Angelika Film Center
18 W. Houston Street,
New York,
NY
10012
18 W. Houston Street,
New York,
NY
10012
28 people
favorited this theater
Showing 1 - 25 of 121 comments
For three years now it has been the ANGELIKA FILM CENTER. NYT ads still advertise it as that. Their website does not. What is Cinema Treasures to do?
Theatre capacity:
183 35MM equipped
240 35MM equipped
240
190
114
74
I am just here to say that I am extremely sad to discover that these awful auditoriums are where great art films start their platform runs and pull like 20k+ in a weekend per theater. Do better New York.
The distributors don’t even get the updated information, the City Cinemas name is now obsolete, the official website is what counts.
Still advertised this way.
http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/1068/photos/369194
ANGELIKA FILM CENTER & CAFE is a brand based off one theater: Angelika Film Center & Cafe in NYC.
@dermycar and @Al Alvarez, ANGELIKA FILM CENTER is the chain for it’s 9 locations it operates, the official name is Angelika New York (Angelika Film Center) is the chain, which is owned by Reading..See pictures
You’re basing the confirmation on the business name on a quick link on the website that has a max character length. Just like “Angelika at Mosaic in Fairfax” is not the official name of the theater: Angelika Film Center & Cafe at Mosaic (check what’s on Fandango for reference). Angelika Film Center & Cafe is located on every logo, cafe napkin, employee shirt and, most importantly, the logo on front of the business.
Their ad in the New York Times Says FILM CENTER. Stop it.
yes, if you click on the theatre’s it Angelika New York, see photo. The parent company Reading eliminated City Cinemas in NYC and branded it’s three theaters under Angelika
Do you mean the website: angelikafilmcenter.com? There are six nationwide Angelika Film Centers, with Angelika Film Center & Cafe in NYC being the original. Also, if you look at the banner on the website, it states “Angelika Film Center”. I believe you’re looking at a website organizational tool (in the top left of the home screen) that is not indicative of the site name, as much as it is a quick ID tag for guests to switch amongst branded theaters.
@DERMYCAR, according to the Angelika website, the name is Angelika New York
The theater name has not changed to “Angelika New York” and is still “Angelika Film Center” just like the storefront (behind the scaffolding) visible from the street reads, as depicted in the photo above.
Offering a special “Two-for-the-price of-one” deal for upcoming premiere engagement of “The Duke” starring Helen Mirren and Jim Broadbent. Details here
add previous operators City Cinemas
Prominently mentioned in this news article on the re-openings of NYC cinemas last weekend. Click here
Please update, theatre renamed Angelika New York as per Angelika Film Center Website
Please update, 1041 seats
Please update, the theatre open September 29, 1989. It was delayed due to construction problems
Wow, this is where I served as a volunteer staff member for the Independent Feature Film Market (IFFM), commuting in via Long Island Railroad for over a week in late September of 1995.
I stood at the top of those stairs in the photo to check people’s Market passes as they entered and on one day got to announce on a lobby microphone when some of the Market film screenings would be starting. For lunch I’d get a hot chicken sandwich at a deli around the corner that may have been Han’s which I see on Google Maps is still there. (I still have a paper coffee cup from there with a depiction of the Manhattan skyline below which says “Enjoy coffee here and don’t ever change…”, which in my head I enjoy repeating with a NY attitude. :) )
During the Market I also saw “Living In Oblivion” at the Angelika about filmmakers trying to make an indie film, and filmmaker Ed Burns speaking at Cooper Union following the then recent success of “The Brothers McMullan”. (The Market had some buzz because Kevin Smith had gotten a deal for “Clerks” there a year or two before.)
Was there for HENRY: PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER. You could have heard a pin drop as the final credits rolled.
Sorry, Zoetmb, but there is proof that’s what the base wants. It’s called “grosses.”
Also, your base assessment that “attendance is down” is as wrong-headed as most of your other judgements. 2013 attendance might have been down 1.4% versus 2012 attendance, but it was also up 4.7% over 2011 and flat against 2010. And movie attendance in the first four months of 2014 is up 7% over the first four months of 2013. Sure, it’s down from recent highs in 2002 and 2003, but what was happening in the world in 2002 and 2003 that might want people to escape from reality for a few hours more often than before, or since, that isn’t happening now? We’re not talking about Netflix or VOD here.
And the Angelika still does pretty damn good, business-wise, without an IMAX-like presentation, or stadium seating, or dine-in options. The only think that differentiates the Angelika from the Sunshine or the Film Forum or any other arthouse theatre is its vibe. The Angelika doesn’t FEEL like any other theatre in Manhattan, even if it shares a similar spirit to the Lincoln Plaza Cinemas.
As for the other theatres that recently closed, ask yourself this: there are only a few reasons why a theatre closes. One, because the owners of the building decided not to renew the lease. Two, because the operators of the theatre decided it was no longer financially viable to operate a cinema in that location. Which one do you think was the case in respect to the Jackson Triplex, the 59th St. Cinema or the Brandon Twin? Or the 64th & Second? Or my old neighborhood theatre, the East 85th?
You say I’m off the mark and yet you agree with my specific comments:
Alvarez: You say that Manhattan theaters are threatened by property values and that’s EXACTLY what I said when I commented that “Especially in NYC where real-estate is very valuable, movie theaters will continue to close. ”
However I completely disagree with you when you say the mega-chains are not concerned about profits in NYC. I’m sure their shareholders would love to hear that. NYC used to be the place where they made all their money; NYC was the place where new technology premiered first, NYC (and Hollywood) is where all the premieres were held. No more. Dolby premiered Atmos in the area in a theatre in New Jersey! (OK, a few premieres are still held at the Ziegfeld).
Havens: When you say it’s what their base wants, there’s nothing that proves that. Since movie attendance is down, the case could be made that it’s just the opposite. Furthermore, even if you’re correct, that’s the “McDonald’s” approach to business. It might sometimes be profitable, but it sucks in every other respect.
You wrote: “If theatres are rushing to add dine-in options and bars and comfy leather recliner chairs, it’s because that is what their customer base wants.”
EXACTLY. That’s the point I made when I wrote that theaters must differentiate. Some theaters are differentiating by doing that, others by offering higher quality presentation (RPX/ETX/Atmos/IMAX) options. How does the Angelica differentiate other than playing some independent films? That was the point of my argument.
You wrote: “eventually every neighborhood will have one single multiplex serving it.”
Thereby proving my point that we’re losing theaters across the board for a variety of reasons.
And impossible anyway, since every neighborhood doesn’t have one single multiplex now. We will probably wind up with just one or two multiplexes per borough outside of Manhattan and perhaps five in Manhattan. Several more theaters closed recently: The Jackson Triplex, the BIG Cinemas on E59th St. and the Brandon Twin in Forest Hills. We’re now down to 26 theaters in Manhattan (199 screens) and 29 theaters in the four outer boroughs (232 screens).
Zoetmb is off the mark. Most Manhattan theatres are threatened by property values, not quality presentation, film choice, nor attendance. The Cinema 1-2-3 will eventually go as it is prime real estate. The Regal Union Square is going nowhere anytime soon as it is one the highest grossing in the city and has small ground level footprint.
Theatre owners did everything possible to delay DVD windows but the market forces made this unsustainable. Who cares about the window when audiences lose interest after two weeks anyway. Less theatres will help the remaining ones survive, and eventually every neighborhood will have one single multiplex serving it.
The mega chains are not so concerned about profits in NYC as long as the theatre is a cash cow that can produce quick revenue that can be invested elsewhere before the studio share is even due.
After reading these long screeds, I must paraphrase Ygriette from Game of Thrones:
You know nothing, Zoetmb.
Or, more specifically, your suppositions seem to be based on trains of thought about the exhibition business that were extinct thirty years ago. Having been in the exhibition business for nearly thirty years now, I see your points and laugh at how off-base they are from the realities I deal with on a daily basis.
Case in point: if all the chains are playing exactly the same movies anyway and the studios only really care about the big junky popcorn movies that can make a ton of money opening weekend, like the upcoming Godzilla, it’s because that is what their customer base wants. If theatres are rushing to add dine-in options and bars and comfy leather recliner chairs, it’s because that is what their customer base wants.
And for the record, one of the companies you mention has seen their per-screen attendance rise over the past couple years while having a net loss of screens and locations by making the in theatre experience the best possible, instead of propping up their numbers with spalshy acquisitions.