a permanant curved screen to use for all formats.

I wish they would put a curved screen in the Ziegfeld to make the experience more exciting. I never understood since it opened why they went with the flat screen.

Vincent is, of course, right; the demise of most real motion pictures is part and parcel of the demise of our culture, though it is not just caused just by greedy and slovenly people, no matter how much they have spent on their clothes from Rodeo Drive. The reason is multifaceted and peers into the very fabric of humanity itself, and is therefore beyond the scope of this forum, sad to say. With today’s modern communications, however, it no longer takes any immigration of peoples anywhere to influence the nature of film or most anything else; blight in the aesthetic sense travels even more quickly by electronic media than automobiles. I must agree that most of today’s films if they could be seen in such as the ROXY and other true palaces, would be so dwarfed in significance that the audience would indeed see such films as “ludicrous.” However, the “glass and steel box fungus” of ‘architecture’ which Vincent refers to is not so much a cause of the demise of the glorious palaces, as a symptom of the cultural degeneration which Vince refers to. Merely read the short novel form 1980: FROM BAUHAUS TO OUR HOUSE by the noted writer Thomas Wolfe, and you will notice the real reason that the ‘fungus’ spread so quickly through the architectural garden that we once enjoyed, complete with movie palaces blooming right and left. (Of course, we cannot forget that it was television which did the major damage to those palaces along with other cultural phenomena of the “black fungus.”)

On the “About ArcLight” portion of their web site is this statement: “ArcLight Hollywood’s 14 new auditoriums begin with a “black box” design aesthetic which favors undistracted viewing over opulence….” Statements such as this are found throughout the new, aesthetically-challenged wunderkind that populate most of our cinema world these days, where they give lip service to the beauty of the palaces, but then turn around and dismiss them with statements such as the above. MANIFESTLY: if a film is so weak or unappetizing that the viewer can be ‘distracted’ by an opulent decor, then the film should be seen as the culprit, not the decorations! It is only the supreme arrogance of the filmakers that makes them assume that anything put on a screen should automatically command the complete attention of each and every member of the audience. Those few of greater humility will acknowledge that much of what comes upon screens these days is self-indulgent crap where pretension masquerades as art. Give me a gorgeous ‘palace’ to see a move along with good projection and sound and service, and I will then have something to occupy my time and justify the stiff admision fees when portions of a film are bad or dull, and there will ALWAYS be portions of any film that do not command attention at every second. The ArcLight and other such screening rooms should never be called theatres, but only cinemas at best. They may not be ‘cheap’ as the previous post explains, but in no sense was their expense evident in the decor, for true ‘decor’ they never have had.

Can anyone out there answer a question for me? It concerns the film HOW THE WEST WAS WON.

I was six years old in 1963 and one of the first motion pictures which made an impression upon me was HOW THE WEST WAS WON. Although I was only a child I remember being awe struck by it’s grandeur.
I have hoped for many years now that I would some day be able to relive the Cinerama experience of this film. As much as I appreciate the efforts nowadays of DVD producers to present films in their original wide screen format, it still doesn’t translate very well where HOW THE WEST WAS WON is concerned. While recently visiting a web site devoted to the making of this film, I learned that it had played about a year and a half ago at the Dome. Being relatively new to Los Angles it was the first time I had heard of the Cinerama Dome. I was so disappointed to learn that I had missed it. My question is; Do they ever bring films back to the Dome once they’ve played? I would assume since HOW THE WEST WAS WON is one of the most famous of the Cinerama productions that this would be the case, but I would appreciate it if anyone out there has knowledge of how they plan their scheduling. Also; Is there any kind of mailing list that one can sign up for to keep abreast of their schedule?
They seem to be rather difficult to contact by phone. Whenever I call the number at the top of this page(323-466-3401)the phone just rings off the hook. There isn’t even any voice mail. So if anyone out there could be of help, I would truly appreciate it. Thank you all.

Regards,

Peter John

I am sorry “William” but in December of 1996 “Evita” did only play at the Cinerama Dome in Los Angeles before its general release in early 1997. Sometimes reality differs from an idolized, isolated view of history.

I saw “Evita” at the Cinerama Dome (however the first movie I saw here was “Fletch” while I was in high school). It was the only place in Los Angeles where “Evita” was playing before its general release. I remember it was very crowded and we waited for hours. I returned recently to see “The Phantom of the Opera” and the place is much better after the remodel.

Can’t we build these kinds of theatres anywhere else? Why should Hollywood have all the fun???

I remember going to see “Evita” expecting to see it on the 86 x 34 ft. screen, boy was I shocked. Apparently Alan Parker, the director, did not want that deeply curved screen. He shot the film to be shown on a flat screen (what a disappointment), and I read that he was very insistant that a flat screen be installed. With the deep curvature of the wall behind, the screen could not be made very wide. Although the screen was moved forward a little, I guess to allow more room for width, you could only go so far because of the seats in front. In my opinion, this did not look so good when sitting in the back balcony. It was really designed for the curved Cinerama screen. If you want a flat screen, show it at the Chinese or even the Village in Westwood, both are big theatres with big screens.

I love the Cinerama Dome and I like the ArcLight Cinemas but the Grove usually does more business on the same film unless its in the Dome. The Grove is a little more popular than the ArcLight. Pacific Theatres owns and runs both theatres but to there surprise the Grove has been more successful as has been stated in Variety a number of times.I am from the old school I like the decor of a theatre like Grauman’s Chinese where the theatre can be as exciting as whats on the screen.The Arclight has great picture and sound and presentation and Pacific has invested a great deal of money in there flagship operation.I have friends who live on the westside and will make a special trip if a film is playing in the Dome but not a special trip for the Arclight blackbox theatres unless its an exclusive run.I have to applaud Pacific Theatres showmanship in bringing a little class back to moviegoing in Hollywood.I regard the Cinerama Dome,El Capitan,Grauman’s Chinese,National and Village theatres as the best theatres in LA to see a movie.brucec

We do have to remember however, that the Arclight exceeds THX Certifaction standards. The Grove is not even THX Certified (in any auditorium). I’ve been to both theatres many times and the presentation at Arclight is much better than the Grove hands down. Technically speaking the Arclight is superior to the Grove in sight & sound presentation. The picture is always razor sharp & there is never any dirt or scratches even after a film has played for a week or so. The sound system is from JBL: Projecting this immersive sound throughout each auditorium are custom-designed JBL systems that feature technology honored by the Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences with a technical achievement Oscar, March 2002. Their two largest auditoriums are equiped with Dolby Digital SRD 6 channel, Dolby EX & SDDS 8 channel and have 3 stage speakers, 2 subwoofers and 9 surrounds, all JBL., the other auditoriums have Dolby Digital SRD 6 channel, Dolby EX & DTS ES. The two largest auditoriums have 70mm projectors & all auditoriums have scope screens with sizes ranging from 40 – 60 ft. The Grove may be more luxurious looking but I am going to see the film not the architecture or uniforms. The front row in all auditoriums (except the dome) is as far back from the screen as it is wide so that patrons are not forced to look up or turn their heads to see the entire screen. People will not be seated 5 min after the movie start time so as not to disrupt those already seated and watching the movie. Each movie is introduced by an arclight employee who gives a brief synopsis & lists the cast. On a comfort note, the arm rests are double width so you don’t bump arms with your neighbor and they are 3 inches wider than other stadium seats. There is no better theatre in LA.