Hi David, I don’t have any photos or drawings to show you, but I live in Gallup and would be happy to assist you in any way I can. I hesitate to give any contact info but…here goes. You can email me at Please use a subject heading mentioning the El Morro so that I don’t just delete it unread.
I was able to get a seat in the third row. The seats were sold by section rather than by aisle and number. Being close to the stage, the acoustics were great. I tried moving further back after the intermission (just so I could have a better view of the auditorium), but had a hard time understanding the spoken dialogue (the dialogue in this opera was simply spoken rather than being sung as recitative), so I moved up to the 5th row. There were plenty of people sitting further back, so the problem may have been mine more than the acoustics. The second balcony was not open, and the staircases were too closely watched for me to sneak up during the performance. I also noticed the stumps of what must have at one time been drinking fountains near the bases of each staircase up to the 1st balcony.
I was fortunate enough to be in Los Angeles last weekend (for a family wedding). I got to L.A. on the morning train and walked around Broadway before going to the hotel and I saw that the opera “Manon Lescaut” was going to be playing at the Los Angeles Theatre that night. While the rest of my friends and relatives went out to drink I walked over to the theatre to see if I could get in at the last minute.
The opera was a budget production, but the singing and music were beautiful. The theatre was slam-dunk gorgeous! As usual, photographs do not do it justice. The theatre was very dusty, and had the dank feel of a building that is not used often, but it is still in very good shape. The famous crystal fountain was lit up, and I noticed that the base of the fountain was actually plumbed for water (no water was flowing that night, of course).
I met one of the stagehands after the performance, and he gave me a tour of the theatre before I left.
I just got a look at the photos posted on this site. What’s amazing is how well this theatre’s decoration has survived. So many things that have long since disappeared from other movie palaces are still in “in situ” as it were. The tapestries, the furnishings, the pieces of artwork, even the urns of flowers in the lobby!
Sheesh! Do you guys wake up and take negativity pills for breakfast or what? All I was saying is that it’s possible to replace missing plaster ornamentation. Also, doesn’t the phrase “boondocks of Brooklyn” seem like an oxymoron? It’s the same as saying the boondocks of America’s largest city.
Sheesh! Do you guys wake up and take negativity pills for breakfast or what? All I was saying is that it’s possible to replace missing plaster ornamentation. Do y'all wait in the wings with buckets of cold water?
Though it would be wonderful if the original plaster molds existed, the lack of them wouldn’t be a problem to restoration. At the Paradise, missing ornaments were reproduced from the plaster that still remained in place. Even if the plaster is completely missing it can be reproduced from photographs. At the Elgin Theatre in Toronto the proscenium and box seats were destroyed to make way for Cinerama, and when the theatre was restored for use as a legitimate playhouse the boxes and proscenium were replicated. You would never know that they were new if you hadn’t been told.
After looking at these photos I have to say that Mr. Ahlschlager was quite the architect. Did he design any other theatres besides the Roxy, the Belmont, and the Beacon? His treatment of theatre interiors is completely different from most movie palace architects. His theatres (at least the three that I’m aware of) all seem to have a sense of solidity, and almost solemnity, combined with a large helping of romance. They seem more dreamlike than other theatres. I admire the way the Beacon’s auditorium is designed to look like some sort of tent-roofed pavilion, with the columns flanking the stage and lining the sidewalls disappearing into the “canvas” above, reaching up to heights that can only be imagined since they can never be actually seen.
Thanks for the great photos Edsolero. Is the paint job in the rotunda touched up? I had a hard time telling whether the color scheme looked original or not. Some parts looked like they were still the original color, and other areas I couldn’t tell. Next time I visit New York I’ll have to check and see if I can’t get into this place. I had heard a lot about how the rotunda in this theatre was supposed to be a smaller version of the Roxy rotunda, but, other than the chandeliers being similar in style, I don’t see any resemblance.
Ken, those are fantasic photos. Thank you for putting them on this site. It seems that the first photo for the December 11 post is misidentified. The theatre is clearly not the Fox (the sidewalls are different, and the balcony support posts suggest a theatre of an earlier date than the Fox). There seems to be a date of 1906 in the corner of the photo, so this is possibly a photograph of a San Francisco theatre damaged in the earthquake.
P.S. Since this may be my last comment this week (you never can tell), please let me wish any readers here a Merry Christmas, a Happy Hannukah, or a joyous holiday. Whichever you may prefer.
EdSolero did put it nicely, and I agree that the Paradise “restoration” is not above criticism. I was just stating that I’m very sick and tired of people who never find anything positive to say ever. The Paradise was quadruplexed, and then boarded up. Now it’s been fixed up inside and reopened. I was just wishing that people who point out what a horrible job was done on the sign (and I agree, it is a horrible job) could give credit where credit is due, as well as nitpick about what went wrong. There’s a small list of things I don’t like about the Paradise; the non-functioning fountain, the lack of stars and clouds, the refreshment stand, the removal of the trees and vines, and the lack of draperies. But I’m truly thrilled at what has been done right. The balcony soffit was missing masssive chunks of ornamentation that is now replicated and restored. The new paint and gold leaf is amazing. The original light fixtures are up and running, and judging by the photos, the lobby lights are kept appropriately low (as you may know, high levels of lobby lighting are a particular gripe of mine). Well, I could go on, but to repeat and recap, there are a few, a very few, folks who only complain. Of course, they should always feel free to complain, but I should feel free to say that I’m tired of their complaints.
I agree with Bobs. It’s amazing that, before the theatre opened, we kept hearing that it will never reopen. Now that’s it’s been largely restored and reopened all we hear is that it will never stay open. Then the nitpicking starts about what’s wrong. Yeah, the sign looks like crap, and you know what? A fresh coat of paint will fix it. I went to the holiday show at the old Loew’s State in Syracuse. The heat was too low. The lighting levels in the lobby are too high. The new refreshment stand is obtrusive, but you know what I kept telling myself? IT’S STILL STANDING. Someone cares enough about it to keep it standing and open, and that’s a great start. As far as I’m concerned, the Paradise is off to a great start. I hope it’s a huge success. Maybe someday they can do a proper restoration of the sign, and then all you whiners can find something else to complain about.
Well, you truly can never tell what the future will bring. Jim, I found your thoughts above to be well stated, but remember that you also gave us a long and well thought out argument as to why the Paradise would never reopen as well. It all comes down to the fact that you truly never can tell.
The New Amsterdam is a good example Jim, especially because it’s condition was pretty horrifying before it was restored. If I recall, there were mushrooms growing in the downstairs lounge, and a great deal of plasterwork had been ruined by moisture.
Hi Warren, the size reference is in commas, meaning it could be a parenthetical comment, allowing it to be in present tense while the rest of the sentence is past tense. I recall seeing on some website about the Bronx that the Paradise was the 2nd largest theatre in NYC. That’s probably where the comment above came from.
Hi Divinity, I can’t make it for this event. I would knock my front teeth out with a hammer if it meant I could make it. I’ll just have to come and drool when I’m able to.
Yes, the color scheme is dreadful, but at the building is well maintained, and it’s obvious the church is proud of their building. It certainly could be worse, and it’s definitely still restorable.
Thanks, Warren, for your usual nit-picking. I think they’re saying that it’s currently the 2nd largest theatre in the 5 boroughs. A statement which you will be commenting on soon, no doubt.
Well, Radio City Music Hall is a very sophisticated streamlined sort of Art Deco, and the Palace in Albany is more of french baroque/Viennese opera house sort of style. Y'know, lots of gold leaf and cherubs and damask and stuff like that.
I hope no one’s disappointed, but this theatre is not atmospheric. I’m not sure how it got described as such. It is, however, a very lovely theatre, and well worth visiting.
I don’t understand this mania that Dupage residents have against using taxpayer funds to save this theatre. There isn’t a building project that ever takes place without the use of taxpayer funds. Whether it’s the purchase price, or tax breaks, or some incentive to get a developer moving, they all do it. So what’s the problem here? As far as the efforts on the parts of the “Friends”, there’s not a whole lot they can do unless they own the theatre or have the owner’s permission.
When Buffalo (a city that is basically bankrupt, by the way) decided to purchase and renovate the Shea’s Buffalo Theatre they not only saved a beautiful and irreplacable building, it turned out that Shea’s became a focal point for downtown. Even though it’s still not a moneymaker the benefits to the businesses surrounding it, and the benefit to the city’s image have been enough that no one ever says saving it was a mistake. On the contrary, whenever someone walks into the building the comment that always comes up sooner or later is “I can’t believe they wanted to tear this down”.
When San Francisco (a city that has a large tourist base, and plenty of tourist attractions) declined to purchase the Fox Theatre and allow its demolition they created a loss that is still talked about in that city today, even though it happened 40 years ago!
If Dupage puts a new structure up on this site, they will have something that they can be proud of for about 10 years, at which point the building will become dated, then unkempt, then within one generation the new building will either be empty or demolished. It’s just the way it is with modern development. They’re not built to last, no matter what they are. Take it from someone who lives in a city that still thinks demolition and redevelopment is a good idea, it doesn’t work. You should save the best of what you already have, and only allow the best to be built when the opportunity arises.
Mr. Concerned Taxpayer, your comments are so pathetic that they are actually funny! I still have to wonder (as I have in previous posts) what your motive is in destroying this place. You really should come to work for my hometown. They have the same short sightedness and desire to destroy anything unique and interesting that you seem to have.
By the way, how does Concerned Taxpayer manage to be so rude, and yet so boring. I gues the lack of imagination that keeps him from seeing this theatre’s potential must affect his writing ability as well.
It’s a pretty sad state of affairs. Even podunk little places in upstate New York have enough sense to preserve their old theatres. Places like Gloversville, Rome, Utica, and Gowanda have all elected to save and restore their last remaining theatres and movie palaces. Well, if the Dupage goes I can at least cross Lombard off my list of places to go.
Hi David, I don’t have any photos or drawings to show you, but I live in Gallup and would be happy to assist you in any way I can. I hesitate to give any contact info but…here goes. You can email me at Please use a subject heading mentioning the El Morro so that I don’t just delete it unread.
Hi Joe,
I was able to get a seat in the third row. The seats were sold by section rather than by aisle and number. Being close to the stage, the acoustics were great. I tried moving further back after the intermission (just so I could have a better view of the auditorium), but had a hard time understanding the spoken dialogue (the dialogue in this opera was simply spoken rather than being sung as recitative), so I moved up to the 5th row. There were plenty of people sitting further back, so the problem may have been mine more than the acoustics. The second balcony was not open, and the staircases were too closely watched for me to sneak up during the performance. I also noticed the stumps of what must have at one time been drinking fountains near the bases of each staircase up to the 1st balcony.
I was fortunate enough to be in Los Angeles last weekend (for a family wedding). I got to L.A. on the morning train and walked around Broadway before going to the hotel and I saw that the opera “Manon Lescaut” was going to be playing at the Los Angeles Theatre that night. While the rest of my friends and relatives went out to drink I walked over to the theatre to see if I could get in at the last minute.
The opera was a budget production, but the singing and music were beautiful. The theatre was slam-dunk gorgeous! As usual, photographs do not do it justice. The theatre was very dusty, and had the dank feel of a building that is not used often, but it is still in very good shape. The famous crystal fountain was lit up, and I noticed that the base of the fountain was actually plumbed for water (no water was flowing that night, of course).
I met one of the stagehands after the performance, and he gave me a tour of the theatre before I left.
I just got a look at the photos posted on this site. What’s amazing is how well this theatre’s decoration has survived. So many things that have long since disappeared from other movie palaces are still in “in situ” as it were. The tapestries, the furnishings, the pieces of artwork, even the urns of flowers in the lobby!
Sheesh! Do you guys wake up and take negativity pills for breakfast or what? All I was saying is that it’s possible to replace missing plaster ornamentation. Also, doesn’t the phrase “boondocks of Brooklyn” seem like an oxymoron? It’s the same as saying the boondocks of America’s largest city.
Sheesh! Do you guys wake up and take negativity pills for breakfast or what? All I was saying is that it’s possible to replace missing plaster ornamentation. Do y'all wait in the wings with buckets of cold water?
Though it would be wonderful if the original plaster molds existed, the lack of them wouldn’t be a problem to restoration. At the Paradise, missing ornaments were reproduced from the plaster that still remained in place. Even if the plaster is completely missing it can be reproduced from photographs. At the Elgin Theatre in Toronto the proscenium and box seats were destroyed to make way for Cinerama, and when the theatre was restored for use as a legitimate playhouse the boxes and proscenium were replicated. You would never know that they were new if you hadn’t been told.
After looking at these photos I have to say that Mr. Ahlschlager was quite the architect. Did he design any other theatres besides the Roxy, the Belmont, and the Beacon? His treatment of theatre interiors is completely different from most movie palace architects. His theatres (at least the three that I’m aware of) all seem to have a sense of solidity, and almost solemnity, combined with a large helping of romance. They seem more dreamlike than other theatres. I admire the way the Beacon’s auditorium is designed to look like some sort of tent-roofed pavilion, with the columns flanking the stage and lining the sidewalls disappearing into the “canvas” above, reaching up to heights that can only be imagined since they can never be actually seen.
Thanks for the great photos Edsolero. Is the paint job in the rotunda touched up? I had a hard time telling whether the color scheme looked original or not. Some parts looked like they were still the original color, and other areas I couldn’t tell. Next time I visit New York I’ll have to check and see if I can’t get into this place. I had heard a lot about how the rotunda in this theatre was supposed to be a smaller version of the Roxy rotunda, but, other than the chandeliers being similar in style, I don’t see any resemblance.
Ken, those are fantasic photos. Thank you for putting them on this site. It seems that the first photo for the December 11 post is misidentified. The theatre is clearly not the Fox (the sidewalls are different, and the balcony support posts suggest a theatre of an earlier date than the Fox). There seems to be a date of 1906 in the corner of the photo, so this is possibly a photograph of a San Francisco theatre damaged in the earthquake.
P.S. Since this may be my last comment this week (you never can tell), please let me wish any readers here a Merry Christmas, a Happy Hannukah, or a joyous holiday. Whichever you may prefer.
EdSolero did put it nicely, and I agree that the Paradise “restoration” is not above criticism. I was just stating that I’m very sick and tired of people who never find anything positive to say ever. The Paradise was quadruplexed, and then boarded up. Now it’s been fixed up inside and reopened. I was just wishing that people who point out what a horrible job was done on the sign (and I agree, it is a horrible job) could give credit where credit is due, as well as nitpick about what went wrong. There’s a small list of things I don’t like about the Paradise; the non-functioning fountain, the lack of stars and clouds, the refreshment stand, the removal of the trees and vines, and the lack of draperies. But I’m truly thrilled at what has been done right. The balcony soffit was missing masssive chunks of ornamentation that is now replicated and restored. The new paint and gold leaf is amazing. The original light fixtures are up and running, and judging by the photos, the lobby lights are kept appropriately low (as you may know, high levels of lobby lighting are a particular gripe of mine). Well, I could go on, but to repeat and recap, there are a few, a very few, folks who only complain. Of course, they should always feel free to complain, but I should feel free to say that I’m tired of their complaints.
I agree with Bobs. It’s amazing that, before the theatre opened, we kept hearing that it will never reopen. Now that’s it’s been largely restored and reopened all we hear is that it will never stay open. Then the nitpicking starts about what’s wrong. Yeah, the sign looks like crap, and you know what? A fresh coat of paint will fix it. I went to the holiday show at the old Loew’s State in Syracuse. The heat was too low. The lighting levels in the lobby are too high. The new refreshment stand is obtrusive, but you know what I kept telling myself? IT’S STILL STANDING. Someone cares enough about it to keep it standing and open, and that’s a great start. As far as I’m concerned, the Paradise is off to a great start. I hope it’s a huge success. Maybe someday they can do a proper restoration of the sign, and then all you whiners can find something else to complain about.
Well, you truly can never tell what the future will bring. Jim, I found your thoughts above to be well stated, but remember that you also gave us a long and well thought out argument as to why the Paradise would never reopen as well. It all comes down to the fact that you truly never can tell.
The New Amsterdam is a good example Jim, especially because it’s condition was pretty horrifying before it was restored. If I recall, there were mushrooms growing in the downstairs lounge, and a great deal of plasterwork had been ruined by moisture.
Hi Warren, the size reference is in commas, meaning it could be a parenthetical comment, allowing it to be in present tense while the rest of the sentence is past tense. I recall seeing on some website about the Bronx that the Paradise was the 2nd largest theatre in NYC. That’s probably where the comment above came from.
Hi Divinity, I can’t make it for this event. I would knock my front teeth out with a hammer if it meant I could make it. I’ll just have to come and drool when I’m able to.
Yes, the color scheme is dreadful, but at the building is well maintained, and it’s obvious the church is proud of their building. It certainly could be worse, and it’s definitely still restorable.
Hi Gustavelifting. The Paradise was designed by John Eberson.
Thanks, Warren, for your usual nit-picking. I think they’re saying that it’s currently the 2nd largest theatre in the 5 boroughs. A statement which you will be commenting on soon, no doubt.
Well, Radio City Music Hall is a very sophisticated streamlined sort of Art Deco, and the Palace in Albany is more of french baroque/Viennese opera house sort of style. Y'know, lots of gold leaf and cherubs and damask and stuff like that.
I hope no one’s disappointed, but this theatre is not atmospheric. I’m not sure how it got described as such. It is, however, a very lovely theatre, and well worth visiting.
I don’t understand this mania that Dupage residents have against using taxpayer funds to save this theatre. There isn’t a building project that ever takes place without the use of taxpayer funds. Whether it’s the purchase price, or tax breaks, or some incentive to get a developer moving, they all do it. So what’s the problem here? As far as the efforts on the parts of the “Friends”, there’s not a whole lot they can do unless they own the theatre or have the owner’s permission.
When Buffalo (a city that is basically bankrupt, by the way) decided to purchase and renovate the Shea’s Buffalo Theatre they not only saved a beautiful and irreplacable building, it turned out that Shea’s became a focal point for downtown. Even though it’s still not a moneymaker the benefits to the businesses surrounding it, and the benefit to the city’s image have been enough that no one ever says saving it was a mistake. On the contrary, whenever someone walks into the building the comment that always comes up sooner or later is “I can’t believe they wanted to tear this down”.
When San Francisco (a city that has a large tourist base, and plenty of tourist attractions) declined to purchase the Fox Theatre and allow its demolition they created a loss that is still talked about in that city today, even though it happened 40 years ago!
If Dupage puts a new structure up on this site, they will have something that they can be proud of for about 10 years, at which point the building will become dated, then unkempt, then within one generation the new building will either be empty or demolished. It’s just the way it is with modern development. They’re not built to last, no matter what they are. Take it from someone who lives in a city that still thinks demolition and redevelopment is a good idea, it doesn’t work. You should save the best of what you already have, and only allow the best to be built when the opportunity arises.
Mr. Concerned Taxpayer, your comments are so pathetic that they are actually funny! I still have to wonder (as I have in previous posts) what your motive is in destroying this place. You really should come to work for my hometown. They have the same short sightedness and desire to destroy anything unique and interesting that you seem to have.
By the way, how does Concerned Taxpayer manage to be so rude, and yet so boring. I gues the lack of imagination that keeps him from seeing this theatre’s potential must affect his writing ability as well.
It’s a pretty sad state of affairs. Even podunk little places in upstate New York have enough sense to preserve their old theatres. Places like Gloversville, Rome, Utica, and Gowanda have all elected to save and restore their last remaining theatres and movie palaces. Well, if the Dupage goes I can at least cross Lombard off my list of places to go.