Roxy Theatre
153 W. 50th Street,
New York,
NY
10020
153 W. 50th Street,
New York,
NY
10020
83 people
favorited this theater
Showing 401 - 425 of 1,213 comments
mjc, in those days all of the B'way houses had at least two men on for each shift. RCMH had 3 or 4 I beleive but I never saw more than two at a time at the Roxy. each man would be responsible for a projector, threading, cleaning and making the change over to his machine. They never left their assigned projector keeping an eye on focus and carbon trimming at all times.
We also had reel boys who were basically apprentices learning the ropes.
Yes Rob It was the larger one, the smaller one was used mostly for running Movietone News dailies and was a very hectic place to be.
MGM also had a screening room on another floor of the Fox building which was used for News of the Day. MGM had their cutting and sound editing rooms for the news there as well.Those News departmente were a hot bed of activity, turning out newsreels faster than a speedy bullet. I seem to recall RCMH having had two or three newsreels a week delivered from several of the major studios. The Music Hall staff would then piece together the best parts to create RCMH News.
I wondered what became of that building, I have not been in that area in years. I used to take the subway to 42nd/Times Square and then walk up B'way to, what was it, 51st street? and then down to the Fox/Deluxe building which cornered 10th Ave.
RE:
“Vito: I would have loved to have seen that booth. There was a picture on the wall at Local #306 which showed what was probably the Roxy booth with the three projectors set up for Cinemiracle and it did seem pretty cramped.”
FYI, the CineMiracle booth was a temporary set-up in the closed mezzanine section built especiallay for the Windjammer engagement. The front balcony projection room was not used for this engagement.
Bob or Vito:
Thanks for all the great projection information.
How many projectionists worked on a shift at the Roxy? If the booth was that small, I can’t see it being practical to have any more than two.
According the Ben Hall, in its heyday the Roxy had a staff of 16 projectionists. If the stage crew controlled all the lighting and curtains, the projectionists would only be left with doing changeovers. What else did they do?
Vito: I would have loved to have seen that booth. There was a picture on the wall at Local #306 which showed what was probably the Roxy booth with the three projectors set up for Cinemiracle and it did seem pretty cramped. Of course when the theatre opened at the end of the silent era, the projectors and lamps themselves were much smaller, so it must have seemed roomy at the time. Was the booth at the Fox H.Q. you refer to in the large screening room? I think there were two there: the big room and a small room for reviewing newsreels. One of the operators on the crew at Radio City worked the big screening room, and I spent time in the booth while waiting to go down for screenings. It was very spacious indeed. Ironically, I now live just down the street from that building (now the High School of Enviorenmental Science) and see it every day from my apartment window.
My first visit to the Roxy booth was back in the 50s when I was just a kid working for 20th Century Fox, the Roxy had been played most of our pictures. The thing that surprised me was the size, it was only about 10 x 20. That seemed rather small, in fact the screening room on the 6th floor of the Fox home office (called the little theatre) was larger. I wonder if anyone else saw the inside of that booth, I know in the photo it seems to indicate three projectors but I only recall there being two. I was a long time ago and I visited a lot of booths so I am just going on memory here, but I believe I am correct.
The comment above about the location of the booth at the Roxy being capable of creating “sharper, more detailed and perhaps larger images than at Radio City” is not quite correct. Image sharpness, detail and size is purely a function of the quality and focal length of the lenses, projectors and light source used to project it. Assuming the booth at the Roxy was about 90' from the screen it would require lenses half the focal length of those at Radio City where the throw is 180' from the screen to achieve the same picture size. There are a whole set of qualifications that determine picture quality. Shorter focal length lenses, since they are magnifying the image much more can have problems with holding the film image in focus since the film is constantly fluttering in the gate due to the heat of the lamp (much like 35mm slides tended to “pop” into focus when they dropped in front of the light). What the booth at the Roxy did share with most of the Rothaphel booths almost a zero angle in relation to the screen which eliminated “keystoning” or making the picture trapezoidal because of the downward angle from a high booth. It also was advantageous when showing Cinemiracle since all three projectors could be locate in the same booth maintaining the zero angle for all three panels. Ben Hall commented in “The Best Remaining Seats” that the first thing Roxy did when he took over the Regent in Harlem was to relocate the booth to the main floor. Spotlight booths have an advantage in a large downward angle since it keeps the light on the performer rather than on the backdrop. Thus the Roxy had a high spot booth at the back of the house. In the Beacon, the spot booth is located above the projection booth. In the Center Theatre, which was intended to run movies, the projection booth was again located at a lower angle. Joseph is right in saying that the Hall wasn’t really supposed to run feature films, but rather the equipment was for projected film effects and perhaps “filler” material. Indeed, the rear projection booth at the Hall is at a better projection angle than the main booth.
The Roxy was promoted at its opening as having a seating capacity of 6,214. But for the bulk of its existence it was reported as seating about 5,700. While replacement of the original seats could account for this (were they replaced?),…there is common speculation that the Roxy literally counted every “seat” in the house, including toilets and dressing room chairs, to come up with this impressive number. Does anyone have information whether or not 6,214 was ever actually the real seating capacity of the theater and if so, what alteration accounted for the lower number later on?
In 1958 the seating was vastly reduced for the showing of “Windjammer” in Cinemiracle. Probably the reaar orchestra and the top baclony were draped off. But the theatre returned to its capacity of 5700 after Windjammer ended. Thanks for your help.
These are terrific photos. I remember this well as I was working there at the time in 1950. It is the New York Philharmonic Orchestra with Dimitri Metropolis conducting. It was not really very successful. Notice the sides of the orchestra, loge and balcony are unfilled. I believe Spyros Skouris, head of 20th Century Fox wanted to try something classy and artistic instead of the regular vaudeville type acts. People coming out sometimes would comment to me that what they expected was the line of Roxyettes and headline acts, not a symphony orchestra. My comment was that I happened to like classical music. Ballet dancers Andre Eglevky and Melissa Hayden danced the pas de deux from Don Quixote to give some action.
This was all four times a day so must have been exhausting. I forgot what movie went along with it. Warren may have a schedule of 1950 shows. Look up and notice the stage valance hanging above.
The LIFE photographer must have been behind the orchestra for these magnificent shots. I don’t understand how the entire auditorium is lit. Did they turn up auditorium lights for this LIFE photographer?
Any photographer here who might take a guess?
posted by Richka on Nov 28, 2008 at 12:54pm
“Those 1950 images taken from backstage show how much more "intimate” the Roxy was than RCMH, even though the seating capacity was virtually the same. Patrons sitting upstairs at the Roxy got a closer view of the performers. One feels miles away in RCMH’s mezzanines. If the Roxy still existed today, I believe that it would be more popular than RCMH as a concert venue."
Yes, I agree. The projection booth situated at the front of the balcony was capable of creating shaper, more detailed and perhaps larger, images than the RCMH installation. But then the ROXY was created as a movie theater, whereas movies were an afterthought at RCMH.
The vast ROXY balcony was incredible; so large and yet each seating section had its own “intimate” feel. I am sure audiences did feel “closer” to the ROXY stage than RCMH audiences.
Have been to RCMH many times from 1955 through about 2003, but regret never having gotten to the Roxy. When I looked at those photos of the Roxy’s auditorium, I was struck by the same impression as Warren. It looks practically intimate compared to RCMH, where I never understood the notion of the priciest (reserved) seats being in the very distant first mezzanine.
Some more great ROXY views from Life:
View link
View link
Hey Joseph,
WOW, if you have photos of the rotunda from 1956 it’s not only amazing but I would love to see them. Is it possible you could scan them and send? That really would be great! I’m sure others would like to see them as well.
Thanx, Richka
Yes Ricka, you may be right about the rug. Perhaps it was replaced later during 1950s. I have photos of the rotunda taken in 1956 and the oval rug is gone. A wall-to-to wall carpet is in its place.
Yes, this photo does date from 1940s. The oval rug was replaced during late 1940s by a wall-to-wall version. The original oval rug wore out. The scaffolding must be related to a maintence/cleaning effort at the time.
Thanks Joseph. Yes, I agree with you about the period of 1940s and the reason for scaffolding. But I do remember the oval rug still there in 1950 when I worked there because I had to walk around the edge of it on the marble flooring every day to my job on the concession stand. (we were not allowed to walk ON it)!
RE: “This photo puzzles me as well because there is scaffolding there which doesn’t seem to belong if the theater was open. Yet the style of clothes people are wearing plus the military men signify it must have been during the mid 1940s. Any other suggestions?”
Yes, this photo does date from 1940s. The oval rug was replaced during late 1940s by a wall-to-wall version. The original oval rug wore out. The scaffolding must be related to a maintence/cleaning effort at the time.
Warren:
Thanks for the ad.
Couldn’t have been said much better.
Thanks Warren, You depressed the hell out of me. My only regret is that I was out of the country during that time and couldn’t get inside, take photos and steal anything that wasn’t nailed down. I do have a bricks from the Loew’s Grand Atlanta, Helen Hayes and Morosco Theaters.
This photo puzzles me as well because there is scaffolding there which doesn’t seem to belong if the theater was open. Yet the style of clothes people are wearing plus the military men signify it must have been during the mid 1940s. Any other suggestions?
This link worked. Awesome, Glorious, tragic, and thank you Lost Memory. The one photo that still puzzles me (I seen it before) is the one with the huge crowd that appears to be running in the rotunda. It looks like a crush of people coming in from the outer lobby and not an orderly line of people entering theater after waiting for seats. Any guesses what this could be? It almost looks like an evacuation, except that they are heading in the wrong direction.
Hate to be more dense than anyone else here but….how do I get the Roxy demolition photos. I clicked on the only link I saw below but that didn’t seem to do it.
Here are some Roxy related photos. Link is courtesy of “misterboo”.
posted by Lost Memory on Nov 21, 2008 at 1:20pm
Lost Memory:
Let me also say thanks for providing us with the Life magazine link on this page.
I would likely never have seen the demolition pictures without it.
Ben Hall’s book shows some construction pictures so now I have a record of the beginning and the end of a one-of-a-kind movie theatre.
These photos are really tragic reminders, especially to those of us who were a part of the Roxy as youngsters. I didn’t know any such photos existed and it is both wonderful and yet sad to have them to view. They went straight into my documents to view again and again. They show exact spots in the theater that I can still remember from the period of 1950-51 when I worked there. I wonder how long did the destruction go on as it was a massive pile. Thankyou lost memory.
I first saw the Gloria Swanson Roxy photo as a little kid. Little did I know that the demolition of the beautiful Roxy would be repeated hundreds of times in the years to come, in theaters all over the country.
Yes. Especially when one has read the account of the Roxy’s opening night in “The Best Remaining Seats”, and then you see how it all ultimately ended. Unfortunately, the demolition photos are the only photos I’ve seen of the Roxy in color. It makes the theatre seem more real, which also makes the tragedy of its destruction more real also.