The WARNER in Milwaukee and its kissing cousin you mention in Erie PA, were both opened in May of 1931, and the PARAMOUNT in Aurora was a splendid example of R&R’s ability to merge delicate French rococco influences with their Art Deco in a warm and wonderful way. Many architects made Deco hard and cold, and thereby lost its appeal in the setting of a theatre that is supposed to be warm and inviting. I have not seen any of R&R’s court houses or other public buildings done in Art Deco, but I wonder if they were somehow able to continue the warmth in such venues. The reason R&R used “traditional styles, usually French in origin” is because that was their ‘signature’ style! Any survey of their theatres will reveal their trademark signature of the stylized sunburst of King Louis XIVth, the Sun King. They did work in other styles such as Spanish in the case of the Chicago UPTOWN, but they clearly prefered French — and that is what their clients wanted too! After the death of the principals, the firm did move into the so-called International Style in such as the FISHER remodeling in Detroit, but they still maintained their signature opulent, yet light touch characteristic of the French influence. I am happy they did.
Even though the RIALTO SQUARE is not my favorite R&R work, the fact remains that it is a wonderful and beautiful palace, and I certainly hope it long endures. I especially like the illuminated ‘grape clusters’ ‘fountain’ in the rotunda. That rotunda may have inspired Ahlschlager for it is certainly grand. I only wish the equally grand original drperies could have been reporduced for it, since the originals in photos are wonderfully done. It was the Milwaukee firm of the then Mid-West Scenic Co. which made the replacement decorative draperies, but I am not entirely pleased with their vacuum-formed plastic gilded to imitate the appliqued and embroidered pendants on the originals. Their achievement is innovative, and it is a lot better than the plain panels so often seen today —if they replace the draperies at all. Still, I feel that plastic is out of place in such forms and venues. As to R&R not being innovative in the late 20s, it is too bad that I cannot post on this site the opening day photos of their WARNER here in Milaukee (now called the GRAND). This was the finest of their medium scale works, if I may be forgiven some local bias.
Yes, Scott, the lobbies are entirely different, but I still maintain that the auditoriums are more than casually similar; of course, you are entitled to your opinion. Frankly, I don’t consider either of them to be the acme of R&R’s works, but then that is just my opinion, a matter of taste, and as the old saying goes: there is no accounting for taste.
I am glad that Messrs. Greene and Parks have set the record straight; it is nice to have this “misinformation” corrected. When I heard this some years ago from a source I don’t remember, I had taken it with a grain of salt, but had always wondered if there was a bit of truth there. Apparently it originated from a competitor or other disgruntled one. I hope EverGreene’s achievements long continue — especially if they involve restoring our theatres!
I’ve been told that EverGreene is run and was founded by a renegade former employee of the famous Conrad Schmitt studios outside of Milwaukee (who have artistically restored hundreds of theatres and other buildings), and that they taught him everything he knows, but that the results of EverGreene’s work is nowhere up to Conrad Schmitt’s standards and specifications.
Most movie palaces had the holes in the ceiling for “lines” as Warren describes them (except Atmospherics) and these were capped with small discs of metal which were wired to the plaster struts that held up the ceiling. They were painted right along with the ceiling, of course, but if one looks closely, he can often see them still in place, sometimes dangling a bit as the wire loosened over the years. Their intent was really to lower at least 4 such “lines” at a time in order to hoist a scaffold with temporary winches in the attic to effect cleaning or repainting. It is true that a single line could be used to hoist a single man in a ‘Bosun’s chair’, but the main intent was for a two or three man scaffold since that would require less positioning as they moved across a ceiling. There is a photo of one being used in the St. Louis FOX in a David Naylor book.
“dwodeyla” could be quite right. All that is known for sure is that the maker of Sculpta-Grille, Harvey Design Workshop of Lynbrook, L.I., N.Y., went out of business with the astounding increase in the price of petroleum (from which plastics are made) with the Arab oil embargo in 1973. What had been $7 the square foot in basic white in quantity, rose to an estimated $25 the square foot within a year, a hefty price even today!
The reason that the ceiling in the auditorium was repained white from the original blue, is that it must be a reflector of the white metal halide flood lights hidden behind the building facades along the horizon line in order for these up-lights to cast upon the ceiling to reflect enough light down upon the congregation in order for them to be able to read their Bibles during the discourses; remember that there is no original bright lighting in an ‘atmospheric’ movie palace. Other lights in blue are turned ‘on’ when these white ones are turned ‘off’ and then they turn the stars and clouds on and people see it much as it was. It would seem that the blue paint on the ceiling is no great loss when compared to the gem that was restored and survives today (and the ceiling had to be repainted in any case, since rain leaks during the years of darkness before the Witnesses took over the place, had produced many visible damaged sections of the plaster ‘sky.’
The MIRAMAR has dire financial straits currently as disclosed in their news report here on CT at: http://cinematreasures.org/news/12937_0_1_0_C/
Perhaps an ‘angel’ will appear before the May deadline.
It should be noted that this theatre was never a movie palace, and that the interior that existed at opening no longer exists and today contains virtually no decor. It cannot be claimed as an architectural icon, but it does have local historical and usefulness merits.
Also, if someone does want to make an appointment to approach a university official, be sure to coordinate it here on this site and anywhere else devotees of the BP might meet, so that there are not many people making appointments, which could be perceived as a furtive assualt on LIU’s legal options to direct their property in the public eye, or simply as misguided individuals speaking of that which they do not know. Likewise, if you determine to make an appointment, take only one other person along with you, if anyone, since more might appear to them to be an intimidation tactic. If you have formed a group, certainly bring along a LIST of their names and addresses to display the fact that you are not alone in this endeavor of good will, but DO NOT make it look like a petition, which and can be very unsettling to administrators and likely to turn them off completely. Save any petition drives for much later in the ‘game.’
If you can first establish a contact on a lower level who has access to the current thinking of those in charge, then you can find out from this person whom to contact and what is a propitious time. Don’t waste your time talking off the ear of the janitor or bldg. super who may sympathize but have no power to contact or influence the president’s office where the decision will likely be made. In all these cases you must be careful not to waste their time by too many meetings or contacts; they are, in reality, a business, and time is money to them too.
Remember, short of legal condemnation of the property by the government under eminent domain laws, there is no way to force them to relinquish their property to others, and I do NOT advocate the currently fashionable misuse of this law to take private property for other private use! That might take the theatre, but leave a permanent ugly stain on its name.
Since the PARAMOUNT is privately owned by LIU, may I suggest that it would be prudent to first determine in a gentle way what their position is on the theatre’s future, since previous comments indicate that they are interested in keeping it as one of their properties, and may be willing to return portions of it to a partial theatrical use. It would be premature and perhaps offensive to them to start an outside effort about their property without their consent and involvement. IF at a later date they seem to oppose any restoration of the auditorium, then it MIGHT be feasible to start a petition drive or other influence upon them, but not before all courteous dialogue with them has been exhausted. Remember that the best way to create an enemy is to step upon his rights, and schools also have property rights. One can appeal to their civic spirit in the interests of the community, but one cannot dismiss them as unconcerned if they do not immediately see your wishes as the plans they ‘must’ adopt. IF you have a large amount of money to offer them to purchase the building and they accept, fine, but do not presume to tell them that they must sell or otherwise handle their property in the way outsiders dictate.
In this regard it might be possible to form an INFORMAL (non-incorporated) group to approach LIU administration to express your devotion to the FORMER theatre, and your wish to help them reprogram the space in a way harmonious to its decor and potential. Since any degree of restoration is going to be costly, they will see your assistance best as as funds raiser. If you can form a credible group to pledge to rent the auditorium for some events once stage and seating are restored, then you may give them a realistic gleam of hope in an otherwise confusing time. Make it clear that you realize that the regents or board of directors of the university expect them to make the most profitable use of the property (always refer to it by the name they use, not as the ‘Brooklyn Paramount’) and that you seek to help them find a profitable use harmonious with BOTH university needs and community needs. Universities are usually quite sensitive to local views and needs, but always remember that this is NOT a tax funded institution, but a private one not required to expose all their financial resources and options with the public, so never imply that you expect them to show you their books.
It might prove helpful to remember that this is but one of their ‘campuses’ and that therefore it need not contain educational programs perhaps better suited to other sites. How much of a problem is classroom space for them? If it is not critical in the former Paramount, then perhaps they could devote it to community and university events requiring a large seating area. Where do they hold graduations now and is it as noteworthy as the restored Paramount would be? They do have a performing arts program; what is the nature of the facility they now use and is that adequate compared with the former theatre? Can you find someone who will donate his time to act as an unpaid consultant in the adaptation of the theatrical aspects of the building to new uses? The more of their research you can do for them before they enter into serious decisions, the better your chances that they will listen to your ideas and take on your approach to the structure. Be ready to have YOUR lawyer draw up a MODEL demising agreement to separate the former theatre portions of the building from the upper floors of offices should LIU decide that that would be a good agreement. Such might also forsee removing the cafeteria from the lobby and other uses now in the balconies. These would presume that you have a viable plan or client to take control of those former theatre spaces at a proft or at least not a loss to the university, assuming they wish to divest themselves of the former theatre portions. You might include a back-out clause allowing them to retake control of the entire structure if the client/operator you propose actually fails within a stated period of time. In this way they will not be seen to be taking all the risk from the insurance, upkeep and profit standpoints.
Should you get the impression that they are open to a possible purchase plan or demising agreement for the theatre portion, then it is time to incorporate so as to collect funds in an open and legal way and then to take a copy of that incorporation certificate to show to them. But first of all is the quiet and kindly expression of deep interest in their property AS WELL AS your equally deep interest in the welfare of the university so valuable to the community since 1926, almost the year the BP opened!
Best Wishes to all.
Many cities such as Milwaukee microfilmed most old blueprints before discarding them and sent the films to rented archives deep in the empty salt mines out west; did New York do something similar? It may be necessary to cultivate a ‘friend’ in the city’s building inspection department to learn what may be confidential. Conceiveably, one could then pay to have a film returned and duplicated or have new prints made off of the film.
As Bruce points out from the print he acquired, it IS possible to redraw the prints from what remains and from photos, but is IS quite expensive!
Ken, thanks for the correction. I’ve got to learn to keep my rabbits all in a row. Glad to know that one is still hopping down the bunny trail, even if it is now a different ‘burrow’ in a different borough.
Sad to say, there is a precedent for this as also seen in New York. In Buffalo the former LOVEJOY theatre on Lovejoy street, became the Lovejoy Community Swimming Pool, as seen on pages 90 and 91 of the book SILENT SCREENS. In that situation the building was completely gutted with the auditorium floor removed and a large swimming pool in its place, and the sight of the roof trusses with skylights cut through the roof above them. There is a photo of the BUNNY on page 26 of AMERICAN PICTURE PALACES.
The exact pattern in the grille wall shown behind the concession stand of the DORT MALL CINEMA in Flint MI, as shown in the photo referred to in the link in the post above, is not in the 1970 Sculpta-Grille catalog as it exists in the Archive of the Theatre Historical Society in Illinois. No doubt there were several firms making grillework for buildings at that time.
I hate to say it, but if, finally, we cannot bring back the glorious KINGS, then we would do well to bring back the equally glorious BROOKLYN PARAMOUNT. The photos of it in Ben Hall’s BEST REMAINING SEATS reveal a wonderland of opulence, and typically, the sumptuous ‘Bird of Paradise’ house curtain will be among the most difficult and costly artifact to reproduce. We hate to trade off palaces, but if it must be, this is a fitting trade.
It would appear that at least 4 of Genreal Drive-In’s cinemas were designed in the early 60s by Maurice D. Sornick of Massapequa Park, NY as a template design that was then executed by local architects under contract, in order to operate in states where Mr. Sornick was not licensed. Those that are known are: The CINEMA WESTLANE in Milwaukee, the CINEMA NORTHLAND in Jennings, MO; the CINEMA BIG TOWN in Mesquite, TX; and the CINEMA SOUTH COUNTY in St. Louis, all razed. The word CINEMA always preceed because the template design was a partial pre-fabricated and featured a roof sign of ten-foot-tall box letters in the word CINEMA which was followed in the nature of the local name sign that the owner wanted. Each of these also had the pre-fab grille wall of Sculpta-Grille as mentioned in posts above.
Note that colors as seen on the printed page and on screen come from different technologies, so one must expect some differences in what one sees. The producers of the different media also may have different opinions and objectives in making colors brighter or diming them according to their marketing purposes. Sad to say, there is not ‘one color fits all.’ And when you get into the color of a video/TV image in either the NTSC or the new ATSC American color systems, it is yet again a whole new ball game!
TO: All Theatres Buffs: Good News re our AVALON THEATRE
Thanks to the eagle eyes of Hugh Swofford comes this:
According to a story in todayâ€\s Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel at: http://www.jsonline.com/bym/news/mar05/308855.asp
The 1929 AVALON on Milwaukeeâ€\s south side in the former village of Bay View, is in the process of being purchased by a local investor, and it looks as though the Landmark chain of movie houses, which includes the ORIENTAL and the DOWNER in Milw., will be the operator of this ‘atmosphericâ€\ type cinema which closed five years ago. After several false starts, it now appears that a deal in earnest, not relying upon a land contract, will come to be, and if so we will then have a grand total of 2 operating movie palaces remaining in the city, out of the 20 we once had (this excludes the DOWNER and the TIMES and the remodeled TOSA (the ROSEBUD CINEMA) which are not really palaces).
I note with favor the kind wishes of Jay Hollis, the proprietor of the ROSEBUD, when he graciously bows out of the Bay View picture by canceling plans for his ROSEBUD-SOUTH that was to be built but a few blocks south of the AVALON, yet gives the AVALON best wishes for success. Rumor has it that he did try to purchase the AVALON, but the price disclosed in the article mentioned, was too high for his means.
This now brings up the question of whether or not the Wurlitzer pipe organ that provided so many fine concerts in the theatre, and which had to be removed just a few months ago due to deteriorating conditions in there, will now be reinstalled to once again entertain so many in Dairyland Theatre Organ Societyâ€\s annual concerts. It would be an irony that it took the removal of the organ to possibly galvanize outsiders into seriously contemplating the future of the ornate theatre, only to have to spend to now return the organ, if that is to be. Let us hope that the new owner will be sympathetic to Dairylandâ€\s interests, unlike the RIVERSIDE‘s management which reportedly demands upwards of $10,000 in advance for Dairyland to perform their own organ in there!
Speaking of pipe organs, Dairyland has just mailed a flyer telling of their next concert to be held in Sheboygan, Sunday, April 3rd at 3PM. It is to be in a converted movie palace which is now the WEILL CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS at 826 N. 6th St., Sheboygan WI. The talented Clark Wilson (remember him for his sojourn at the long-gone Pipe Organ Pizza on Oklahoma Ave.?) will provide a mixed show at $18 general admission at the door, day of show. For the first time, they will also offer a chartered bus departing from four park&ride lots, two in Milwaukee, and one each in Kenosha and Racine, for only $20 including ticket; that is a $2 bus trip, almost as cheap as local transit fare! E-mail me for any additional information desired or phone the Organ Piper Pizza, which is selling cheaper advance sale tickets, at: 414-529-1177.
Let us keep our fingers crossed as to a brighter future for the venerable AVALON. I will be contacting Mr. Barczak regarding historic references about the theatre, in case he is interested in a goodly restoration, so if anyone wants to volunteer to help in that effort, possibly by forming a Friends of the Avalon, do let me know and I will inform him. Possibly he will be encouraged by outside interest. I once sent such a documented proposal to the current owner, but he did not even reply.
‘Theatricallyâ€\ yours, Jim ()
P.O. Box 14455, West Allis, WI 53214
I can’t say if Kurt Mangel is responsible for the work on the BUFFALO PERFORMING ARTS CENTER all by himself, but I do know that this is but one of many theatres he has helped along, most notably the UPTOWN in Chicago some years back.
The previous two posts echo what so many of us ‘theatres buffs’ have experienced: the last visit shortly before demolition of a once beautiful theatre. These are favorite accounts at the ‘Slide Bashes’ (shows after the banquet) at the annual conventions of the Theatre Historical Society in a different city every summer. They are called “CONCLAVES” and are detailed on thier web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org where you click on Conclaves. I am not a photographer like many of the guys who show their slides at the conventions, but I have many bittersweet memories of being among the last to tour a theatre before it became rubble, but yet regret the far greater number I had never seen before each one’s fateful day. I once thought of combining my stories of such melancholy tours, but I am afraid that it would be too melancholy to read! :(
I spoke too soon regarding sending photos to CinemaTOUR since CinemaTREASURES is not now accepting photos. It turns out that CinemaTOUR is in the same boat now: Adam Martin, the honcho there, says in the current FORUMS (www.CinemaTour.com) that he cannot accept any more photos for the foreseeable future. It seems that he is 20,000 (!) photos behind, so no more for now. I will ask Theatre Historical Society if their limited server space can accomodate BoxOfficeBill’s ROXY photo, but we can’t count on that. I guess that lots of photos just take up too much expensive space, more’s the pity!
That’s interesting information, BoxOfficeBill, about the last draping of the ROXY, and I, for one, have never seen a photo of that era you mention as being in Dec. of ‘52. Since it has not been possible to post photos here for years now, perhaps you can scan that photo in the Theatre Catalog you mention and submit it to Cinema Tour at '’ and maybe that way we can see it there through a link later posted here.
The WARNER in Milwaukee and its kissing cousin you mention in Erie PA, were both opened in May of 1931, and the PARAMOUNT in Aurora was a splendid example of R&R’s ability to merge delicate French rococco influences with their Art Deco in a warm and wonderful way. Many architects made Deco hard and cold, and thereby lost its appeal in the setting of a theatre that is supposed to be warm and inviting. I have not seen any of R&R’s court houses or other public buildings done in Art Deco, but I wonder if they were somehow able to continue the warmth in such venues. The reason R&R used “traditional styles, usually French in origin” is because that was their ‘signature’ style! Any survey of their theatres will reveal their trademark signature of the stylized sunburst of King Louis XIVth, the Sun King. They did work in other styles such as Spanish in the case of the Chicago UPTOWN, but they clearly prefered French — and that is what their clients wanted too! After the death of the principals, the firm did move into the so-called International Style in such as the FISHER remodeling in Detroit, but they still maintained their signature opulent, yet light touch characteristic of the French influence. I am happy they did.
Even though the RIALTO SQUARE is not my favorite R&R work, the fact remains that it is a wonderful and beautiful palace, and I certainly hope it long endures. I especially like the illuminated ‘grape clusters’ ‘fountain’ in the rotunda. That rotunda may have inspired Ahlschlager for it is certainly grand. I only wish the equally grand original drperies could have been reporduced for it, since the originals in photos are wonderfully done. It was the Milwaukee firm of the then Mid-West Scenic Co. which made the replacement decorative draperies, but I am not entirely pleased with their vacuum-formed plastic gilded to imitate the appliqued and embroidered pendants on the originals. Their achievement is innovative, and it is a lot better than the plain panels so often seen today —if they replace the draperies at all. Still, I feel that plastic is out of place in such forms and venues. As to R&R not being innovative in the late 20s, it is too bad that I cannot post on this site the opening day photos of their WARNER here in Milaukee (now called the GRAND). This was the finest of their medium scale works, if I may be forgiven some local bias.
Yes, Scott, the lobbies are entirely different, but I still maintain that the auditoriums are more than casually similar; of course, you are entitled to your opinion. Frankly, I don’t consider either of them to be the acme of R&R’s works, but then that is just my opinion, a matter of taste, and as the old saying goes: there is no accounting for taste.
More likely a bleed through of stains on the back of the original.
I am glad that Messrs. Greene and Parks have set the record straight; it is nice to have this “misinformation” corrected. When I heard this some years ago from a source I don’t remember, I had taken it with a grain of salt, but had always wondered if there was a bit of truth there. Apparently it originated from a competitor or other disgruntled one. I hope EverGreene’s achievements long continue — especially if they involve restoring our theatres!
I’ve been told that EverGreene is run and was founded by a renegade former employee of the famous Conrad Schmitt studios outside of Milwaukee (who have artistically restored hundreds of theatres and other buildings), and that they taught him everything he knows, but that the results of EverGreene’s work is nowhere up to Conrad Schmitt’s standards and specifications.
Anyone know if any of this is true?
Most movie palaces had the holes in the ceiling for “lines” as Warren describes them (except Atmospherics) and these were capped with small discs of metal which were wired to the plaster struts that held up the ceiling. They were painted right along with the ceiling, of course, but if one looks closely, he can often see them still in place, sometimes dangling a bit as the wire loosened over the years. Their intent was really to lower at least 4 such “lines” at a time in order to hoist a scaffold with temporary winches in the attic to effect cleaning or repainting. It is true that a single line could be used to hoist a single man in a ‘Bosun’s chair’, but the main intent was for a two or three man scaffold since that would require less positioning as they moved across a ceiling. There is a photo of one being used in the St. Louis FOX in a David Naylor book.
“dwodeyla” could be quite right. All that is known for sure is that the maker of Sculpta-Grille, Harvey Design Workshop of Lynbrook, L.I., N.Y., went out of business with the astounding increase in the price of petroleum (from which plastics are made) with the Arab oil embargo in 1973. What had been $7 the square foot in basic white in quantity, rose to an estimated $25 the square foot within a year, a hefty price even today!
The reason that the ceiling in the auditorium was repained white from the original blue, is that it must be a reflector of the white metal halide flood lights hidden behind the building facades along the horizon line in order for these up-lights to cast upon the ceiling to reflect enough light down upon the congregation in order for them to be able to read their Bibles during the discourses; remember that there is no original bright lighting in an ‘atmospheric’ movie palace. Other lights in blue are turned ‘on’ when these white ones are turned ‘off’ and then they turn the stars and clouds on and people see it much as it was. It would seem that the blue paint on the ceiling is no great loss when compared to the gem that was restored and survives today (and the ceiling had to be repainted in any case, since rain leaks during the years of darkness before the Witnesses took over the place, had produced many visible damaged sections of the plaster ‘sky.’
The MIRAMAR has dire financial straits currently as disclosed in their news report here on CT at: http://cinematreasures.org/news/12937_0_1_0_C/
Perhaps an ‘angel’ will appear before the May deadline.
It should be noted that this theatre was never a movie palace, and that the interior that existed at opening no longer exists and today contains virtually no decor. It cannot be claimed as an architectural icon, but it does have local historical and usefulness merits.
Also, if someone does want to make an appointment to approach a university official, be sure to coordinate it here on this site and anywhere else devotees of the BP might meet, so that there are not many people making appointments, which could be perceived as a furtive assualt on LIU’s legal options to direct their property in the public eye, or simply as misguided individuals speaking of that which they do not know. Likewise, if you determine to make an appointment, take only one other person along with you, if anyone, since more might appear to them to be an intimidation tactic. If you have formed a group, certainly bring along a LIST of their names and addresses to display the fact that you are not alone in this endeavor of good will, but DO NOT make it look like a petition, which and can be very unsettling to administrators and likely to turn them off completely. Save any petition drives for much later in the ‘game.’
If you can first establish a contact on a lower level who has access to the current thinking of those in charge, then you can find out from this person whom to contact and what is a propitious time. Don’t waste your time talking off the ear of the janitor or bldg. super who may sympathize but have no power to contact or influence the president’s office where the decision will likely be made. In all these cases you must be careful not to waste their time by too many meetings or contacts; they are, in reality, a business, and time is money to them too.
Remember, short of legal condemnation of the property by the government under eminent domain laws, there is no way to force them to relinquish their property to others, and I do NOT advocate the currently fashionable misuse of this law to take private property for other private use! That might take the theatre, but leave a permanent ugly stain on its name.
Since the PARAMOUNT is privately owned by LIU, may I suggest that it would be prudent to first determine in a gentle way what their position is on the theatre’s future, since previous comments indicate that they are interested in keeping it as one of their properties, and may be willing to return portions of it to a partial theatrical use. It would be premature and perhaps offensive to them to start an outside effort about their property without their consent and involvement. IF at a later date they seem to oppose any restoration of the auditorium, then it MIGHT be feasible to start a petition drive or other influence upon them, but not before all courteous dialogue with them has been exhausted. Remember that the best way to create an enemy is to step upon his rights, and schools also have property rights. One can appeal to their civic spirit in the interests of the community, but one cannot dismiss them as unconcerned if they do not immediately see your wishes as the plans they ‘must’ adopt. IF you have a large amount of money to offer them to purchase the building and they accept, fine, but do not presume to tell them that they must sell or otherwise handle their property in the way outsiders dictate.
In this regard it might be possible to form an INFORMAL (non-incorporated) group to approach LIU administration to express your devotion to the FORMER theatre, and your wish to help them reprogram the space in a way harmonious to its decor and potential. Since any degree of restoration is going to be costly, they will see your assistance best as as funds raiser. If you can form a credible group to pledge to rent the auditorium for some events once stage and seating are restored, then you may give them a realistic gleam of hope in an otherwise confusing time. Make it clear that you realize that the regents or board of directors of the university expect them to make the most profitable use of the property (always refer to it by the name they use, not as the ‘Brooklyn Paramount’) and that you seek to help them find a profitable use harmonious with BOTH university needs and community needs. Universities are usually quite sensitive to local views and needs, but always remember that this is NOT a tax funded institution, but a private one not required to expose all their financial resources and options with the public, so never imply that you expect them to show you their books.
It might prove helpful to remember that this is but one of their ‘campuses’ and that therefore it need not contain educational programs perhaps better suited to other sites. How much of a problem is classroom space for them? If it is not critical in the former Paramount, then perhaps they could devote it to community and university events requiring a large seating area. Where do they hold graduations now and is it as noteworthy as the restored Paramount would be? They do have a performing arts program; what is the nature of the facility they now use and is that adequate compared with the former theatre? Can you find someone who will donate his time to act as an unpaid consultant in the adaptation of the theatrical aspects of the building to new uses? The more of their research you can do for them before they enter into serious decisions, the better your chances that they will listen to your ideas and take on your approach to the structure. Be ready to have YOUR lawyer draw up a MODEL demising agreement to separate the former theatre portions of the building from the upper floors of offices should LIU decide that that would be a good agreement. Such might also forsee removing the cafeteria from the lobby and other uses now in the balconies. These would presume that you have a viable plan or client to take control of those former theatre spaces at a proft or at least not a loss to the university, assuming they wish to divest themselves of the former theatre portions. You might include a back-out clause allowing them to retake control of the entire structure if the client/operator you propose actually fails within a stated period of time. In this way they will not be seen to be taking all the risk from the insurance, upkeep and profit standpoints.
Should you get the impression that they are open to a possible purchase plan or demising agreement for the theatre portion, then it is time to incorporate so as to collect funds in an open and legal way and then to take a copy of that incorporation certificate to show to them. But first of all is the quiet and kindly expression of deep interest in their property AS WELL AS your equally deep interest in the welfare of the university so valuable to the community since 1926, almost the year the BP opened!
Best Wishes to all.
Many cities such as Milwaukee microfilmed most old blueprints before discarding them and sent the films to rented archives deep in the empty salt mines out west; did New York do something similar? It may be necessary to cultivate a ‘friend’ in the city’s building inspection department to learn what may be confidential. Conceiveably, one could then pay to have a film returned and duplicated or have new prints made off of the film.
As Bruce points out from the print he acquired, it IS possible to redraw the prints from what remains and from photos, but is IS quite expensive!
Ken, thanks for the correction. I’ve got to learn to keep my rabbits all in a row. Glad to know that one is still hopping down the bunny trail, even if it is now a different ‘burrow’ in a different borough.
The ALSO KNOWN line at top should also read “THE BUNNY”
Sad to say, there is a precedent for this as also seen in New York. In Buffalo the former LOVEJOY theatre on Lovejoy street, became the Lovejoy Community Swimming Pool, as seen on pages 90 and 91 of the book SILENT SCREENS. In that situation the building was completely gutted with the auditorium floor removed and a large swimming pool in its place, and the sight of the roof trusses with skylights cut through the roof above them. There is a photo of the BUNNY on page 26 of AMERICAN PICTURE PALACES.
The exact pattern in the grille wall shown behind the concession stand of the DORT MALL CINEMA in Flint MI, as shown in the photo referred to in the link in the post above, is not in the 1970 Sculpta-Grille catalog as it exists in the Archive of the Theatre Historical Society in Illinois. No doubt there were several firms making grillework for buildings at that time.
I hate to say it, but if, finally, we cannot bring back the glorious KINGS, then we would do well to bring back the equally glorious BROOKLYN PARAMOUNT. The photos of it in Ben Hall’s BEST REMAINING SEATS reveal a wonderland of opulence, and typically, the sumptuous ‘Bird of Paradise’ house curtain will be among the most difficult and costly artifact to reproduce. We hate to trade off palaces, but if it must be, this is a fitting trade.
It would appear that at least 4 of Genreal Drive-In’s cinemas were designed in the early 60s by Maurice D. Sornick of Massapequa Park, NY as a template design that was then executed by local architects under contract, in order to operate in states where Mr. Sornick was not licensed. Those that are known are: The CINEMA WESTLANE in Milwaukee, the CINEMA NORTHLAND in Jennings, MO; the CINEMA BIG TOWN in Mesquite, TX; and the CINEMA SOUTH COUNTY in St. Louis, all razed. The word CINEMA always preceed because the template design was a partial pre-fabricated and featured a roof sign of ten-foot-tall box letters in the word CINEMA which was followed in the nature of the local name sign that the owner wanted. Each of these also had the pre-fab grille wall of Sculpta-Grille as mentioned in posts above.
Note that colors as seen on the printed page and on screen come from different technologies, so one must expect some differences in what one sees. The producers of the different media also may have different opinions and objectives in making colors brighter or diming them according to their marketing purposes. Sad to say, there is not ‘one color fits all.’ And when you get into the color of a video/TV image in either the NTSC or the new ATSC American color systems, it is yet again a whole new ball game!
FROM: JIM RANKIN, MILWAUKEE, MARCH 12, 2005
TO: All Theatres Buffs: Good News re our AVALON THEATRE
Thanks to the eagle eyes of Hugh Swofford comes this:
According to a story in todayâ€\s Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel at:
http://www.jsonline.com/bym/news/mar05/308855.asp
The 1929 AVALON on Milwaukeeâ€\s south side in the former village of Bay View, is in the process of being purchased by a local investor, and it looks as though the Landmark chain of movie houses, which includes the ORIENTAL and the DOWNER in Milw., will be the operator of this ‘atmosphericâ€\ type cinema which closed five years ago. After several false starts, it now appears that a deal in earnest, not relying upon a land contract, will come to be, and if so we will then have a grand total of 2 operating movie palaces remaining in the city, out of the 20 we once had (this excludes the DOWNER and the TIMES and the remodeled TOSA (the ROSEBUD CINEMA) which are not really palaces).
I note with favor the kind wishes of Jay Hollis, the proprietor of the ROSEBUD, when he graciously bows out of the Bay View picture by canceling plans for his ROSEBUD-SOUTH that was to be built but a few blocks south of the AVALON, yet gives the AVALON best wishes for success. Rumor has it that he did try to purchase the AVALON, but the price disclosed in the article mentioned, was too high for his means.
This now brings up the question of whether or not the Wurlitzer pipe organ that provided so many fine concerts in the theatre, and which had to be removed just a few months ago due to deteriorating conditions in there, will now be reinstalled to once again entertain so many in Dairyland Theatre Organ Societyâ€\s annual concerts. It would be an irony that it took the removal of the organ to possibly galvanize outsiders into seriously contemplating the future of the ornate theatre, only to have to spend to now return the organ, if that is to be. Let us hope that the new owner will be sympathetic to Dairylandâ€\s interests, unlike the RIVERSIDE‘s management which reportedly demands upwards of $10,000 in advance for Dairyland to perform their own organ in there!
Speaking of pipe organs, Dairyland has just mailed a flyer telling of their next concert to be held in Sheboygan, Sunday, April 3rd at 3PM. It is to be in a converted movie palace which is now the WEILL CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS at 826 N. 6th St., Sheboygan WI. The talented Clark Wilson (remember him for his sojourn at the long-gone Pipe Organ Pizza on Oklahoma Ave.?) will provide a mixed show at $18 general admission at the door, day of show. For the first time, they will also offer a chartered bus departing from four park&ride lots, two in Milwaukee, and one each in Kenosha and Racine, for only $20 including ticket; that is a $2 bus trip, almost as cheap as local transit fare! E-mail me for any additional information desired or phone the Organ Piper Pizza, which is selling cheaper advance sale tickets, at: 414-529-1177.
Let us keep our fingers crossed as to a brighter future for the venerable AVALON. I will be contacting Mr. Barczak regarding historic references about the theatre, in case he is interested in a goodly restoration, so if anyone wants to volunteer to help in that effort, possibly by forming a Friends of the Avalon, do let me know and I will inform him. Possibly he will be encouraged by outside interest. I once sent such a documented proposal to the current owner, but he did not even reply.
‘Theatricallyâ€\ yours, Jim ()
P.O. Box 14455, West Allis, WI 53214
I can’t say if Kurt Mangel is responsible for the work on the BUFFALO PERFORMING ARTS CENTER all by himself, but I do know that this is but one of many theatres he has helped along, most notably the UPTOWN in Chicago some years back.
The previous two posts echo what so many of us ‘theatres buffs’ have experienced: the last visit shortly before demolition of a once beautiful theatre. These are favorite accounts at the ‘Slide Bashes’ (shows after the banquet) at the annual conventions of the Theatre Historical Society in a different city every summer. They are called “CONCLAVES” and are detailed on thier web site: www.HistoricTheatres.org where you click on Conclaves. I am not a photographer like many of the guys who show their slides at the conventions, but I have many bittersweet memories of being among the last to tour a theatre before it became rubble, but yet regret the far greater number I had never seen before each one’s fateful day. I once thought of combining my stories of such melancholy tours, but I am afraid that it would be too melancholy to read! :(
I spoke too soon regarding sending photos to CinemaTOUR since CinemaTREASURES is not now accepting photos. It turns out that CinemaTOUR is in the same boat now: Adam Martin, the honcho there, says in the current FORUMS (www.CinemaTour.com) that he cannot accept any more photos for the foreseeable future. It seems that he is 20,000 (!) photos behind, so no more for now. I will ask Theatre Historical Society if their limited server space can accomodate BoxOfficeBill’s ROXY photo, but we can’t count on that. I guess that lots of photos just take up too much expensive space, more’s the pity!
That’s interesting information, BoxOfficeBill, about the last draping of the ROXY, and I, for one, have never seen a photo of that era you mention as being in Dec. of ‘52. Since it has not been possible to post photos here for years now, perhaps you can scan that photo in the Theatre Catalog you mention and submit it to Cinema Tour at '’ and maybe that way we can see it there through a link later posted here.