Ken, I think this was eventually demolished much later. I worked in the area around 1982/3 and remember it being demolished and having to use the hideous Safeway. A sad loss.
The local council have approved demolition imminently but retention of the facade. This in spite of there being whole sections of the theatre in their original state. These are mostly out of view to public or behind modern walls.This is a great loss for the community, a complete turnaround by Odeon who were recently premiereing films here as an alternative to Leicester Square.It was always considered by Odeon as one of the prestige venues.
Everything I have ever read about the Times Square Paramount has said it was completely gutted and replaced with office space. Nothing remained to show a theatre had ever been there. The floors were put in throughout and the offices continued across on all floors. Even the windows at the front were taken from the side of the building to match the others at the front. There was no sign a theatre had ever been there.
The Hard Rock Cafe at 1501 Broadway claims to “taking over the former Paramount Theatre” and when I checked their site out it showed pics of them renovating the space. It looked large and cavernous and there was detailed plasterwork. It has space for 700 tables and a concert space. They also have a “space above the historic marquee to entertain†The current marquee is a rather clumsy, but welcome, attempt to re-create the original ornate bronze canopy that was replaced in the early 1950’s. The new façade arch window and marquee being only about 4 years old.
Jim’s comments are always both informed and informative. I love the Chinese because it is an event, but it spent a very long time being badly maintained and a lot of its treasures lost or damaged. By the 1990’s it had really lost its lustre, having nothing much else but a famous name and a tourist attraction entrance.
The booth moved back upstairs about 4 years ago. The main chandelier is about 50% smaller than it was originally, but is once again lit. Hopefully the horrible red wool curtains on the screen and side walls have gone by now. Mann have spent a lot of money making it look special again but they could spend a whole lot more considering the rep this place has.
I had forgotten how sensitively the ventilation ducting was placed in that particular auditorium. Perhaps my mind was on other things. Thanks for reminding me Warren;–)
The Paramount Building at 1501 Broadway was mostly occupied by tenants other than Paramount Pictures but sat astride the exquisite Paramount Theatre like a mother hen. The State Building was, for most of it life, all Loews’s Inc, and predominately the east coast offices for MGM.
Gee whiz, just because I agree with a lot of other Alamedans that is an ill-conceived and foolish approach to a restoration I’m supposed to stump up $15 million and pay for it myself?!!! Get a life.
There is a lot of objection to this project and it’s getting louder. There are a lot of local politics interfering with the issue of restoring this priceless gem. It is blatantly obvious that the city council has raced into this current incarnation and is being led down the path by the developers. The developers are being given big cash incentives and the city council believe they have made a good decision but its been made in haste and was their only option. There were no other developers approached since the previous attempt failed in the 1990s. This project is rotten at the core and the site is being leased to developers for a ridiculously low rate of 9c per square foot. The council feel that they will make big bucks from movie admissions to cover their investment. The figures they are using are artificially high have don’t take into account the BIG downturn in attendances. I though part of the point in doing it this way was for the funds made at the box office by the City Council were supposed to finance further so-called restoration. I can see this won’t be happening for some time.
The whole point of my raising these issues is that it affects the quality of the restoration as this IS Cinema Treasures. You only get one good crack at it. Lets start with how do you justify building a hideous eyesore around a listed building? Just because over the years small low-level businesses have become run down they have to be replaced with something so inappropriate as this ineptly designed multiplex? Then the City Council claim loudly this is improving downtown. Having a city official defend the project last week by saying “I truly believe that this is the best plan we’re capable of doing.†is pretty desperate.
Then you take the original graceful and unique building and you really desecrate it. If you compromise it first off you spend more time and lots more money down the line getting it right. How is putting a 480 seat cinema inside an area that once seated 2000 a good place to start? How is seating in in a style that is modern appropriate to the deco style you are supposed to be restoring? Then you neglect the rest of the building or hide it.There are massive holes in the ceiling that aren’t even going to be repaired! Then the developers have so little faith in the building that you punch holes in it so that people are forced to enter the main building to get into the multiplex. Guess which part gets most restored? The Lobby, because that leads to the multiplex. To top it all off you call it a ‘restoration’ and a lot of fools believe you. What is sorely needed here is some respect for this once grand theatre and a total rethink.
Thankfully there are several organisations in Alameda who are not fooled. stopalamedamegaplex.com and alamedadailynews.com are both at the forefront of asking why this has gone so far and how to raise objections. I suggest the poster of the above, kbb try those for a dose of reality.
Alameda has a rare jewel of a theatre. Designed by a famous local architect whose stylistic brilliance is responsible for the unprecedented flair of the nearby Oakland Paramount. The Alameda shares many architectural features with its famous sister-theatre and the building has suffered over the years but is basically sound. Still sitting proud above all the street level shops surrounding it. Whilst the City Council is trying to regenerate the downtown area they have no real faith in the building itself. If they did they would not be attempting this dreadfully ill-conceived and half-baked restoration. The building is not huge. Originally only seating just over 2000 people in art deco splendor.
The proposal is to restore elements of the original theatre (alarm bells ringing yet?) by reopening the original front orchestra section (a proposed 400+ seats!). They claim to be restoring the area that can be seen from those seats facing the proscenium and above. The balcony will remain unrestored with its two 1970’s box cinemas not planned for re-use…. but possibly in the future. The orchestra section will have the roller skating rink floor taken out and replaced with a stadium seating floor (?!) The lobby will be restored faithfully with the addition of new ticket office, merchandise area and candy counters. Some of this will be placed underneath the balcony section. The beautiful upper lobby and mezzanine lounge left closed. There will then be holes punched through the outer walls to allow access to the hideous multiplex and associated car park they plan to build next door. The graceful façade, marquee and blade sign, restored, but now joined to a multiplex and car park building that are so far from discreet and harmonious, you wonder if the new architects have ever seen the original building!
In what world is this any sort of restoration? What is the point of even calling this a restoration if there isn’t a single aspect of it that is not compromised in some way. Its high time the City of Alameda woke up to the real horror that is about to wreck this rare gem. The City Council should hang their heads in shame for even suggesting such an ill-conceived scheme to denigrate the centrepiece of their revitalised downtown. If the project is as vital as they keep proclaiming it to be, have enough faith to restore the whole theatre for starters. Alameda is not such a small city is cannot support another large community venue. The original theatre can be used for multiple uses as well as showing occasional films. Build the multiplex and car park if you must but let it sit gracefully alongside the original building, contributing to it architecturally as well as economically, it IS possible.
Citizens of Alameda please stop letting the City Council and others fool you into believing this is a restoration, it is the desecration of a very worthwhile part of your community.
Hey Bill Huelbig, Whats the history of some of these ads you are listing for us? Some are real pieces of old newsprint, have you been saving them for years. Some have tape marks, did you have them on the wall at some point? They are the ones I like best they are nice and sharp and the paper has yellowed and I find them very evocative. Sometimes I feel like I am scanning the pages of the NY Times again when there was a choice of great films to see every day. Try doing that today. Thanks and keep up the good work!
Who needs another crap Tesco Supermarket when there is already one 5 minutes walk away from this site. What Hammersmith needs is a High Street with some character. Some reason to go downtown in an evening, not an area where everything closes at 7pm, a run down cinema, decrepit live theatre and restaurants run by low-rent chains.No wonder everyone goes elsewhere. We need a decent cinema here, we already have two concert venues of major size that are open occasionally!
Rendres:Great stuff and very informative. The fire will certainly have something to do with painting the place a very dark color.(Do you remember if it was black or a very dark purple?) It diguises the damage and also covers up the shabby job they did triplexing the place. Its so hard to believe that this was a prestige first run house and within a few years had become a dollar house. Did the 70mm equipment remain? For some reason when I saw something there in the 80’s I think it was in 70mm, a very small 70mm from memory too. Can’t believe they showed 3D ‘Frankenstein’ in one of the box theatres.
I also remember that the volume was always loud downstairs to mask the noise from the two theatres in the balcony. Quite often there was some kind of disturbance in there too. People shouting at the screen or a punch up, or people living in there all day. Always made me laugh how it was just part of the deal in Times Square in the 70’s and 80’s. If you went to a theatre like that, dollar house,second or third run, thats what you got.Strangely I never remember it as dirty or stinking or really threatening. Just very run down, something that at one time had been quite gracious.
Did you have to carry the film cans for all 3 theatres up to the booth?
It would be great to see it open again and restored but how could it ever pay its way as a movie theatre in that location?
REndres: A fire? Tell me more about that. I love the fact that you were working there and didn’t go into the main auditorium, just saw it from the box. I DO remember those huge speakers but could never figure why they were there, so thanks for solving that one.
CConnolly: Thanks for that I look forward to it.Views from above are very rare and always very interesting, I find. Sad I know :–)
REndres. The current Mayfair/DeMille was built in exactly the format it still remains in. The entrance was in 7th Avenue and had a wraparound marquee into 47th Street. The marquee was just a marketing feature that enabled the theatre to advertise big and large to a Times Square audience. They would have paid the owners of the building a hefty price to rent that space and eventually the agreement expired and the marquee was removed.
The auditorium was in the same place now that it was built in. The back of the balcony was at the 7th Avenue end facing east. There was a screen at the eastern end that was placed in a stage house with a flying grid. It was built as a movie house and therefore did not have a deep stage facility. All there would have been in the stage house was several drapes that would be raised horizontally as well as vertically, various screens and the speakers. The street frontage you can see in the 1980’s photo features a blacked out set of arched windows above the marquee. This was the old lounge area on the way to the balcony seats.
The alterations made to the building when it was triplexed into the Embassy 2,3,4 were minimal but consisted of building the two box theatres in the old balcony. They halved the lobby, gaining space for the Donut Shop and then redecorated the lobby. It was only possible to do this because of the much reduced seating capacity of the theatre. They then proceeded to paint out the entire auditorium in black (or maybe it was dark purple) It was possible to sit in the downstairs auditorium and see all the original architectural features beneath the paint. The original seats were still in use.
HOWEVER, what your friend may be right about instating that the plans were all wrong, is that the Mayfair was built within a previous theatres site. The Columbia was gutted in 1930 and the Mayfair built within its walls. Perhaps that’s where the confusion arises?
Yes Don, the lobby was cut in half all the way back to the doors into the orchestra. The Donut Shop occupied half the lobby for about 12 feet in and then after that it was the box office. It was redecorated so you really weren’t aware of it, cream and gold with big mirrors and wall brackets down the sides to open the narrow space up a little.
If I had to see a film here I would always sit at the front of the downstairs auditorium. You could see the old dome way high above and the architectural features of the proscenium and sidewalls were just painted out black or maroon when they triplexed it. Even a chandelier hanging there but unlit. The old seats remained and it was only carpetted down the aisles. I quite often killed time here wondering how I would restore the place. It had a unusual quirky decorative theme underneath all that paint. Kind of like an art deco/moorish feel to it. The upstairs theatres were in the balcony and they had just put a wall up and it was pretty basic inside those boxes. Love to see more pics of it in its heydey.
J, thanks for the update. In your pics there seem to be pieces of original furniture in the lobby shots too. Fascinating that it is still just sitting there. You’d think the souvenir hunters would have had that long ago. This is a two level theatre correct? The mezz being at the front of the upper level and the balcony at the rear of it?
Ken, I think this was eventually demolished much later. I worked in the area around 1982/3 and remember it being demolished and having to use the hideous Safeway. A sad loss.
The local council have approved demolition imminently but retention of the facade. This in spite of there being whole sections of the theatre in their original state. These are mostly out of view to public or behind modern walls.This is a great loss for the community, a complete turnaround by Odeon who were recently premiereing films here as an alternative to Leicester Square.It was always considered by Odeon as one of the prestige venues.
Here is a photo of the Paramount stage door in the 1930’s.
View link
Pretty discreet.
Thanks Woody, What would you guess the actual screen size is?
Initially I was excited about this until I read the cinema seats 175! Whats the point of 70mm in a space like that?
What a great story and a great memory Bill, beautifully written too.Thats what CT needs more of.
Everything I have ever read about the Times Square Paramount has said it was completely gutted and replaced with office space. Nothing remained to show a theatre had ever been there. The floors were put in throughout and the offices continued across on all floors. Even the windows at the front were taken from the side of the building to match the others at the front. There was no sign a theatre had ever been there.
The Hard Rock Cafe at 1501 Broadway claims to “taking over the former Paramount Theatre” and when I checked their site out it showed pics of them renovating the space. It looked large and cavernous and there was detailed plasterwork. It has space for 700 tables and a concert space. They also have a “space above the historic marquee to entertain†The current marquee is a rather clumsy, but welcome, attempt to re-create the original ornate bronze canopy that was replaced in the early 1950’s. The new façade arch window and marquee being only about 4 years old.
Could there have actually been part of the Paramount left inside the building or is this all hype for the new Café in the bowels of the building?
Jim’s comments are always both informed and informative. I love the Chinese because it is an event, but it spent a very long time being badly maintained and a lot of its treasures lost or damaged. By the 1990’s it had really lost its lustre, having nothing much else but a famous name and a tourist attraction entrance.
The booth moved back upstairs about 4 years ago. The main chandelier is about 50% smaller than it was originally, but is once again lit. Hopefully the horrible red wool curtains on the screen and side walls have gone by now. Mann have spent a lot of money making it look special again but they could spend a whole lot more considering the rep this place has.
sorry typo – .uk
Thanks Dennis, I’d love to see ‘em too. .uk Many thanks.
I had forgotten how sensitively the ventilation ducting was placed in that particular auditorium. Perhaps my mind was on other things. Thanks for reminding me Warren;–)
Thanks Jim, Thats a brilliant feature. Best wishes.
Thanks Divinity!
Where’s the eagerly awaited Photo Gallery? I want detailed BIG photos.
Now just a shadow of it former self, but still an imposing exterior.
Thanks for that excellent pic Warren.
The Paramount Building at 1501 Broadway was mostly occupied by tenants other than Paramount Pictures but sat astride the exquisite Paramount Theatre like a mother hen. The State Building was, for most of it life, all Loews’s Inc, and predominately the east coast offices for MGM.
Gee whiz, just because I agree with a lot of other Alamedans that is an ill-conceived and foolish approach to a restoration I’m supposed to stump up $15 million and pay for it myself?!!! Get a life.
There is a lot of objection to this project and it’s getting louder. There are a lot of local politics interfering with the issue of restoring this priceless gem. It is blatantly obvious that the city council has raced into this current incarnation and is being led down the path by the developers. The developers are being given big cash incentives and the city council believe they have made a good decision but its been made in haste and was their only option. There were no other developers approached since the previous attempt failed in the 1990s. This project is rotten at the core and the site is being leased to developers for a ridiculously low rate of 9c per square foot. The council feel that they will make big bucks from movie admissions to cover their investment. The figures they are using are artificially high have don’t take into account the BIG downturn in attendances. I though part of the point in doing it this way was for the funds made at the box office by the City Council were supposed to finance further so-called restoration. I can see this won’t be happening for some time.
The whole point of my raising these issues is that it affects the quality of the restoration as this IS Cinema Treasures. You only get one good crack at it. Lets start with how do you justify building a hideous eyesore around a listed building? Just because over the years small low-level businesses have become run down they have to be replaced with something so inappropriate as this ineptly designed multiplex? Then the City Council claim loudly this is improving downtown. Having a city official defend the project last week by saying “I truly believe that this is the best plan we’re capable of doing.†is pretty desperate.
Then you take the original graceful and unique building and you really desecrate it. If you compromise it first off you spend more time and lots more money down the line getting it right. How is putting a 480 seat cinema inside an area that once seated 2000 a good place to start? How is seating in in a style that is modern appropriate to the deco style you are supposed to be restoring? Then you neglect the rest of the building or hide it.There are massive holes in the ceiling that aren’t even going to be repaired! Then the developers have so little faith in the building that you punch holes in it so that people are forced to enter the main building to get into the multiplex. Guess which part gets most restored? The Lobby, because that leads to the multiplex. To top it all off you call it a ‘restoration’ and a lot of fools believe you. What is sorely needed here is some respect for this once grand theatre and a total rethink.
Thankfully there are several organisations in Alameda who are not fooled. stopalamedamegaplex.com and alamedadailynews.com are both at the forefront of asking why this has gone so far and how to raise objections. I suggest the poster of the above, kbb try those for a dose of reality.
Alameda has a rare jewel of a theatre. Designed by a famous local architect whose stylistic brilliance is responsible for the unprecedented flair of the nearby Oakland Paramount. The Alameda shares many architectural features with its famous sister-theatre and the building has suffered over the years but is basically sound. Still sitting proud above all the street level shops surrounding it. Whilst the City Council is trying to regenerate the downtown area they have no real faith in the building itself. If they did they would not be attempting this dreadfully ill-conceived and half-baked restoration. The building is not huge. Originally only seating just over 2000 people in art deco splendor.
The proposal is to restore elements of the original theatre (alarm bells ringing yet?) by reopening the original front orchestra section (a proposed 400+ seats!). They claim to be restoring the area that can be seen from those seats facing the proscenium and above. The balcony will remain unrestored with its two 1970’s box cinemas not planned for re-use…. but possibly in the future. The orchestra section will have the roller skating rink floor taken out and replaced with a stadium seating floor (?!) The lobby will be restored faithfully with the addition of new ticket office, merchandise area and candy counters. Some of this will be placed underneath the balcony section. The beautiful upper lobby and mezzanine lounge left closed. There will then be holes punched through the outer walls to allow access to the hideous multiplex and associated car park they plan to build next door. The graceful façade, marquee and blade sign, restored, but now joined to a multiplex and car park building that are so far from discreet and harmonious, you wonder if the new architects have ever seen the original building!
In what world is this any sort of restoration? What is the point of even calling this a restoration if there isn’t a single aspect of it that is not compromised in some way. Its high time the City of Alameda woke up to the real horror that is about to wreck this rare gem. The City Council should hang their heads in shame for even suggesting such an ill-conceived scheme to denigrate the centrepiece of their revitalised downtown. If the project is as vital as they keep proclaiming it to be, have enough faith to restore the whole theatre for starters. Alameda is not such a small city is cannot support another large community venue. The original theatre can be used for multiple uses as well as showing occasional films. Build the multiplex and car park if you must but let it sit gracefully alongside the original building, contributing to it architecturally as well as economically, it IS possible.
Citizens of Alameda please stop letting the City Council and others fool you into believing this is a restoration, it is the desecration of a very worthwhile part of your community.
Hey Bill Huelbig, Whats the history of some of these ads you are listing for us? Some are real pieces of old newsprint, have you been saving them for years. Some have tape marks, did you have them on the wall at some point? They are the ones I like best they are nice and sharp and the paper has yellowed and I find them very evocative. Sometimes I feel like I am scanning the pages of the NY Times again when there was a choice of great films to see every day. Try doing that today. Thanks and keep up the good work!
Who needs another crap Tesco Supermarket when there is already one 5 minutes walk away from this site. What Hammersmith needs is a High Street with some character. Some reason to go downtown in an evening, not an area where everything closes at 7pm, a run down cinema, decrepit live theatre and restaurants run by low-rent chains.No wonder everyone goes elsewhere. We need a decent cinema here, we already have two concert venues of major size that are open occasionally!
Rendres:Great stuff and very informative. The fire will certainly have something to do with painting the place a very dark color.(Do you remember if it was black or a very dark purple?) It diguises the damage and also covers up the shabby job they did triplexing the place. Its so hard to believe that this was a prestige first run house and within a few years had become a dollar house. Did the 70mm equipment remain? For some reason when I saw something there in the 80’s I think it was in 70mm, a very small 70mm from memory too. Can’t believe they showed 3D ‘Frankenstein’ in one of the box theatres.
I also remember that the volume was always loud downstairs to mask the noise from the two theatres in the balcony. Quite often there was some kind of disturbance in there too. People shouting at the screen or a punch up, or people living in there all day. Always made me laugh how it was just part of the deal in Times Square in the 70’s and 80’s. If you went to a theatre like that, dollar house,second or third run, thats what you got.Strangely I never remember it as dirty or stinking or really threatening. Just very run down, something that at one time had been quite gracious.
Did you have to carry the film cans for all 3 theatres up to the booth?
It would be great to see it open again and restored but how could it ever pay its way as a movie theatre in that location?
REndres: A fire? Tell me more about that. I love the fact that you were working there and didn’t go into the main auditorium, just saw it from the box. I DO remember those huge speakers but could never figure why they were there, so thanks for solving that one.
CConnolly: Thanks for that I look forward to it.Views from above are very rare and always very interesting, I find. Sad I know :–)
CConnolly, why dont u take a pic for us. Be great to see it from above and even some from the street if you had the time. Please ;–)
REndres. The current Mayfair/DeMille was built in exactly the format it still remains in. The entrance was in 7th Avenue and had a wraparound marquee into 47th Street. The marquee was just a marketing feature that enabled the theatre to advertise big and large to a Times Square audience. They would have paid the owners of the building a hefty price to rent that space and eventually the agreement expired and the marquee was removed.
The auditorium was in the same place now that it was built in. The back of the balcony was at the 7th Avenue end facing east. There was a screen at the eastern end that was placed in a stage house with a flying grid. It was built as a movie house and therefore did not have a deep stage facility. All there would have been in the stage house was several drapes that would be raised horizontally as well as vertically, various screens and the speakers. The street frontage you can see in the 1980’s photo features a blacked out set of arched windows above the marquee. This was the old lounge area on the way to the balcony seats.
The alterations made to the building when it was triplexed into the Embassy 2,3,4 were minimal but consisted of building the two box theatres in the old balcony. They halved the lobby, gaining space for the Donut Shop and then redecorated the lobby. It was only possible to do this because of the much reduced seating capacity of the theatre. They then proceeded to paint out the entire auditorium in black (or maybe it was dark purple) It was possible to sit in the downstairs auditorium and see all the original architectural features beneath the paint. The original seats were still in use.
HOWEVER, what your friend may be right about instating that the plans were all wrong, is that the Mayfair was built within a previous theatres site. The Columbia was gutted in 1930 and the Mayfair built within its walls. Perhaps that’s where the confusion arises?
Yes Don, the lobby was cut in half all the way back to the doors into the orchestra. The Donut Shop occupied half the lobby for about 12 feet in and then after that it was the box office. It was redecorated so you really weren’t aware of it, cream and gold with big mirrors and wall brackets down the sides to open the narrow space up a little.
If I had to see a film here I would always sit at the front of the downstairs auditorium. You could see the old dome way high above and the architectural features of the proscenium and sidewalls were just painted out black or maroon when they triplexed it. Even a chandelier hanging there but unlit. The old seats remained and it was only carpetted down the aisles. I quite often killed time here wondering how I would restore the place. It had a unusual quirky decorative theme underneath all that paint. Kind of like an art deco/moorish feel to it. The upstairs theatres were in the balcony and they had just put a wall up and it was pretty basic inside those boxes. Love to see more pics of it in its heydey.
J, thanks for the update. In your pics there seem to be pieces of original furniture in the lobby shots too. Fascinating that it is still just sitting there. You’d think the souvenir hunters would have had that long ago. This is a two level theatre correct? The mezz being at the front of the upper level and the balcony at the rear of it?