Peter, thanks for telling me about the sign. I really don’t recall seeing it. What I DO remember is the lack of interest exibited by the civic and political powers that be over the closure. On that point, it will be interesting to see how the current bunch responds to the Rigewood Theatre’s landmarks campaign. Perhaps we will learn a bit in the next Ridgewood Times.
Warren, thanks again for the fine photo. In addition to getting the season wrong, the article mis-names the street after which the movie house was named. It is, of course Madison Street, NOT Madison Ave. Coming from a local publication, this is a pretty big gaff.
When the Madison closed in 1978, I was working in Bushwick as the Community Board district manager. In that capacity, I worked very closely with the civic leadership of Ridgewood since the two communities shared many issues and problems. Looking back, what surprises me is the lack of impact the closing of the theater had upon the two communities at the time. While there certainly were many other critical issues to be faced during this very difficult period – only one year removed from the devastating 1977 blackout – you would have thought the closing of this once magnificant palace would have caused more of an uproar. Yet I don’t recall anything like that. Did I miss something – or did the Madison really go out with a whimper?
ECR, the AIA stands for the American Institute of Architects. They produce the gold standard – or at least ONE of the gold standards – of architectual surveys in NYC. It’s definitely worth the price – and I need to buy a more recent edition.
Regarding the scope of landmark designation, I think the best that the Ridgewood can realistically hope for is exterior protection. Even if the movie house had not been divided, its less than extraordinary decor would probably rule out anything more. Besides protecting the facade, exterior designation would be useful in leveraging the future cinematic and/or theatrical use of at least a portion of the old theater. Economically, this is probably the most we can hope for.
LuisV, I have read your fine posts re the Loews King with great interest. You are a terrific reporter/commentator. Despite the BP’s posturing, Marty Markowitz is probably the only real hope to make this dream a reality – especially since we will probably be stuck with him for four more years. Also, at the risk of being accused – probably correctly – of pushing pork, the renovation of this palace could very well be included as part of NYC’s Federally funded stimulus package. I’m not sure how much besides Marty’s BS makes it “shovel ready”, but it is worth being pursued.
Finally, between posts, my wife and I took in – alas, by DVD – the latest Batman movie. WOW!! I was especially impressed that the secondary roles were both cast and written from strength. Talk soon.
Since “landmark designation” has been derided on this page because it did not save the Academy of Music and Luchows, I just have one question: Were either of these two properties ever so designated? In researching this item, I have come up with a resounding NO! Specifically, the 1988 edition of the AIA guide – the latest one in my possession – does not make any landmarks reference to the Academy but notes that the Commission had dithered with the interior and exterior designation of Luchows since the mid 1970’s without taking any action. By that time, the restaurant had been closed – and fire damaged – for a number of years. (The reference, in fact, appears in the Guide’s Necrology section.) In addition, the 1992 listing of NYC designated landmarks makes absolutely no reference to either building. Considering that NYU demolished both by 1996, this did not leave much of an opening for the glacially lengthy designation process to occur.
What this means is that these two gems were destroyed not despite their landmarks designation but – to a significant degree – because they never enjoyed that protection. While the Commission’s chronic inability and/or unwillingness to adequately address legitimate designation requests – see e.g., the old Huntington Hartford Museum – is both real and quite notorious, that is an entirely different question than the inadequacy of the protection provided to properties officially designated as landmarks.
These facts clearly underline the critical importance of aggessively suppporting official landmarks designation for the Ridgewood. While the road to secure this will probably be long and not a little frustrating – the Commission’s capacity to dither can never be overstated – it represents the best relistic hope of saving the old theatre in recognizable form – or at least leveraging the community’s ability to effectively negotiate with the owner.
I strongly second LuisV’s comments. Landmarking has made a positive difference in the vast majority of instances where it has been applied. In addition, the current landmarks preservation climate may be beneficial to the Ridgewood since the Landmarks Commission has been under fire for ignoring the outer boroughs – particularly Queens – and is being pressured to remedy this problem. Just recently, the process of landmarking a significant residential area in Ridgewood commenced, and the same trend could very well also ultimately envelop the Ridgewood.
To that end, this is certainly the time to enlist the support of the Ridgewood civic groups who have been pushing the designation of the residential district to also support the old theatre. It will be interesting to see how those groups react to the Ridgewood Times piece.
It is ironic how bad economic times can save historic buildings from the wrecking ball. Prior to NYC’s fiscal crisis in the 1970’s, the Tweed Courthouse and the original Emmigrant Savings Bank (now the site of the City’s wedding chapel!) were slated for demolition. The actual plan was to level them in order to provide a “Grand Promonade” between City Hall and those magnificent buildings at Federal Plaza. (Mussollini would have loved it.) But the fiscal wolf came to the door, and the rest is history.
So perhaps our unfolding time of troubles may provide a silver lining to the Ridgewood. Let’s hope so.
The Ridgewood Times article was certainly a pleasant surprise and provides some hope for the future. It should definitely inspire those of you who have not yet done so to sign the “Save the Ridgewood” petition, a link to which appears on this page. Currently, about 360 names have been secured, which is good but not great. A push to raise that number to at least 500 would be very helpful at this juncture.
Given the Ridgewood’s not very ornate interior, I was surprised that the Landmarks Commission’s statement dwelt considerable attention to such interior issues as sight lines and decor. This could underline the preliminary nature of the process and imply that the Commission is just beginning to focus on the building’s landmark potential. In any event, very few interior areas are ever landmarked and both the Ridgewood’s distinguished exterior and fascinating history clearly provide more than sufficient justification for landmark consideration. (A concise summary of the comments contained on this page could provide a compelling brief on behalf of designation.)
Peter, the Ridgewood looked exactly as you described it when I visited the site about a month or so ago. So, it seems as if the property is not being actively marketed. Given the state of the economy, this is not very surprising.
One last point. You may be interested to know that the Queens Crap blog, which was affectionately cited on the Keith Richmond Hill page, has been regularly promoting the “Save the Ridgewood” petition on its home page. So, kudos to them.
J.D., hopefully they only added a cook who could prepare Indian cuisine. By the looks of things on my last walk through, both the Italian and Indian interests seem quite secure. So there is hope for the future – at least here. Hope the same is ultimately true for the old movie palace.
This represents the first anniversary of the day I stumbled across this amazing web page and entered my first comment. Alas, this also marks the one year date of the last entry submitted for the old Winnie. So I guess I’m pretty much alone in remembering this small movie house that provided much enjoyment during my early years.
Anyhow, it’s been a lot of fun reading all the comments over the past year and making my own modest contributions. It’s also been great meeting Bway, Peter Koch, Lost Memory. Anniegirl, Warren and many others along the way.
Looking forward to a great 2009 at Cinema Treasures.
This whole newspaper listing thing reminds me of that sequence in the book and movie On The Beach when mysterious radio signals begin to eminate from nuclear devastated San Francisco. The hopes raised by the possible survival of someone are, of course, dashed when it is discovered that the enigmatic “messages” were only being caused by an inanimate object hitting against an open transmitter.
The probable mundane reality here is the newspapers' policy to refer readers to the theater’s telepnone number when (1) no movie schedule is received and (2) no representative from the last recorded owner has officially intructed the paper to cease publication. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if even if the papers were informed of the Ridgewood’s demise, they would still continue to list the theater since they had not yet received any official directive to stop. (Newspapers have their bureaucratic rules too!)
Given the current economic downturn and the probable difficulty of finding any longterm buyers, it would make sense for persons interested in leasing out a portion of the theater for short term purposes to contact the owner. This would both provide a little cash flow and forstall the otherwise idle building’s deterioration. So Michael Perlman’s point is well taken.
Last Spring, my wife and I were passing through Oakland and just, by accident, happened to come upon this wonderful theater, which was going through its final stages of exterior renovation. It looked stunning. I am so happy that the end to this – I am sure – tedious process is finally approaching. Kudos to the people of Oakland, who know how to preserve their gems. Also hope the place is at least occasionally used for cinematic purposes.
I think the fact that the Bushwick is being positively used as a school helps ensure that it is well maintained and that any defacement is promptly addressed and corrected. This is a great win – win situation.
Correction. It was Slumdog – not Slumlord – Millionaire that I viewed at this great theater yesterday. (Hopefully, the protagonist will not turn into a slumlord after reaping the profits from the game show – but that is the plot of another – and far more depressing – sequel.)
Spent a great evening yesterday enjoying Slumlord Millionaire at this lovely theater. While waiting for the flick, I caught a few minutes of Gone With the Wind which was being telecast in the lounge. This movie house remains a real treasure!
I wouldn’t place THAT Starbucks on the endangered list. While it is situated slightly north of Greenpoint’s main commercial district, it’s right next to a buzy – at least for the G train – subway station and in very close proximity to the very gentrified Greenpoint Historic district. These residents surely constitute a strong customer base – just as would have been the case for the Chopin had it survived. My guess is that this place only closes if another Starbucks opens in a more centralized part of Greenpoint.
By the way, the property now occupied by the McDonald restaurant at the Manhattan/Greenpoint Ave. corner once hosted an American Legion Hall and possibly some other government related functions. Architecturally speaking, it was quite compatible with the movie house. This gave the block a strongly “American” appearance.
LM, I think the night club is actually situated on the second floor, which was never part of the movie house. It hosted a Bingo Hall for many years, including the period when the American/Chopin was operating as a movie house.
Ken, I believe the Starbucks is only situated – at least for public use – in the old lobby area. The main theater area is either not being used or is serving as a storage area. Beyond that, I cannot add anything.
While a Starbucks is probably preferable to a Burger King or – a once co-occupant – Roy Rogers, it is no replacement for the wonderful ambience of the American/Chopin. As I previously noted, this theater could have become a quirky art house if it had been able to stay alive for a few more years and benefitted from the gentrification of Greenpoint. But that was not to be.
Any other comments from former American/Chopin fans is really appreciated.
Just took a rather depressing walk past this old theater. The Mexican restaurant replacement for Jahns has not yet opened, though the new Italian-Indian replacement for Salerno’s seems to be doing a pretty good business. For the record, it is named Sorrento and appears to retain Saterno’s basic ambience. How the food tastes is anyone’s guess.
The old movie house was doing pretty good business, with a rather paltry flea market in the old lobby – the big flea market day is Sunday – and a full house for Bingo. But I really got the impression that this will not last for long.
Hopefully, the Richmond Hill Historical people will come to the rescue here.
After reading the reports of the “Ridgewood’s resurrection”, I visited the site earlier today. My findings were not very reassuring.
While no obvious changes have occurred to the lobby and facade, there was absolutely no indication of any planned activity. If the theater did plan to open on Sundays, you would think that some notice of this would be advertised. But there was nothing to be seen. Instead, I only saw a plastic chair and a box of toys that were placed in the outside lobby, behind the metal gates. This just seemed like stuff that had been cleared out of the theater and would be disposed of during the Sanitation Dept’s. next visit.
There were no “For Sale” signs exhibited anywhere at this site. This means either that the owner has – for now – taken the property off the market or is finalizing a re-sale deal with a would be owner. You just can’t read too much into this.
So, unless anyone has any other solid information on the Ridgewood’s future, this seems as murky as ever.
Sorry to provide a less than rosy report, but facts are facts.
I was about to write that “at least Salerno’s is still there” until the recent comment rudely informed me otherwise. This is really a time to feel badly about this neighborhood. Hopefully, the Richmond Hill will not meet the same fate.
Warren, thanks for your last comment. I guess the architect faced a real problem that provided a dearth of length and width – but a tremendous amount of height, and was able to turn a lemon into lemonade. Yet another example of McElfatrick’s creativity.
Yes Ed, the old Austin lights continue to glow in a lounge located just to the right of the entrance. While sitting there, you can also view tapes of old movies as you wait for the feature to begin.
Peter, thanks for telling me about the sign. I really don’t recall seeing it. What I DO remember is the lack of interest exibited by the civic and political powers that be over the closure. On that point, it will be interesting to see how the current bunch responds to the Rigewood Theatre’s landmarks campaign. Perhaps we will learn a bit in the next Ridgewood Times.
Warren, thanks again for the fine photo. In addition to getting the season wrong, the article mis-names the street after which the movie house was named. It is, of course Madison Street, NOT Madison Ave. Coming from a local publication, this is a pretty big gaff.
When the Madison closed in 1978, I was working in Bushwick as the Community Board district manager. In that capacity, I worked very closely with the civic leadership of Ridgewood since the two communities shared many issues and problems. Looking back, what surprises me is the lack of impact the closing of the theater had upon the two communities at the time. While there certainly were many other critical issues to be faced during this very difficult period – only one year removed from the devastating 1977 blackout – you would have thought the closing of this once magnificant palace would have caused more of an uproar. Yet I don’t recall anything like that. Did I miss something – or did the Madison really go out with a whimper?
Thanks Bway, though it looks pretty brutal.
ECR, the AIA stands for the American Institute of Architects. They produce the gold standard – or at least ONE of the gold standards – of architectual surveys in NYC. It’s definitely worth the price – and I need to buy a more recent edition.
Regarding the scope of landmark designation, I think the best that the Ridgewood can realistically hope for is exterior protection. Even if the movie house had not been divided, its less than extraordinary decor would probably rule out anything more. Besides protecting the facade, exterior designation would be useful in leveraging the future cinematic and/or theatrical use of at least a portion of the old theater. Economically, this is probably the most we can hope for.
LuisV, I have read your fine posts re the Loews King with great interest. You are a terrific reporter/commentator. Despite the BP’s posturing, Marty Markowitz is probably the only real hope to make this dream a reality – especially since we will probably be stuck with him for four more years. Also, at the risk of being accused – probably correctly – of pushing pork, the renovation of this palace could very well be included as part of NYC’s Federally funded stimulus package. I’m not sure how much besides Marty’s BS makes it “shovel ready”, but it is worth being pursued.
Finally, between posts, my wife and I took in – alas, by DVD – the latest Batman movie. WOW!! I was especially impressed that the secondary roles were both cast and written from strength. Talk soon.
Since “landmark designation” has been derided on this page because it did not save the Academy of Music and Luchows, I just have one question: Were either of these two properties ever so designated? In researching this item, I have come up with a resounding NO! Specifically, the 1988 edition of the AIA guide – the latest one in my possession – does not make any landmarks reference to the Academy but notes that the Commission had dithered with the interior and exterior designation of Luchows since the mid 1970’s without taking any action. By that time, the restaurant had been closed – and fire damaged – for a number of years. (The reference, in fact, appears in the Guide’s Necrology section.) In addition, the 1992 listing of NYC designated landmarks makes absolutely no reference to either building. Considering that NYU demolished both by 1996, this did not leave much of an opening for the glacially lengthy designation process to occur.
What this means is that these two gems were destroyed not despite their landmarks designation but – to a significant degree – because they never enjoyed that protection. While the Commission’s chronic inability and/or unwillingness to adequately address legitimate designation requests – see e.g., the old Huntington Hartford Museum – is both real and quite notorious, that is an entirely different question than the inadequacy of the protection provided to properties officially designated as landmarks.
These facts clearly underline the critical importance of aggessively suppporting official landmarks designation for the Ridgewood. While the road to secure this will probably be long and not a little frustrating – the Commission’s capacity to dither can never be overstated – it represents the best relistic hope of saving the old theatre in recognizable form – or at least leveraging the community’s ability to effectively negotiate with the owner.
I strongly second LuisV’s comments. Landmarking has made a positive difference in the vast majority of instances where it has been applied. In addition, the current landmarks preservation climate may be beneficial to the Ridgewood since the Landmarks Commission has been under fire for ignoring the outer boroughs – particularly Queens – and is being pressured to remedy this problem. Just recently, the process of landmarking a significant residential area in Ridgewood commenced, and the same trend could very well also ultimately envelop the Ridgewood.
To that end, this is certainly the time to enlist the support of the Ridgewood civic groups who have been pushing the designation of the residential district to also support the old theatre. It will be interesting to see how those groups react to the Ridgewood Times piece.
It is ironic how bad economic times can save historic buildings from the wrecking ball. Prior to NYC’s fiscal crisis in the 1970’s, the Tweed Courthouse and the original Emmigrant Savings Bank (now the site of the City’s wedding chapel!) were slated for demolition. The actual plan was to level them in order to provide a “Grand Promonade” between City Hall and those magnificent buildings at Federal Plaza. (Mussollini would have loved it.) But the fiscal wolf came to the door, and the rest is history.
So perhaps our unfolding time of troubles may provide a silver lining to the Ridgewood. Let’s hope so.
The Ridgewood Times article was certainly a pleasant surprise and provides some hope for the future. It should definitely inspire those of you who have not yet done so to sign the “Save the Ridgewood” petition, a link to which appears on this page. Currently, about 360 names have been secured, which is good but not great. A push to raise that number to at least 500 would be very helpful at this juncture.
Given the Ridgewood’s not very ornate interior, I was surprised that the Landmarks Commission’s statement dwelt considerable attention to such interior issues as sight lines and decor. This could underline the preliminary nature of the process and imply that the Commission is just beginning to focus on the building’s landmark potential. In any event, very few interior areas are ever landmarked and both the Ridgewood’s distinguished exterior and fascinating history clearly provide more than sufficient justification for landmark consideration. (A concise summary of the comments contained on this page could provide a compelling brief on behalf of designation.)
Peter, the Ridgewood looked exactly as you described it when I visited the site about a month or so ago. So, it seems as if the property is not being actively marketed. Given the state of the economy, this is not very surprising.
One last point. You may be interested to know that the Queens Crap blog, which was affectionately cited on the Keith Richmond Hill page, has been regularly promoting the “Save the Ridgewood” petition on its home page. So, kudos to them.
J.D., hopefully they only added a cook who could prepare Indian cuisine. By the looks of things on my last walk through, both the Italian and Indian interests seem quite secure. So there is hope for the future – at least here. Hope the same is ultimately true for the old movie palace.
This represents the first anniversary of the day I stumbled across this amazing web page and entered my first comment. Alas, this also marks the one year date of the last entry submitted for the old Winnie. So I guess I’m pretty much alone in remembering this small movie house that provided much enjoyment during my early years.
Anyhow, it’s been a lot of fun reading all the comments over the past year and making my own modest contributions. It’s also been great meeting Bway, Peter Koch, Lost Memory. Anniegirl, Warren and many others along the way.
Looking forward to a great 2009 at Cinema Treasures.
Well, this will hardly be the first time – and certainly not the last – that people in the same agency don’t talk to each other!
This whole newspaper listing thing reminds me of that sequence in the book and movie On The Beach when mysterious radio signals begin to eminate from nuclear devastated San Francisco. The hopes raised by the possible survival of someone are, of course, dashed when it is discovered that the enigmatic “messages” were only being caused by an inanimate object hitting against an open transmitter.
The probable mundane reality here is the newspapers' policy to refer readers to the theater’s telepnone number when (1) no movie schedule is received and (2) no representative from the last recorded owner has officially intructed the paper to cease publication. In fact, I wouldn’t be surprised if even if the papers were informed of the Ridgewood’s demise, they would still continue to list the theater since they had not yet received any official directive to stop. (Newspapers have their bureaucratic rules too!)
Given the current economic downturn and the probable difficulty of finding any longterm buyers, it would make sense for persons interested in leasing out a portion of the theater for short term purposes to contact the owner. This would both provide a little cash flow and forstall the otherwise idle building’s deterioration. So Michael Perlman’s point is well taken.
Last Spring, my wife and I were passing through Oakland and just, by accident, happened to come upon this wonderful theater, which was going through its final stages of exterior renovation. It looked stunning. I am so happy that the end to this – I am sure – tedious process is finally approaching. Kudos to the people of Oakland, who know how to preserve their gems. Also hope the place is at least occasionally used for cinematic purposes.
I think the fact that the Bushwick is being positively used as a school helps ensure that it is well maintained and that any defacement is promptly addressed and corrected. This is a great win – win situation.
Correction. It was Slumdog – not Slumlord – Millionaire that I viewed at this great theater yesterday. (Hopefully, the protagonist will not turn into a slumlord after reaping the profits from the game show – but that is the plot of another – and far more depressing – sequel.)
In any event, long live the Kew Gardens!
Spent a great evening yesterday enjoying Slumlord Millionaire at this lovely theater. While waiting for the flick, I caught a few minutes of Gone With the Wind which was being telecast in the lounge. This movie house remains a real treasure!
I wouldn’t place THAT Starbucks on the endangered list. While it is situated slightly north of Greenpoint’s main commercial district, it’s right next to a buzy – at least for the G train – subway station and in very close proximity to the very gentrified Greenpoint Historic district. These residents surely constitute a strong customer base – just as would have been the case for the Chopin had it survived. My guess is that this place only closes if another Starbucks opens in a more centralized part of Greenpoint.
By the way, the property now occupied by the McDonald restaurant at the Manhattan/Greenpoint Ave. corner once hosted an American Legion Hall and possibly some other government related functions. Architecturally speaking, it was quite compatible with the movie house. This gave the block a strongly “American” appearance.
LM, I think the night club is actually situated on the second floor, which was never part of the movie house. It hosted a Bingo Hall for many years, including the period when the American/Chopin was operating as a movie house.
Ken, I believe the Starbucks is only situated – at least for public use – in the old lobby area. The main theater area is either not being used or is serving as a storage area. Beyond that, I cannot add anything.
Hope this is helpful.
Thanks for the comment.
While a Starbucks is probably preferable to a Burger King or – a once co-occupant – Roy Rogers, it is no replacement for the wonderful ambience of the American/Chopin. As I previously noted, this theater could have become a quirky art house if it had been able to stay alive for a few more years and benefitted from the gentrification of Greenpoint. But that was not to be.
Any other comments from former American/Chopin fans is really appreciated.
Just took a rather depressing walk past this old theater. The Mexican restaurant replacement for Jahns has not yet opened, though the new Italian-Indian replacement for Salerno’s seems to be doing a pretty good business. For the record, it is named Sorrento and appears to retain Saterno’s basic ambience. How the food tastes is anyone’s guess.
The old movie house was doing pretty good business, with a rather paltry flea market in the old lobby – the big flea market day is Sunday – and a full house for Bingo. But I really got the impression that this will not last for long.
Hopefully, the Richmond Hill Historical people will come to the rescue here.
After reading the reports of the “Ridgewood’s resurrection”, I visited the site earlier today. My findings were not very reassuring.
While no obvious changes have occurred to the lobby and facade, there was absolutely no indication of any planned activity. If the theater did plan to open on Sundays, you would think that some notice of this would be advertised. But there was nothing to be seen. Instead, I only saw a plastic chair and a box of toys that were placed in the outside lobby, behind the metal gates. This just seemed like stuff that had been cleared out of the theater and would be disposed of during the Sanitation Dept’s. next visit.
There were no “For Sale” signs exhibited anywhere at this site. This means either that the owner has – for now – taken the property off the market or is finalizing a re-sale deal with a would be owner. You just can’t read too much into this.
So, unless anyone has any other solid information on the Ridgewood’s future, this seems as murky as ever.
Sorry to provide a less than rosy report, but facts are facts.
I was about to write that “at least Salerno’s is still there” until the recent comment rudely informed me otherwise. This is really a time to feel badly about this neighborhood. Hopefully, the Richmond Hill will not meet the same fate.
No Peter K, there was no porn to be seen. I think I did see scenes from All About Eve though!
Warren, thanks for your last comment. I guess the architect faced a real problem that provided a dearth of length and width – but a tremendous amount of height, and was able to turn a lemon into lemonade. Yet another example of McElfatrick’s creativity.
Yes Ed, the old Austin lights continue to glow in a lounge located just to the right of the entrance. While sitting there, you can also view tapes of old movies as you wait for the feature to begin.