Well, it has to be remembered that the procedure for submitting a news item, and that for posting news on a theater’s entry page are different here on CT. I posted this as a news item, and unless it is flagged as urgent, there is often a time lag of a week or more from the time they are submitted to the time they appear on in the center column on the CT home page, The blog editor usually posts about three items per day, Monday through Friday, and I am sure that he must make decisions regarding each item’s urgency, appropriateness, and timeliness and also wants to be fair to all posters, both those post frequently and those who post occasionally. If the item’s URL is posted on the theater’s entry page as a comment, it usually appears very quickly, as do the comments on the news items. I am sure that the number of news postings varies, and I do not know if Mike Zoldessy regularly scans comments on the various theater pages for news or if he relies on those submitted via the news posting process.
I am not sure he is wrong; on another page he indicates that the mall is off I-275, and this one is. The mall opened as The Forest Fair Mall in 1988 and the theater opened as the Forest Mall Cinemas. It became a Showcase after acquisition by National Amusements. The mall declined over the years and is basically an outlet mall.
I think stadium seating is an important but perhaps not the only factor with regard to the demise of the relatively smaller multiplexes built when this one was. The much-detested shoebox multiplexes of the 1980s and early 90s cannot help but be at a disadvantage when a new cinema with all the now-expected amenities is built somewhere even relatively nearby. Some of the older multiplexes of the Parkway’s era may not be in locations where upgrades are feasible – especially if they are in older malls. (Theaters with their entrances inside a mall – they also seem to be a dying species). Many first and second generation multiplexes are constrained by the size of the real estate on which they sit, or are no longer regarded as profitable by their respective operators.
Considering how many of them were basically concrete block buildings sitting on a pad, with interiors of basically sheetrock, they are almost disposable buildings, which is how their owners probably regard them when no other use can be found.
The US label, as in the case, of this film was United Artists with which Horizon (which, as is the case many independent producers today, had no distribution arm) made a distribution deal. Many UA films of the era were the result of similar arrangements. (Most of Horizon’s later products were distributed by Columbia) These distribution agreements between producers and US studios with distribution arms made in the era before home video (on any media) sometimes explains why it takes so long for some older films to come out on DVD, especially if the production company was dissolved before the necessary legalities over film ownership and DVD distribution are completed. When all this is straightened out, it is sometimes surprising who ends up with DVD distribution rights (which vary in length and marketing territory) – this new DVD is being distributed (at least in US) by Paramount’s home DVD division. I am sure today, DVD distribution is built into production and distribution agreements before the cameras even roll.
Most likely because it was made by Horizon Pictures, which was a UK-based motion picture production company headed by Sam Spiegel; it also made “The Bridge on the River Kwai,” “Lawrence of Arabia,” and “Nicholas and Alexandra,” among others.
A recent photo essay about this theater appeared in the Huffington Post; the pictures illustrate its history and show the traces of the theater that remain after its conversion to a drugstore: View link
Apparently, Rave did not think it was a worthy acquisition; according to this brief article, the theater was permanently closed as of February 28, 2010: View link
Well, it has to be remembered that the procedure for submitting a news item, and that for posting news on a theater’s entry page are different here on CT. I posted this as a news item, and unless it is flagged as urgent, there is often a time lag of a week or more from the time they are submitted to the time they appear on in the center column on the CT home page, The blog editor usually posts about three items per day, Monday through Friday, and I am sure that he must make decisions regarding each item’s urgency, appropriateness, and timeliness and also wants to be fair to all posters, both those post frequently and those who post occasionally. If the item’s URL is posted on the theater’s entry page as a comment, it usually appears very quickly, as do the comments on the news items. I am sure that the number of news postings varies, and I do not know if Mike Zoldessy regularly scans comments on the various theater pages for news or if he relies on those submitted via the news posting process.
I am not sure he is wrong; on another page he indicates that the mall is off I-275, and this one is. The mall opened as The Forest Fair Mall in 1988 and the theater opened as the Forest Mall Cinemas. It became a Showcase after acquisition by National Amusements. The mall declined over the years and is basically an outlet mall.
I think stadium seating is an important but perhaps not the only factor with regard to the demise of the relatively smaller multiplexes built when this one was. The much-detested shoebox multiplexes of the 1980s and early 90s cannot help but be at a disadvantage when a new cinema with all the now-expected amenities is built somewhere even relatively nearby. Some of the older multiplexes of the Parkway’s era may not be in locations where upgrades are feasible – especially if they are in older malls. (Theaters with their entrances inside a mall – they also seem to be a dying species). Many first and second generation multiplexes are constrained by the size of the real estate on which they sit, or are no longer regarded as profitable by their respective operators.
Considering how many of them were basically concrete block buildings sitting on a pad, with interiors of basically sheetrock, they are almost disposable buildings, which is how their owners probably regard them when no other use can be found.
Sorry that link is dead; here’s one with an article that includes the same picture: http://www.crpmuseum.com/index.php?article=138
There’s a typo in the URL indicated above: the correct one is: http://www.lahtf.org/
This theater should now be listed as the Holiday Star Theater; here’s an article about the new owner’s plans for the theater: View link
Recent article about the progress being made to reopen the Ridgewood: View link
Here’s a link to Technicolor’s 3D projection process website for those who interested in technical details: View link
Here the link to Technicolor’s related webpage with technical information for those interested: View link
The US label, as in the case, of this film was United Artists with which Horizon (which, as is the case many independent producers today, had no distribution arm) made a distribution deal. Many UA films of the era were the result of similar arrangements. (Most of Horizon’s later products were distributed by Columbia) These distribution agreements between producers and US studios with distribution arms made in the era before home video (on any media) sometimes explains why it takes so long for some older films to come out on DVD, especially if the production company was dissolved before the necessary legalities over film ownership and DVD distribution are completed. When all this is straightened out, it is sometimes surprising who ends up with DVD distribution rights (which vary in length and marketing territory) – this new DVD is being distributed (at least in US) by Paramount’s home DVD division. I am sure today, DVD distribution is built into production and distribution agreements before the cameras even roll.
Most likely because it was made by Horizon Pictures, which was a UK-based motion picture production company headed by Sam Spiegel; it also made “The Bridge on the River Kwai,” “Lawrence of Arabia,” and “Nicholas and Alexandra,” among others.
A proposed construction project in Loveland would include enhancements to the Rialto: View link
According to this article, the owner and the real estate agent for the theater are making some effort to preserve it as a cinema: View link
The reopening is now set for April, 2010: View link
According to this article, this theater is under new management and will now be known as the Holiday Star Theater:
View link
And if you are near one, what about a warehouse store such as Sam’s or Costco? Concessionaires and food service operators buy in bulk from them,
And if you are near one, what about a warehouse store such as Sam’s or Costco? Concessionaires and food service operators buy in bulk from them.
This article about the closing has a picture:
View link
Recent article featuring an interview with the owners:
View link
Here’s an article about a potential buyer: View link
A recent photo essay about this theater appeared in the Huffington Post; the pictures illustrate its history and show the traces of the theater that remain after its conversion to a drugstore: View link
Apparently this theater is in financial difficulty:
View link
A recent article with a picture of the facade: View link
Pacific has confirmed that this theater will become an Arclight
operation: View link
Apparently, Rave did not think it was a worthy acquisition; according to this brief article, the theater was permanently closed as of February 28, 2010: View link