Whitleys Redevelopment — 15/10072/FULL is the main planning application; however, as changes were made to basement levels, the more obvious one to reference is a later variation application.
To quote from the summary: (My emphasis.)
“Demolition of and redevelopment of building behind retained and refurbished facades to Queensway and Porchester Gardens facades to provide a mixed use development comprising three basement levels, ground floor and up to 10 upper floor levels, containing up to 103 residential units (Class C3), retail floorspace (Class A1 and A3) facing Queensway and arranged around a new retail arcade below re-provided central atrium and central retail courtyard, public car park, hotel (Class C1), cinema (Class D2), gym (Class D2), crèche (Class D1)…”
263 documents (yes, REALLY!) are associated with this application.
The proposed cinema is accessed from Ground Floor Level, with three lifts down to Basement Level 3, with the cinema’s demise shown on the documents titled “GROUND FLOOR PLAN” and “BASEMENT 03” in the above-linked planning application.
The cinema is briefly covered in the Design and Access Statement, specifically p3 (PDF page number) of the document titled “DAS PART 2” in the above-linked planning application.
It says that the proposed cinema was moved to level B3 to allow for an increased “clear height of 6.5m… to meet the spatial requirements of contemporary cinemas” and “minimise the potential impact to its immediate adjacenies.”
The page mentions “potential operators” and states that “it is assumed that the unit will be developed to shell and core only… the final demise configuration will be further developed…”
Hence, the cinema layout shown in the plans appears to be indicative only of a possible arrangement.
Nevertheless, here are the details:
On level B3 three auditoria are shown, each identical in size, with near wall-to-wall screens of ~15.5m (~50ft. width), in auditoria measuring ~18m (~60ft.) wide by ~19m wide (~62ft.) internally, or ~3700sq.ft. in area.
Each is shown having 5 rows of recliner seats in straight lines, except for 2-3 seats on each sides which are “toed in,” and the last row has 6 accessible spaces. Total seats per auditorium – 62 + 6 accessible.
A foyer area is also shown in the B3 plans, and the cinema’s entrance is shown on the Ground Floor Plan, with another lobby area, including seating (?).
Noting that the Design and Access Statement states a “clear height of 6.5m (~21ft.), it is clear that a 50ft. wide "scope” screen would, vertically, at best be a tight fit indeed, or impossible, suggesting that these “indicative” layouts are illustrative only.
Having a quick look at the first “Basement Impact Assessment” document, it provides an overview of the history of the site, alterations made to the Whitleys Department Store, and other historical material including “lost” rivers, should anyone reading this be interested in such.
N.B. For clarity, previous two posts removed; contents of which were amalgamated and revised for this post.
[ADDED TEXT TO OVERCOME “YOUR COMMENT APPEARS TO BE SPAM!” ERROR MESSAGE.]
Looking at Cineworld’s booking pages, it seems that “First Man” isn’t programmed for the IMAX auditorium, only 4DX and Superscreen. In fact, nothing is presently scheduled for the IMAX according to Cineworld’s site; the IMAX is being used for the BFI Film Festival, though hardly continuously, unless there are private screenings also held there?
With 15/70 prints not being made, the only option in London for “full scale” IMAX will be Xenon-lamp projection at the BFI, and no option at all to see it “full height” 1.4:1.
As of last weekend, the opening into the OLS circle foyer had been largely obscured by flame retardant sheeting. Looks like Zappomatic took a photo at an opportune time!
Addendum: The “new” block is the “Glow” exhibition centre repurposed, with alterations shown in the above-linked plans.
To be clear, the old KCS sidewall speakers have not been removed, but are disused, with two IMAX rear speakers, standard for multiplex-type IMAX installations, replacing them; IMAX do not use rear arrays but “discrete” rears only.
Having covered the IMAX auditorium, I shall now proceed with the additional 4 auditoria.
To the left (or more accurately, East—but as experienced when entering the cinema via the main foyer from the mall) of the existing cinema, an “exhibition” space, “Glow,” had been built. This was, reportedly, not a success, and a planning application is available for its redevelopment, the summary description of which is:
“Change of use from an Events and Exhibition Venue (Use Class D1) to a cinema and other family orientated leisure uses (Use Class D2), restaurant facilities (Use Class A3) together with internal and external reconfiguration and associated works incorporating demolition of some existing floor space end construction of new floor space.”
Essentially, there is now a block adjacent to the existing cinema, which includes restaurants, a “Gravity” Trampoline Park, and the four new auditoria. The plans for these can be seen in the document titled “PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR LEVEL”*; they are connected from the far end of the main foyer of the existing cinema via a link bridge—not that the non-curious patron would realise that they were walking over to another building!
(*Plans for the existing cinema can also be seen here, albeit only partial as cropped.)
A fairly generously sized foyer/lobby area is included for these four auditoria, including seating areas, at the other end of which is a corridor leading to the four new auditoria entrances.
The foyer/lobby area does not include a suspended ceiling, and so services above are visible; they are generally black in colour, but a mess of suspension wires and threaded rods can be seen. There are several trays containing very large bundles of cables.
“Honeycomb” features are also suspended down to ceiling height, and oddly domestic-looking wall curtains (?!) and stand-alone lamps are featured, the latter being incongruently connected to white coloured wall sockets.
Several impressive “XPlus Laser” wall signs are featured, faced with (presumably CNC-cut) metal, surrounded by concealed blue LED lighting.
One of these is positioned adjacent to the “link bridge” entrance, along with a wall continuing the “honeycomb” motif, with the hexagons painted in various shades of e.g. blue and yellow. Combined with the rectangular section of white faceted squares behind the XPlus Laser sign, it all looks somewhat 1960s-inspired—in a positive way!
All four new auditoria feature laser projection, Dolby Atmos sound, and reclining seating.
I briefly had a look into the XPlus Laser auditorium (Screen 15), and the scope screen appeared to be very large indeed, with clearly excellent colour rendering, and the sidewall speakers were JBLs.
A unfortunate qubble: These new lobby areas appeared to be unstaffed on this occasion, and popcorn had been strewn on the carpet outside the XPlus Laser entrance.
The 4 new auditoria and associated lobby areas appear to be a fantastic addition, and I will be returning to the XPlus Laser auditorium at the earliest opportunity.
Dimensions as drawn on planning application:
-Main foyer: ~43m long by ~13m wide (entrance)/~29.5 wide (“ticket tear” end) (~140ft.x42ft./97ft.)
-Extension main foyer area – ~18x10m (~60x33ft.)
-XPlus Laser auditorium – ~24m long by ~20.5m wide (~80x67ft.)
Visited the Showcase Cinema de Lux Bluewater last Sunday as LARGE_screen_format informed me that the MCU movies were being shown in the IMAX auditorium at £2.50 per screening for “INSIDER” members (sign-up to which is free), plus booking fee, and I thought it would be a good opportunity to revisit this cinema, having not been here since the early 2000s.
With the relatively recent addition of four new auditoria, housed in a new block just to the left of the existing cinema, and linked to via a bridge at the end of the existing foyer, this is virtually “two cinemas in one.”
Therefore, I shall divide my comments into several posts, first covering the IMAX auditorium.
IIRC, this multiplex opened with two THX-certified auditoria, in which I attended several screenings. These were fitted with KCS rear array speakers, and at that time I did not consider the presentation to be of an exceptional standard.
Looking at satellite aerial photos, the IMAX auditorium (Screen 4) is one of the two largest (identical?) in the original multiplex, being situated in the South West corner. Thus, it is presumably a conversion of one of the two originally THX-certified auditoria.
The sidewall rear array speakers are retained, and the stretched fabric covering on these walls may well be original—or certainly pre-dates the IMAX conversion? It is not black, but more of a “muted” colour that appears dark grey during the feature; the stretched fabric wall areas are “staggered” in sections, forming “coves,” which are lit with downfiring spotlights, two per cove for the first 3 coves from the front, and one for the rear cove. Below these stretched fabric sections, the sidewalls are flat and covered with wall carpet.
House lights are at the edges of the ceiling only, dimmed for the feature, and only after the end credits were finished were they fully raised, with “cove” spotlights also raised.
The aisle steps are fitted with LED nosing profiles, and illuminated throughout the feature, which may well be distracting for those seated near an aisle. Otherwise, the auditorium was very dark indeed during the main feature.
As far as I could tell, most or all of the ceiling appeared to be smooth, and so I assume that ceiling tiles have not been used, rather stretched fabric, the colour of which also appeared to be dark grey during the feature. Possibly, the ceiling was fabricated in the way that theatre_of_varieties described for the LSQ IMAX—namely, to keep HF reflections from the ceiling at bay, insulation slabs are fitted, and the stretched fabric simply covers over them, rather than having a plasterboard layer behind the insulation also. The ceiling slopes up towards the screen, presumably an alteration made in the IMAX conversion.
The right sidewall features a backlit blue IMAX logo with a horizontal line above.
As the area surrounding the screen is dark black, the perception is created that the ceiling is sloped up to a level that’s higher than the screen—which doesn’t appear to be quite wall-to-wall and, overall, forming a proscenium “frame” around the screen. Combined with the “staggered” sidewall features, this—perhaps unintentionally!—creates a more “designed” feel than the typical black-box rectangular auditorium.
It is not difficult to see how more creative use of lighting and some additional features could turn this into a very attractive auditorium.
Presentation otherwise was fine, excepting the lack of moveable masking, with non-sync music played. However, the feature ended with a green “flash” on the screen.
The vomitory into the auditorium emerges behind the 5th row, with, IIRC, the front few rows on a slightly less steep rake than the rear seats.
I booked a seat in the centre of row “G” on the basis that this would be a satisfactory distance away from the screen; however, it turns out that the first row is in fact “D”—presumably the first few rows were eliminated in the IMAX conversion, with no changes to row lettering Nonetheless, it turned out to be about the right distance from the screen, albeit too low.
The screen was certainly on the small side for an IMAX, although from my seating position I considered it to be adequately sized. Certainly, being familiar with the near-90ft. wide screens at the BFI and LSQ IMAXs, I would have been unhappy had I paid full price for the tickets, which are currently £16.60 for the IMAX auditorium.
The IMAX projection system achieved very good results, with perfect geometry and alignment as expected, and a super-smooth yet detailed image. Centre-to-edge brightness consistency was good, slightly noticeable brightness fall off perhaps on the end credits. However, the black level was higher than I’d have expected, with clipping of low-level detail, and with the 3D glasses on, the brightness level seemed insufficient.
As the screen was presumably 1.9:1 ratio; these scope movies were presented in “letterboxed” form; with 3D glasses on, the black screen areas above and below the picture, though higher in level than would be preferred, were not overly problematic. However, as with my experience of “Avengers: Infinity War” at the LSQ 4DX, the picture width varied slightly from shot to shot, which I found distracting.
Possibly partially due to its lineage as a purpose-built THX-certified auditorium, the acoustics were outstanding. The HVAC system was inaudible, with excellent isolation. Only a distant rumble could very occasionally be distantly heard from an adjacent auditorium during the quiet moments.
In my view, it actually demonstrated that the rationale behind this, to ensure audibility of low level sounds in quiet scenes, is all very well at the mixing stage, but does not work in a theatrical environment open to the public with 10s or 100s of seats, simply because what one hears in quiet scenes is not low level audio detail so much as every last sound made by other patrons—even if they are not being noisy munching away at popcorn, the slightest rustle becomes distracting. I would actually prefer a slightly audible background hiss/rumble from the HVAC system—which certainly was the case in the corridor leading to the auditorium.
To meet THX specifications, the auditorium must have had a well controlled reverberation time, and combined with what I imagine to be the stretched fabric ceiling added in the IMAX conversion, an exceptionally low reverberation time is achieved, with excellent stereo imaging, including for sounds panned to the rears.
The sound quality was otherwise very good, with clean mids/high frequencies, and very good bass extension. Dialogue levels seemed about right; however, the system never seemed to reach the highest sound pressure levels that would be expected, and it felt like there was peak limiting—although the system never sounded strained.
Rear speakers were the same as those used in typical multiplex IMAX screens.
The HVAC system functioned well, although there was some temperature cycling in the evening performance from hot to cold, but at no time was the auditorium stuffy, overly hot, or cold.
Seating is upholstered in very high quality red fabric, with what felt like memory foam padding, and legroom was very generous. I am not sure if these are the original seats; if they are, their condition suggests that they have been reupholstered at some point.
However, the seats were on the narrow side, and I didn’t find them as comfortable as I’d have expected. The stadia for these front rows felt solid, and on using (after the feature had finished!) my phone’s “torch” facility to check if I’d dropped something behind the seat, I noticed that a concrete floor surface could be seen in a small area under the seat.
All in all, actually a pretty good auditorium to see a film—if you can swallow the price for an “IMAX Lite”-sized screen!
[TEXT ADDED TO OVERCOME “YOUR COMMENT APPEARS TO BE SPAM!” ERROR MESSAGE.]
Or more accurately, the stretched fabric covered areas of the sidewalls are angled out in staggered sections, with the remainer of the flat sidewalls covered with carpet to the floor.
Ian: IIRC an LED module screen below the vertical “ODEON” logo on the North East corner of the building was shown in the main application; it’s still there on the rendering on the first page of the third “Design and Access Statement” document in the above-linked variation application. Looking through the planning “Decision Notice” document for the full 2016 application, I don’t see any reference to it; presumably, separate advertising consent will be required.
Like the OLS and Vue West End, any consent is likely to have restrictions, including not allowing full motion video.
In the case of the large format screen on the facade of the Vue, only static images are allowed with a minimum change rate of 12 seconds.
I suppose it may well count as the first auditorium to open as a Luxe?
SethLewis: Yes, the entrance will be separate. Entry will be via a small lobby with escalators down to the main foyer.
Looking at the planning application and comparing to old licensing plans, the replacement Screen 1 will be about the same size as the old auditorium, were it straightened up and made rectangular in shape, i.e. sidewalls moved in and back wall moved up to the front of the booth.
As measured on the plans, replacement screen size is about ~50ft. vs. ~37ft. wide for the previous.
Screen 2 will have a smaller auditorium, but the screen at ~33ft. wide is slightly smaller than the previous. (~37ft.)
So, whilst not saying that this scheme somehow compensates for the loss of heritage, etc., entailed by demolishing the existing, from the POV of the average patron, if anything, it will be a superior offer.
Whether or not there will be sufficient demand to fill them is another matter!
Change of use of the cinema may require planning permission and I would imagine that Westminster Council would not be keen. It also looks very much like its own demise down in the basement and doesn’t integrate well with the rest of the hotel scheme.
Bedrooms could hardly be put in the basement; most obviously they could be used as conference rooms, but then the cinema can hire out the auditoria anyway, and I’d imagine Odeon has very favourable lease terms. I may have to eat my words, but my prediction is it will be a cinema 5 years after opening—if cinemas in general are still viable!
Most of this application relates to minutae of limited relevance here; however, some of the plans are included and looking in particular at the document marked “PROPOSED ELEVATION NORTH” there have been no changes to the existing scheme in respect of the cinema layout and frontage, Odeon’s entrance being on the North East corner with a vertical Odeon sign; the detailing of this section clearly has taken cues from the hoarding that was in front of the original facade.
The two auditoria are at basement levels but—and not that this matters once you’re in the building!—they are on the Northern side of the building.
(No revised proposals have been included for the basement levels in the above-linked planning application.)
Odeon may at times be geographically challenged, but I trust that they will have no reason to call it the “Odeon Trafalgar!” ;–)
I’m thinking that the capacity of the two auditoria will be adjusted downwards if they are to be “Luxe” screens with recliner (?) seating.
[Evening Standard advertorial](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-londoner-name-revealed-of-new-5-luxury-hotel-planned-for-leicester-square-a3929151.html(.
Hotel name announced: “The Londoner.” [Yawn…!]
5 star hotel to open 2020.
The basement cinema will feature 2 Odeon Luxe screens.
LARGE_screen_format: At a “constant” 50ft. high (about that of the LSQ IMAX), the screen width needed for 2:35 would be 120ft. And for a 1.4:1 IMAX like the BFI, it would be ~140ft.
Getting a bit impractical, isn’t it? ;–)
moviebuff82: These things are usually region or country-specific, regardless of parent company.
A few weeks I spoke to a member of staff at the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square, not necessarily someone you’d expect to know about higher level decisions but who had been working there prior to the Cineworld acquisition, and they told me that they understood that Empire Cinemas were minded to refurbish Haymarket.
Wasn’t expecting further changes so soon!
Wonder if the screen upgrade will help draw in more trade to this now somewhat “secondary” location?
“The final aspect in Dolby’s quest for the perfect projected image is the use of a constant height screen. That means the screen is the width of the auditorium and uses an aspect ratio of 2.35:1. […]
“There is nothing that says cinema better than watching side masking move out to reveal a full 2.35:1 widescreen image.”
I agree… however, this seems to be a convenient way of differentating Dolby Cinema from IMAX, whilst not requiring the vertical field of view that IMAX requires, and—not wishing to issue amateur legal advice here!—possibly infringing IMAX’s patent(s), e.g. Conversion of cinema theatre to a super cinema theatre.
Taller, wider… seems to me that using either between 1.78:1 (aka 16:9) or 1.9:1 would make the most sense!
Update: Having a quick look a couple of days ago, the outside of the Odeon Leicester Square is essentially the same as mentioned in previous posts, with the facade largely covered by fire retardant sheeting, hiding scaffolding behind.
A couple of extra photos, including a view behind the LSQ facade fire retardant sheeting taken from the left side, to follow.
A couple of weeks ago, I went to the Cineworld O2 to attend a screening of “The Meg” in the ScreenX (Screen 9, IIRC.)
The least said about this “monster” (pun intended!) of a movie, the better.
Cineworld O2 Extension/“Project Loop” Update:
On the day I visited the O2, the external fabric of the building was partially complete.
(It will have to be kept in mind here that the O2, aka the “Dome,” is a large tent—thus it does afford a degree of protection against the elements, but does not provide the necessary insulation, nor, obviously, any insulation between the new building and the other parts of the Dome.)
In some parts of the facade, Rockwool mineral wool slabs and Tyvek breathable water resistant membrane visible in other areas, pending the installation of the cladding; in others that cladding had been attached.
Other parts remained “open,” allowing for a view into the building shell, where already installed services (e.g. HVAC ducts.)
Cineworld O2 ScreenX Auditorium:
Detailed notes were stored in my head and typed up as a late night “brain dump” on returning home.
As it has now been a couple of weeks since my visit, I will do my best to unravel them here.
On entering the ScreenX auditorium, it seemed quite comfortable—however, the seating, which had a slight “rocker” action, was narrow and uncomfortable. Legroom, however, was on the generous side for “standard” seating. The vinyl floor in front/under the seating also looks “cheap,” not matching the quality of other parts of the venue, and ditto the handrails on the sidewall(s.)
Presentation before/after the feature was poor—e.g. I had entered the auditorium not long after the doors had “opened” for the performance—all that could be heard was ventilation (perhaps on the slightly loud side?) Abruptly, non-sync music started, then the Cineworld slideshow. After the feature, the house lights came back up and, IIRC, the non-sync music started, and a sudden “thump” sound and it came to a halt again. Admittedly, I was the only one left in the auditorium by this time, as all other patrons left the auditorium as soon as the credits started!
There was also a clear stepping in the “ventilation” sound level after the feature ended which may have been the ScreenX projectors internal fans or extraction turning off or perhaps an “energy saving” mode being used whilst the auditorium was empty.
The sidewalls were a grey colour not too dissimilar to the post-1989 tile colour in the old Empire 1, and were reasonably effective in terms of not reflecting too much back from the main screen (just appears as a sort of “colour wash” towards the front) whilst the brightness level from the ScreenX projectors matched the main scope “stage” screen.
The image on the “stage” screen (floating, no moveable masking) seemed to me not to be as bright as it might have been; however, it did match the sidewall brightness levels.
Picture alignment on the “stage” screen was good, with little or no barrel distortion, and also appeared to have good colour calibration. However, there was some visible centre to edge (vignetting) brightness loss, and the black level could have been better, but I didn’t notice too much clipping of low level detail.
There were 4x ScreenX sidewall projectors, two on each sidewall. As Zappomatic noted, there is an overlap in the middle of each sidewall between the two ScreenX sidewall projectors; whilst this could be seen clearly when no sidewall content was played but the projectors remained on, it was primarily only visible in darker scenes as an increase in black level.
The ScreenX projectors did not quite fill entire height of sidewalls, with a gap top and bottom; the upper gap was where the sidewall projectors and the (small) rear array sidewall speakers were positioned vertically; there was also a slight shadow cast below each ScreenX projector.
With the ScreenX projectors being fed content to display, it seemed to me that a “cylindrical” type stretch was used towards the rear of the auditorium with the ScreenX projectors, presumably to accomodate for different auditorium depths, and/or it is intentional since the human visual system is used to this stretching at the extremes of the horizontal visual field. In any case it works perceptually.
As Zappomatic noted, there was a noticeable delay between the “stage” projection and the sidewall projectors. I can’t be sure, but it also seemed that the right sidewall projectors were further delayed slightly compared to the left sidewall projectors, sometimes it seemed like there was some “tearing” indicating a lack of “vertical synchronisation.”
Furthermore, the sound and front “stage” projection also seemed to be delayed with respect to the audio, with the dialogue preceeding the picture by a perhaps few tens of milliseconds.
However, I may have become oversensitive to this from having adjusted video/sound synchronisation myself, e.g. due to the large latency caused by the processing in modern TVs.
The scenes which used the “full width” afforded by ScreenX seemed to be somewhat random, and sudden jumps between the “stage” screen only and the “full width” being used was sometimes jarring.
The system was very effective in producing an “immersive” wrap-around display, an amazing sense of width and activation of the peripheral vision motion sensitivity.
The overall brightness level seemed sufficient with all projectors in use.
It did, however, seem to me that the “stage” screen was insufficient in size relative to today’s expectations, but, obviously, this is something of a trade-off with the ScreenX system, and I did sit quite far to the back in order to get the full width experience.
Furthermore, the colour rendering match between the “stage” and sidewall ScreenX projection was inconsistent; at times close, at other times, obviously out, being too green—but this depended on the colours being displayed.
The sound system was reasonably good, with sufficient brightness sounding, although not quite at the high end of refinement. Playback didn’t seem to be at reference level though, and may have been peak limited. LFE was OK, and the rear array may have been calibrated at too high a level.
Reverb time was outstanding, and this might be due to the performance of the Armstrong Tectum product noted in previous posts on this page as being used by ScreenX for the sidewall “screens.”
(Incidentally, the seams and lack of colour consistency between these were sometimes (or often?—can’t remember) visible.)
As Zappomatic has mentioned, the “honeycomb” lights work well and were not distracting during the main feature.
Cineworld O2 – Foyer/lobbies/toilets—some random observations:
I was not as impressed by the finishes and standard of work toilet fit-out as Zappomatic. A screw missing in one of the grilles above the urinals.
However, they were super clean and feature the excellent Mitsubishi Jet Towels—“Made in Japan” as the label on them boasts—which in my view are superior to the Dyson Airblades that I have encountered, which lack sufficient room to insert my hands without touching the sides.
The background music speakers in the foyer/lobby areas did not achieve a high quality of sound; some were wall mounted, with ceiling units in the toilets.
Some areas had what looked like black lacquer stretched fabric, as used in Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square’s newly refurbished foyer. However, on section of these appeared not to be sufficiently tensioned, as it “flapped” about slightly, presumably being moved by the HVAC air flow.
ScreenX was being heavily promoted, with signage—and there was also ScreenX sign on the rear of the auditorium.
Numerous displays (LED module type and large, presumably LCD, display types) throughout the foyer/lobby areas.
The standard of finishes in the foyer/lobby areas remains inconsistent, with the lowest level foyer still having “bumpy” walls and ceilings. Perhaps a further makeover to this area will occur when this foyer is expanded into the cinema’s extended area.
Staff were all very good, and one stood outside the auditorium thanking me for visiting, even though this was some time after all other patrons had left the auditorium, and two members of staff were waiting in the vomitory to clean the auditorium.
Overall, I thought the ScreenX system was effective at what it did, and could be put to very good use; its niggles could be overlooked, but they ideally need ironing out.
With Cineworld committing to numerous installations, it will be interesting to see how much content is made available for the system. But it is getting ridiculous that key titles can now be seen in an IMAX, “PLF” with Dolby Atmos, 4DX, ScreenX, soon in the UK Dolby Cinema, and “regular” auditoria. And, given the choice, I can’t imagine why ScreenX would be chosen over a ~90ft. wide screen fitted with an IMAX with Laser projection system.
Photos of the Cineworld O2 Extension/“Project Loop” under construction and the foyer/lobby areas of the Cineworld O2 to follow.
Update: Essentially no changes visible externally from Leicester Square, the facade is still largely hidden by fire retardant sheeting. Looking through a slight gap in the sheeting on the far right, it appears the facade works are a long way from complete.
Based on this alone, I think it is fair to guess that the OLS won’t be reopening by opening by the 10th October for the BFI London Film Festival 2018, and looking through the calendar for this, it is indeed not one of the festival’s venues.
Whitleys Redevelopment — 15/10072/FULL is the main planning application; however, as changes were made to basement levels, the more obvious one to reference is a later variation application.
To quote from the summary: (My emphasis.)
“Demolition of and redevelopment of building behind retained and refurbished facades to Queensway and Porchester Gardens facades to provide a mixed use development comprising three basement levels, ground floor and up to 10 upper floor levels, containing up to 103 residential units (Class C3), retail floorspace (Class A1 and A3) facing Queensway and arranged around a new retail arcade below re-provided central atrium and central retail courtyard, public car park, hotel (Class C1), cinema (Class D2), gym (Class D2), crèche (Class D1)…”
263 documents (yes, REALLY!) are associated with this application.
The proposed cinema is accessed from Ground Floor Level, with three lifts down to Basement Level 3, with the cinema’s demise shown on the documents titled “GROUND FLOOR PLAN” and “BASEMENT 03” in the above-linked planning application.
The cinema is briefly covered in the Design and Access Statement, specifically p3 (PDF page number) of the document titled “DAS PART 2” in the above-linked planning application.
It says that the proposed cinema was moved to level B3 to allow for an increased “clear height of 6.5m… to meet the spatial requirements of contemporary cinemas” and “minimise the potential impact to its immediate adjacenies.”
The page mentions “potential operators” and states that “it is assumed that the unit will be developed to shell and core only… the final demise configuration will be further developed…”
Hence, the cinema layout shown in the plans appears to be indicative only of a possible arrangement.
Nevertheless, here are the details:
On level B3 three auditoria are shown, each identical in size, with near wall-to-wall screens of ~15.5m (~50ft. width), in auditoria measuring ~18m (~60ft.) wide by ~19m wide (~62ft.) internally, or ~3700sq.ft. in area.
Each is shown having 5 rows of recliner seats in straight lines, except for 2-3 seats on each sides which are “toed in,” and the last row has 6 accessible spaces. Total seats per auditorium – 62 + 6 accessible.
A foyer area is also shown in the B3 plans, and the cinema’s entrance is shown on the Ground Floor Plan, with another lobby area, including seating (?).
Noting that the Design and Access Statement states a “clear height of 6.5m (~21ft.), it is clear that a 50ft. wide "scope” screen would, vertically, at best be a tight fit indeed, or impossible, suggesting that these “indicative” layouts are illustrative only.
Having a quick look at the first “Basement Impact Assessment” document, it provides an overview of the history of the site, alterations made to the Whitleys Department Store, and other historical material including “lost” rivers, should anyone reading this be interested in such.
N.B. For clarity, previous two posts removed; contents of which were amalgamated and revised for this post.
[ADDED TEXT TO OVERCOME “YOUR COMMENT APPEARS TO BE SPAM!” ERROR MESSAGE.]
Or rather, metal extrusions in which LEDs are fitted.
More precisely, this “new” block is the “Glow” exhibition centre (2012) repurposed.
Looking at Cineworld’s booking pages, it seems that “First Man” isn’t programmed for the IMAX auditorium, only 4DX and Superscreen. In fact, nothing is presently scheduled for the IMAX according to Cineworld’s site; the IMAX is being used for the BFI Film Festival, though hardly continuously, unless there are private screenings also held there?
With 15/70 prints not being made, the only option in London for “full scale” IMAX will be Xenon-lamp projection at the BFI, and no option at all to see it “full height” 1.4:1.
As of last weekend, the opening into the OLS circle foyer had been largely obscured by flame retardant sheeting. Looks like Zappomatic took a photo at an opportune time!
Photo uploaded.
Addendum: The “new” block is the “Glow” exhibition centre repurposed, with alterations shown in the above-linked plans.
To be clear, the old KCS sidewall speakers have not been removed, but are disused, with two IMAX rear speakers, standard for multiplex-type IMAX installations, replacing them; IMAX do not use rear arrays but “discrete” rears only.
Having covered the IMAX auditorium, I shall now proceed with the additional 4 auditoria.
To the left (or more accurately, East—but as experienced when entering the cinema via the main foyer from the mall) of the existing cinema, an “exhibition” space, “Glow,” had been built. This was, reportedly, not a success, and a planning application is available for its redevelopment, the summary description of which is:
“Change of use from an Events and Exhibition Venue (Use Class D1) to a cinema and other family orientated leisure uses (Use Class D2), restaurant facilities (Use Class A3) together with internal and external reconfiguration and associated works incorporating demolition of some existing floor space end construction of new floor space.”
Essentially, there is now a block adjacent to the existing cinema, which includes restaurants, a “Gravity” Trampoline Park, and the four new auditoria. The plans for these can be seen in the document titled “PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR LEVEL”*; they are connected from the far end of the main foyer of the existing cinema via a link bridge—not that the non-curious patron would realise that they were walking over to another building!
(*Plans for the existing cinema can also be seen here, albeit only partial as cropped.)
A fairly generously sized foyer/lobby area is included for these four auditoria, including seating areas, at the other end of which is a corridor leading to the four new auditoria entrances.
The foyer/lobby area does not include a suspended ceiling, and so services above are visible; they are generally black in colour, but a mess of suspension wires and threaded rods can be seen. There are several trays containing very large bundles of cables.
“Honeycomb” features are also suspended down to ceiling height, and oddly domestic-looking wall curtains (?!) and stand-alone lamps are featured, the latter being incongruently connected to white coloured wall sockets.
Several impressive “XPlus Laser” wall signs are featured, faced with (presumably CNC-cut) metal, surrounded by concealed blue LED lighting.
One of these is positioned adjacent to the “link bridge” entrance, along with a wall continuing the “honeycomb” motif, with the hexagons painted in various shades of e.g. blue and yellow. Combined with the rectangular section of white faceted squares behind the XPlus Laser sign, it all looks somewhat 1960s-inspired—in a positive way!
All four new auditoria feature laser projection, Dolby Atmos sound, and reclining seating.
I briefly had a look into the XPlus Laser auditorium (Screen 15), and the scope screen appeared to be very large indeed, with clearly excellent colour rendering, and the sidewall speakers were JBLs.
XPlus Laser screen size: 64ft. x 27ft. (Source.)
A unfortunate qubble: These new lobby areas appeared to be unstaffed on this occasion, and popcorn had been strewn on the carpet outside the XPlus Laser entrance.
The 4 new auditoria and associated lobby areas appear to be a fantastic addition, and I will be returning to the XPlus Laser auditorium at the earliest opportunity.
Dimensions as drawn on planning application:
-Main foyer: ~43m long by ~13m wide (entrance)/~29.5 wide (“ticket tear” end) (~140ft.x42ft./97ft.)
-Extension main foyer area – ~18x10m (~60x33ft.)
-XPlus Laser auditorium – ~24m long by ~20.5m wide (~80x67ft.)
Visited the Showcase Cinema de Lux Bluewater last Sunday as LARGE_screen_format informed me that the MCU movies were being shown in the IMAX auditorium at £2.50 per screening for “INSIDER” members (sign-up to which is free), plus booking fee, and I thought it would be a good opportunity to revisit this cinema, having not been here since the early 2000s.
With the relatively recent addition of four new auditoria, housed in a new block just to the left of the existing cinema, and linked to via a bridge at the end of the existing foyer, this is virtually “two cinemas in one.”
Therefore, I shall divide my comments into several posts, first covering the IMAX auditorium.
IIRC, this multiplex opened with two THX-certified auditoria, in which I attended several screenings. These were fitted with KCS rear array speakers, and at that time I did not consider the presentation to be of an exceptional standard.
Looking at satellite aerial photos, the IMAX auditorium (Screen 4) is one of the two largest (identical?) in the original multiplex, being situated in the South West corner. Thus, it is presumably a conversion of one of the two originally THX-certified auditoria.
The sidewall rear array speakers are retained, and the stretched fabric covering on these walls may well be original—or certainly pre-dates the IMAX conversion? It is not black, but more of a “muted” colour that appears dark grey during the feature; the stretched fabric wall areas are “staggered” in sections, forming “coves,” which are lit with downfiring spotlights, two per cove for the first 3 coves from the front, and one for the rear cove. Below these stretched fabric sections, the sidewalls are flat and covered with wall carpet.
House lights are at the edges of the ceiling only, dimmed for the feature, and only after the end credits were finished were they fully raised, with “cove” spotlights also raised.
The aisle steps are fitted with LED nosing profiles, and illuminated throughout the feature, which may well be distracting for those seated near an aisle. Otherwise, the auditorium was very dark indeed during the main feature.
As far as I could tell, most or all of the ceiling appeared to be smooth, and so I assume that ceiling tiles have not been used, rather stretched fabric, the colour of which also appeared to be dark grey during the feature. Possibly, the ceiling was fabricated in the way that theatre_of_varieties described for the LSQ IMAX—namely, to keep HF reflections from the ceiling at bay, insulation slabs are fitted, and the stretched fabric simply covers over them, rather than having a plasterboard layer behind the insulation also. The ceiling slopes up towards the screen, presumably an alteration made in the IMAX conversion.
The right sidewall features a backlit blue IMAX logo with a horizontal line above.
As the area surrounding the screen is dark black, the perception is created that the ceiling is sloped up to a level that’s higher than the screen—which doesn’t appear to be quite wall-to-wall and, overall, forming a proscenium “frame” around the screen. Combined with the “staggered” sidewall features, this—perhaps unintentionally!—creates a more “designed” feel than the typical black-box rectangular auditorium.
It is not difficult to see how more creative use of lighting and some additional features could turn this into a very attractive auditorium.
Presentation otherwise was fine, excepting the lack of moveable masking, with non-sync music played. However, the feature ended with a green “flash” on the screen.
The vomitory into the auditorium emerges behind the 5th row, with, IIRC, the front few rows on a slightly less steep rake than the rear seats.
I booked a seat in the centre of row “G” on the basis that this would be a satisfactory distance away from the screen; however, it turns out that the first row is in fact “D”—presumably the first few rows were eliminated in the IMAX conversion, with no changes to row lettering Nonetheless, it turned out to be about the right distance from the screen, albeit too low.
The screen was certainly on the small side for an IMAX, although from my seating position I considered it to be adequately sized. Certainly, being familiar with the near-90ft. wide screens at the BFI and LSQ IMAXs, I would have been unhappy had I paid full price for the tickets, which are currently £16.60 for the IMAX auditorium.
The IMAX projection system achieved very good results, with perfect geometry and alignment as expected, and a super-smooth yet detailed image. Centre-to-edge brightness consistency was good, slightly noticeable brightness fall off perhaps on the end credits. However, the black level was higher than I’d have expected, with clipping of low-level detail, and with the 3D glasses on, the brightness level seemed insufficient.
As the screen was presumably 1.9:1 ratio; these scope movies were presented in “letterboxed” form; with 3D glasses on, the black screen areas above and below the picture, though higher in level than would be preferred, were not overly problematic. However, as with my experience of “Avengers: Infinity War” at the LSQ 4DX, the picture width varied slightly from shot to shot, which I found distracting.
Possibly partially due to its lineage as a purpose-built THX-certified auditorium, the acoustics were outstanding. The HVAC system was inaudible, with excellent isolation. Only a distant rumble could very occasionally be distantly heard from an adjacent auditorium during the quiet moments.
In my view, it actually demonstrated that the rationale behind this, to ensure audibility of low level sounds in quiet scenes, is all very well at the mixing stage, but does not work in a theatrical environment open to the public with 10s or 100s of seats, simply because what one hears in quiet scenes is not low level audio detail so much as every last sound made by other patrons—even if they are not being noisy munching away at popcorn, the slightest rustle becomes distracting. I would actually prefer a slightly audible background hiss/rumble from the HVAC system—which certainly was the case in the corridor leading to the auditorium.
To meet THX specifications, the auditorium must have had a well controlled reverberation time, and combined with what I imagine to be the stretched fabric ceiling added in the IMAX conversion, an exceptionally low reverberation time is achieved, with excellent stereo imaging, including for sounds panned to the rears.
The sound quality was otherwise very good, with clean mids/high frequencies, and very good bass extension. Dialogue levels seemed about right; however, the system never seemed to reach the highest sound pressure levels that would be expected, and it felt like there was peak limiting—although the system never sounded strained.
Rear speakers were the same as those used in typical multiplex IMAX screens.
The HVAC system functioned well, although there was some temperature cycling in the evening performance from hot to cold, but at no time was the auditorium stuffy, overly hot, or cold.
Seating is upholstered in very high quality red fabric, with what felt like memory foam padding, and legroom was very generous. I am not sure if these are the original seats; if they are, their condition suggests that they have been reupholstered at some point.
However, the seats were on the narrow side, and I didn’t find them as comfortable as I’d have expected. The stadia for these front rows felt solid, and on using (after the feature had finished!) my phone’s “torch” facility to check if I’d dropped something behind the seat, I noticed that a concrete floor surface could be seen in a small area under the seat.
All in all, actually a pretty good auditorium to see a film—if you can swallow the price for an “IMAX Lite”-sized screen!
[TEXT ADDED TO OVERCOME “YOUR COMMENT APPEARS TO BE SPAM!” ERROR MESSAGE.]
Or more accurately, the stretched fabric covered areas of the sidewalls are angled out in staggered sections, with the remainer of the flat sidewalls covered with carpet to the floor.
The large bundles of cables in trays can be clearly seen in this photo.
Ian: IIRC an LED module screen below the vertical “ODEON” logo on the North East corner of the building was shown in the main application; it’s still there on the rendering on the first page of the third “Design and Access Statement” document in the above-linked variation application. Looking through the planning “Decision Notice” document for the full 2016 application, I don’t see any reference to it; presumably, separate advertising consent will be required.
Like the OLS and Vue West End, any consent is likely to have restrictions, including not allowing full motion video.
In the case of the large format screen on the facade of the Vue, only static images are allowed with a minimum change rate of 12 seconds.
I suppose it may well count as the first auditorium to open as a Luxe?
A 360º walkthrough is currently available on Showcase Cinemas' site, further down on the linked page.
Zappomatic: Thank you for the update and photo.
I see there is lots of new plasterboard (looks like British Gypsum SoundBloc) under the circle stadia and walls.
SethLewis: Yes, the entrance will be separate. Entry will be via a small lobby with escalators down to the main foyer.
Looking at the planning application and comparing to old licensing plans, the replacement Screen 1 will be about the same size as the old auditorium, were it straightened up and made rectangular in shape, i.e. sidewalls moved in and back wall moved up to the front of the booth.
As measured on the plans, replacement screen size is about ~50ft. vs. ~37ft. wide for the previous.
Screen 2 will have a smaller auditorium, but the screen at ~33ft. wide is slightly smaller than the previous. (~37ft.)
So, whilst not saying that this scheme somehow compensates for the loss of heritage, etc., entailed by demolishing the existing, from the POV of the average patron, if anything, it will be a superior offer.
Whether or not there will be sufficient demand to fill them is another matter!
Change of use of the cinema may require planning permission and I would imagine that Westminster Council would not be keen. It also looks very much like its own demise down in the basement and doesn’t integrate well with the rest of the hotel scheme.
Bedrooms could hardly be put in the basement; most obviously they could be used as conference rooms, but then the cinema can hire out the auditoria anyway, and I’d imagine Odeon has very favourable lease terms. I may have to eat my words, but my prediction is it will be a cinema 5 years after opening—if cinemas in general are still viable!
Ian: This project has had more than one proposal and the current one has been revised, so it can get confusing!
I’ve checked Westminster Council’s planning applications search site, and the most recent application is dated March 2018.
Most of this application relates to minutae of limited relevance here; however, some of the plans are included and looking in particular at the document marked “PROPOSED ELEVATION NORTH” there have been no changes to the existing scheme in respect of the cinema layout and frontage, Odeon’s entrance being on the North East corner with a vertical Odeon sign; the detailing of this section clearly has taken cues from the hoarding that was in front of the original facade.
The two auditoria are at basement levels but—and not that this matters once you’re in the building!—they are on the Northern side of the building.
(No revised proposals have been included for the basement levels in the above-linked planning application.)
Odeon may at times be geographically challenged, but I trust that they will have no reason to call it the “Odeon Trafalgar!” ;–)
I’m thinking that the capacity of the two auditoria will be adjusted downwards if they are to be “Luxe” screens with recliner (?) seating.
[Evening Standard advertorial](https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/the-londoner-name-revealed-of-new-5-luxury-hotel-planned-for-leicester-square-a3929151.html(.
Recent photo taken from LSQ uploaded.
Hmm, I assume, specifically regarding wall coverings and the surrounds, you mean in the non-ScreenX auditoria?
Zappomatic: Ah, that explains the handrails!
I suppose the seating would have to be removed to replace the vinyl floor covering.
LARGE_screen_format: At a “constant” 50ft. high (about that of the LSQ IMAX), the screen width needed for 2:35 would be 120ft. And for a 1.4:1 IMAX like the BFI, it would be ~140ft.
Getting a bit impractical, isn’t it? ;–)
moviebuff82: These things are usually region or country-specific, regardless of parent company.
AMC Stubs T&C’s.
To quote:
“Membership is valid at participating AMC Theatres in U.S. locations.”
Kers: Thank you for the photos and the update.
A few weeks I spoke to a member of staff at the Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square, not necessarily someone you’d expect to know about higher level decisions but who had been working there prior to the Cineworld acquisition, and they told me that they understood that Empire Cinemas were minded to refurbish Haymarket.
Wasn’t expecting further changes so soon!
Wonder if the screen upgrade will help draw in more trade to this now somewhat “secondary” location?
LARGE_screen_format:
“There is nothing that says cinema better than watching side masking move out to reveal a full 2.35:1 widescreen image.”
I agree… however, this seems to be a convenient way of differentating Dolby Cinema from IMAX, whilst not requiring the vertical field of view that IMAX requires, and—not wishing to issue amateur legal advice here!—possibly infringing IMAX’s patent(s), e.g. Conversion of cinema theatre to a super cinema theatre.
Taller, wider… seems to me that using either between 1.78:1 (aka 16:9) or 1.9:1 would make the most sense!
Update: Having a quick look a couple of days ago, the outside of the Odeon Leicester Square is essentially the same as mentioned in previous posts, with the facade largely covered by fire retardant sheeting, hiding scaffolding behind.
A couple of extra photos, including a view behind the LSQ facade fire retardant sheeting taken from the left side, to follow.
Addendum: The stretched lacquered black fabric mentioned in the above post was fitted to the foyer ceilings only.
A couple of weeks ago, I went to the Cineworld O2 to attend a screening of “The Meg” in the ScreenX (Screen 9, IIRC.)
The least said about this “monster” (pun intended!) of a movie, the better.
Cineworld O2 Extension/“Project Loop” Update:
On the day I visited the O2, the external fabric of the building was partially complete.
(It will have to be kept in mind here that the O2, aka the “Dome,” is a large tent—thus it does afford a degree of protection against the elements, but does not provide the necessary insulation, nor, obviously, any insulation between the new building and the other parts of the Dome.)
In some parts of the facade, Rockwool mineral wool slabs and Tyvek breathable water resistant membrane visible in other areas, pending the installation of the cladding; in others that cladding had been attached.
Other parts remained “open,” allowing for a view into the building shell, where already installed services (e.g. HVAC ducts.)
Cineworld O2 ScreenX Auditorium:
Detailed notes were stored in my head and typed up as a late night “brain dump” on returning home.
As it has now been a couple of weeks since my visit, I will do my best to unravel them here.
On entering the ScreenX auditorium, it seemed quite comfortable—however, the seating, which had a slight “rocker” action, was narrow and uncomfortable. Legroom, however, was on the generous side for “standard” seating. The vinyl floor in front/under the seating also looks “cheap,” not matching the quality of other parts of the venue, and ditto the handrails on the sidewall(s.)
Presentation before/after the feature was poor—e.g. I had entered the auditorium not long after the doors had “opened” for the performance—all that could be heard was ventilation (perhaps on the slightly loud side?) Abruptly, non-sync music started, then the Cineworld slideshow. After the feature, the house lights came back up and, IIRC, the non-sync music started, and a sudden “thump” sound and it came to a halt again. Admittedly, I was the only one left in the auditorium by this time, as all other patrons left the auditorium as soon as the credits started!
There was also a clear stepping in the “ventilation” sound level after the feature ended which may have been the ScreenX projectors internal fans or extraction turning off or perhaps an “energy saving” mode being used whilst the auditorium was empty.
The sidewalls were a grey colour not too dissimilar to the post-1989 tile colour in the old Empire 1, and were reasonably effective in terms of not reflecting too much back from the main screen (just appears as a sort of “colour wash” towards the front) whilst the brightness level from the ScreenX projectors matched the main scope “stage” screen.
The image on the “stage” screen (floating, no moveable masking) seemed to me not to be as bright as it might have been; however, it did match the sidewall brightness levels.
Picture alignment on the “stage” screen was good, with little or no barrel distortion, and also appeared to have good colour calibration. However, there was some visible centre to edge (vignetting) brightness loss, and the black level could have been better, but I didn’t notice too much clipping of low level detail.
There were 4x ScreenX sidewall projectors, two on each sidewall. As Zappomatic noted, there is an overlap in the middle of each sidewall between the two ScreenX sidewall projectors; whilst this could be seen clearly when no sidewall content was played but the projectors remained on, it was primarily only visible in darker scenes as an increase in black level.
The ScreenX projectors did not quite fill entire height of sidewalls, with a gap top and bottom; the upper gap was where the sidewall projectors and the (small) rear array sidewall speakers were positioned vertically; there was also a slight shadow cast below each ScreenX projector.
With the ScreenX projectors being fed content to display, it seemed to me that a “cylindrical” type stretch was used towards the rear of the auditorium with the ScreenX projectors, presumably to accomodate for different auditorium depths, and/or it is intentional since the human visual system is used to this stretching at the extremes of the horizontal visual field. In any case it works perceptually.
As Zappomatic noted, there was a noticeable delay between the “stage” projection and the sidewall projectors. I can’t be sure, but it also seemed that the right sidewall projectors were further delayed slightly compared to the left sidewall projectors, sometimes it seemed like there was some “tearing” indicating a lack of “vertical synchronisation.”
Furthermore, the sound and front “stage” projection also seemed to be delayed with respect to the audio, with the dialogue preceeding the picture by a perhaps few tens of milliseconds.
However, I may have become oversensitive to this from having adjusted video/sound synchronisation myself, e.g. due to the large latency caused by the processing in modern TVs.
The scenes which used the “full width” afforded by ScreenX seemed to be somewhat random, and sudden jumps between the “stage” screen only and the “full width” being used was sometimes jarring.
The system was very effective in producing an “immersive” wrap-around display, an amazing sense of width and activation of the peripheral vision motion sensitivity.
The overall brightness level seemed sufficient with all projectors in use.
It did, however, seem to me that the “stage” screen was insufficient in size relative to today’s expectations, but, obviously, this is something of a trade-off with the ScreenX system, and I did sit quite far to the back in order to get the full width experience.
Furthermore, the colour rendering match between the “stage” and sidewall ScreenX projection was inconsistent; at times close, at other times, obviously out, being too green—but this depended on the colours being displayed.
The sound system was reasonably good, with sufficient brightness sounding, although not quite at the high end of refinement. Playback didn’t seem to be at reference level though, and may have been peak limited. LFE was OK, and the rear array may have been calibrated at too high a level.
Reverb time was outstanding, and this might be due to the performance of the Armstrong Tectum product noted in previous posts on this page as being used by ScreenX for the sidewall “screens.”
(Incidentally, the seams and lack of colour consistency between these were sometimes (or often?—can’t remember) visible.)
As Zappomatic has mentioned, the “honeycomb” lights work well and were not distracting during the main feature.
Cineworld O2 – Foyer/lobbies/toilets—some random observations:
I was not as impressed by the finishes and standard of work toilet fit-out as Zappomatic. A screw missing in one of the grilles above the urinals.
However, they were super clean and feature the excellent Mitsubishi Jet Towels—“Made in Japan” as the label on them boasts—which in my view are superior to the Dyson Airblades that I have encountered, which lack sufficient room to insert my hands without touching the sides.
The background music speakers in the foyer/lobby areas did not achieve a high quality of sound; some were wall mounted, with ceiling units in the toilets.
Some areas had what looked like black lacquer stretched fabric, as used in Cineworld (Empire) Leicester Square’s newly refurbished foyer. However, on section of these appeared not to be sufficiently tensioned, as it “flapped” about slightly, presumably being moved by the HVAC air flow.
ScreenX was being heavily promoted, with signage—and there was also ScreenX sign on the rear of the auditorium.
Numerous displays (LED module type and large, presumably LCD, display types) throughout the foyer/lobby areas.
The standard of finishes in the foyer/lobby areas remains inconsistent, with the lowest level foyer still having “bumpy” walls and ceilings. Perhaps a further makeover to this area will occur when this foyer is expanded into the cinema’s extended area.
Staff were all very good, and one stood outside the auditorium thanking me for visiting, even though this was some time after all other patrons had left the auditorium, and two members of staff were waiting in the vomitory to clean the auditorium.
Overall, I thought the ScreenX system was effective at what it did, and could be put to very good use; its niggles could be overlooked, but they ideally need ironing out.
With Cineworld committing to numerous installations, it will be interesting to see how much content is made available for the system. But it is getting ridiculous that key titles can now be seen in an IMAX, “PLF” with Dolby Atmos, 4DX, ScreenX, soon in the UK Dolby Cinema, and “regular” auditoria. And, given the choice, I can’t imagine why ScreenX would be chosen over a ~90ft. wide screen fitted with an IMAX with Laser projection system.
Photos of the Cineworld O2 Extension/“Project Loop” under construction and the foyer/lobby areas of the Cineworld O2 to follow.
Update: Essentially no changes visible externally from Leicester Square, the facade is still largely hidden by fire retardant sheeting. Looking through a slight gap in the sheeting on the far right, it appears the facade works are a long way from complete.
Based on this alone, I think it is fair to guess that the OLS won’t be reopening by opening by the 10th October for the BFI London Film Festival 2018, and looking through the calendar for this, it is indeed not one of the festival’s venues.
PhilipWW: You can have a look at some of the other screens in the virtual tour on Empire Cinemas' site.
Just had a look at the auditorium information page—I see that most of the auditoria are on the small size.
Empire Cinemas also seem to have made a slight error on that page:
“Screen 6: 70 Seats 105 Superior Standard Seats 5 Double Sofas 6 Leather Recliners Wheelchair Spaces x 2”
Spot their mistake! ;–)