Quincy is kind of a world unto itself. They also have their own paper, the Patriot Ledger. I think the little Milton theater in that neighboring town only advertised locally, as well. It’s a section of Milton that looks like it should be Quincy. Downtown Quincy once had the Strand theater and also the Art, which was sort of art deco in style. I think I saw a beach blanket film there and possibly Hercules around 1962.
Boris – I’m pretty sure I recall seeing the booth on the first floor around 1965; I think it was a screening of “Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines. They cut a chunk of the decorative mouldings out from under the balcony to allow projection clearance. About five years ago, during a screening of the restored "Vertigo” in 70mm VistaVision, I visited the current booth which is once again on the upper level.
Ron—It’s very disappointing that the Appeals Court failed to link the zoning and theater issues. It would be tragic to lose the battle over the Gaiety and win the zoning war. It’s puzzling, but I’m a planner not a lawyer. I sometimes wonder if there’s some weird mix of Puritanism and capitalism that wants to absolve lower Washington of its “Combat Zone” past while making a buck in the process. Can they take this to the Commonwealth’s Supreme Court, or is the Appeals Court the last bite at the apple?
Let’s hope the Appeals Court links the zoning and demolition issues. A “ten taxpayers” suit might have helped here.
In so many cities, the local powers-that-be favor monster condominium projects in the downtown business districts. In the process, they destroy the older buildings which make up the character and fabric of the city.
Let’s hope the Glass Slipper’s attorney will file the appeal. They have legal standing since they’re an abutter to the property. There’s another legal avenue called a “ten taxpayers” suit where under certain circumstances ten citizens can file an appeal. It’s another way of getting standing in the courts, though it’s less often used. If the Glass Slipper appeals, let’s hope that court works on a different theory than Judge Long. Some kind of landmark status for the building would have helped here. Land Court tends to be quite conservative. Overall, the Massachusetts court system works reasonably well, though—no matter what you might see on “Boston Legal.” Maybe they should hire Danny Crane or Alan Shore. Bobby Donald may be looking for work.
There’s hope—some anyway—going to the Court of Appeals. I was involved in a land use case in Massachusetts that went against us in Land Court and was overturned in the Appeals Court. The justices may see that the intent of the zoning here has been fractured beyond belief.
Several issues are raised here. Why did the Landmarks Commission fail to give this theater landmark status? If this isn’t a landmark, what is, particularly in the context of the theater district? Tearing down a structurally sound, architecturally significant theater in a theater district strikes me as a totally convoluted bit reasoning…save from the point of view of the developer.
I found the web address with pictures of the Pacific as it looked in 1971 for the “Clockwork Orange” run:
[url=http://alexdlg.tripod.com/aco/pressbook.html] I got the address from a link (“Pressbook”) on this Malcolm McDowell site: [url=http://malcolmmcdowell.net/] It can also be addressed with this: [url=http://www.geocities.com/malcolmtribute/] I’ve bookmarked these sites and saved the web pages and image files. You never know how long these things will last on the net. It’s an interesting page in cinema history. As the web site says, they put this level of promotion into one theater for one film. I can’t believe I was actually there for the event. I rarely get to L.A. and just happened to be there for a few days visiting friends just after Christmas in 1971.
Quintaphonic sound. I missed that one. Did they use magnetic tracks? Analog Dolby started to appear at about this time. Twinning was a killer. So many nice auditoriums ruined.
Ron, I live out of state at the moment and only visit Boston occasionally. The city is the worse for losing so many movie theaters. Boston had such diversity and texture in its pattern of urban development. Now, everything gets swept up and replaced by big projects. Hard to believe it’s boiled down to nineteen screens in one building. If they had to build a ‘plex, I wish they’d been able to save a couple of the old theaters in that district and incorporate them. Urban planning in Boston has slipped. They’re suburbanizing the downtown. Copley Place started the trend, though I suppose you could go back as far as the Prudential center. Neither of them relate to the street in any meaningful way.
Ron, If I remember correctly, what is now the Copy Copy was a street level lobby with stairs that led down to the theaters. I think the ticket counter was on the lower level, but I could be wrong. I saw “Say Amen, Somebody” and Kirosawa’s “Kagemusha” there in the eighties, before they switched it from art house to mainstream. The Beacon Hill and the Pi Alley a couple blocks away gave a cinema presence in that area of town. Now there aren’t any at theaters at that end of downtown that I know of.
debbi—I guess the economics of theaters made the one and two screen theaters too expensive to operate downtown. The Beacon Hill was actually under ground at the garage level. The One Beacon Street building turned it into more garage space, I believe. tom
Ron: Thanks for the comprehensive listing of the fate of Boston movie theaters past and present. I’ve archived it. I hope they can save the Gayety, though it sounds like the mayor has dug in his heels on that one. They’ll eventually destroy the city in their attempts to save it.
Ron—Interesting they had one for each station. The names are so neutral. They don’t sound like porn theaters. I’m an urban planner and have observed the fringe location phenomenon for these theaters. The South End of Boston did and may still have a high gay population which might account for the South Station Cinemas bookings I’d guess the North Station Cinema had straight porn, though the North Station area has had several gay bars over the years, which also gravitate to fringe locations. There’s a journal article in all this somewhere.
As a teenager and into my adult years, I saw many films here until they closed. They often ran day and date with Boston art houses. I saw the Hitchcock rereleases in the eighties here. Just before they went dark, I was allowed to visit the booth. You had to climb a metal ladder to get there. They ran two projectors with arc lamps—no platters or Xenon. One of the best programmed suburban venues.
Gerald—Sad to hear that the West End is gone. As you observe, significant changes for that area, and not all to the good. The Swedish films had an impact in their day.
Gerald. Thanks for the reply. It must have been the West End, because I remember (at a distance) the Pussycat in that same location. They did indeed have good programming. “The Shop on Main Street” was great then and now. I don’t know why I recall the theater being small—my faulty memory. The South Station Cinema is a fascinating bit of Boston film history. Was it somewhere between S. Station and Chinatown? Another quick question: How long was the Charles a Walter Reade theater? How did Sack get such control in Boston? Your knowledge is encyclopedic.
It’s a relief that Judge Spina sees the links between the cases filed by attorney Ken Tatarian. This is why we have an appeals process.
Quincy is kind of a world unto itself. They also have their own paper, the Patriot Ledger. I think the little Milton theater in that neighboring town only advertised locally, as well. It’s a section of Milton that looks like it should be Quincy. Downtown Quincy once had the Strand theater and also the Art, which was sort of art deco in style. I think I saw a beach blanket film there and possibly Hercules around 1962.
Boris – I’m pretty sure I recall seeing the booth on the first floor around 1965; I think it was a screening of “Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines. They cut a chunk of the decorative mouldings out from under the balcony to allow projection clearance. About five years ago, during a screening of the restored "Vertigo” in 70mm VistaVision, I visited the current booth which is once again on the upper level.
Ron—It’s very disappointing that the Appeals Court failed to link the zoning and theater issues. It would be tragic to lose the battle over the Gaiety and win the zoning war. It’s puzzling, but I’m a planner not a lawyer. I sometimes wonder if there’s some weird mix of Puritanism and capitalism that wants to absolve lower Washington of its “Combat Zone” past while making a buck in the process. Can they take this to the Commonwealth’s Supreme Court, or is the Appeals Court the last bite at the apple?
Let’s hope the Appeals Court links the zoning and demolition issues. A “ten taxpayers” suit might have helped here.
In so many cities, the local powers-that-be favor monster condominium projects in the downtown business districts. In the process, they destroy the older buildings which make up the character and fabric of the city.
Let’s hope the Glass Slipper’s attorney will file the appeal. They have legal standing since they’re an abutter to the property. There’s another legal avenue called a “ten taxpayers” suit where under certain circumstances ten citizens can file an appeal. It’s another way of getting standing in the courts, though it’s less often used. If the Glass Slipper appeals, let’s hope that court works on a different theory than Judge Long. Some kind of landmark status for the building would have helped here. Land Court tends to be quite conservative. Overall, the Massachusetts court system works reasonably well, though—no matter what you might see on “Boston Legal.” Maybe they should hire Danny Crane or Alan Shore. Bobby Donald may be looking for work.
There’s hope—some anyway—going to the Court of Appeals. I was involved in a land use case in Massachusetts that went against us in Land Court and was overturned in the Appeals Court. The justices may see that the intent of the zoning here has been fractured beyond belief.
Several issues are raised here. Why did the Landmarks Commission fail to give this theater landmark status? If this isn’t a landmark, what is, particularly in the context of the theater district? Tearing down a structurally sound, architecturally significant theater in a theater district strikes me as a totally convoluted bit reasoning…save from the point of view of the developer.
Ron: Sad news to be sure. Thanks for the links. Tom
Ack. Let me try that Tripod site again. That’s the direct link
http://alexdlg.tripod.com/aco/pressbook.html
Maybe we can make those sites clickable
http://alexdlg.tripod.com/aco/pressbook.htm
http://malcolmmcdowell.net/
http://www.geocities.com/malcolmtribute/
I found the web address with pictures of the Pacific as it looked in 1971 for the “Clockwork Orange” run:
[url=http://alexdlg.tripod.com/aco/pressbook.html] I got the address from a link (“Pressbook”) on this Malcolm McDowell site: [url=http://malcolmmcdowell.net/] It can also be addressed with this: [url=http://www.geocities.com/malcolmtribute/] I’ve bookmarked these sites and saved the web pages and image files. You never know how long these things will last on the net. It’s an interesting page in cinema history. As the web site says, they put this level of promotion into one theater for one film. I can’t believe I was actually there for the event. I rarely get to L.A. and just happened to be there for a few days visiting friends just after Christmas in 1971.
Ron—I agree that the Pru is better now than in the past. The original Pru shopping arcade was dreary.
Erik—fascinating info on the use of the Wang lobby for Eastwick. It’s a huge space.
Quintaphonic sound. I missed that one. Did they use magnetic tracks? Analog Dolby started to appear at about this time. Twinning was a killer. So many nice auditoriums ruined.
Ron, I live out of state at the moment and only visit Boston occasionally. The city is the worse for losing so many movie theaters. Boston had such diversity and texture in its pattern of urban development. Now, everything gets swept up and replaced by big projects. Hard to believe it’s boiled down to nineteen screens in one building. If they had to build a ‘plex, I wish they’d been able to save a couple of the old theaters in that district and incorporate them. Urban planning in Boston has slipped. They’re suburbanizing the downtown. Copley Place started the trend, though I suppose you could go back as far as the Prudential center. Neither of them relate to the street in any meaningful way.
Ack, I meant “Copy Cop,” sorry…
Ron, If I remember correctly, what is now the Copy Copy was a street level lobby with stairs that led down to the theaters. I think the ticket counter was on the lower level, but I could be wrong. I saw “Say Amen, Somebody” and Kirosawa’s “Kagemusha” there in the eighties, before they switched it from art house to mainstream. The Beacon Hill and the Pi Alley a couple blocks away gave a cinema presence in that area of town. Now there aren’t any at theaters at that end of downtown that I know of.
debbi—I guess the economics of theaters made the one and two screen theaters too expensive to operate downtown. The Beacon Hill was actually under ground at the garage level. The One Beacon Street building turned it into more garage space, I believe. tom
Ron. Thanks for the photo link. It hasn’t changed much there. Seventies architecture left something to be desired.
Ron: Thanks for the comprehensive listing of the fate of Boston movie theaters past and present. I’ve archived it. I hope they can save the Gayety, though it sounds like the mayor has dug in his heels on that one. They’ll eventually destroy the city in their attempts to save it.
Ron—Interesting they had one for each station. The names are so neutral. They don’t sound like porn theaters. I’m an urban planner and have observed the fringe location phenomenon for these theaters. The South End of Boston did and may still have a high gay population which might account for the South Station Cinemas bookings I’d guess the North Station Cinema had straight porn, though the North Station area has had several gay bars over the years, which also gravitate to fringe locations. There’s a journal article in all this somewhere.
As a teenager and into my adult years, I saw many films here until they closed. They often ran day and date with Boston art houses. I saw the Hitchcock rereleases in the eighties here. Just before they went dark, I was allowed to visit the booth. You had to climb a metal ladder to get there. They ran two projectors with arc lamps—no platters or Xenon. One of the best programmed suburban venues.
Gerald—Sad to hear that the West End is gone. As you observe, significant changes for that area, and not all to the good. The Swedish films had an impact in their day.
Gerald. Thanks for the reply. It must have been the West End, because I remember (at a distance) the Pussycat in that same location. They did indeed have good programming. “The Shop on Main Street” was great then and now. I don’t know why I recall the theater being small—my faulty memory. The South Station Cinema is a fascinating bit of Boston film history. Was it somewhere between S. Station and Chinatown? Another quick question: How long was the Charles a Walter Reade theater? How did Sack get such control in Boston? Your knowledge is encyclopedic.