Edgar Wright has posted a video of the entrance corridor to the Dolby Cinema auditorium.
AFAIK this is currently the only Dolby Cinema in the UK to include the “AVP corridor” feature.
CF100
commented about
BFI IMAXon
Nov 5, 2021 at 1:37 pm
According to an article published on the 1st September 2021, which links to reports from Lambeth Council, feasibility studies for an “office-led” scheme encompassing the IMAX site continue, with a further £150,000 funding allocated.
One may still be slightly puzzled as to why laser light source projection has not been installed, for it could always be moved over to any replacement venue built as part of such a scheme, and it has been six years since the IMAX GT dual-laser projection system was installed in Leicester Square…
But it does seem to be the most likely explanation for the lack of substantial investment in this ever-popular venue; another example being the auditorium seating, which looks very tired.
CF100
commented about
BFI IMAXon
Nov 5, 2021 at 1:33 pm
Full “Dollhouse” 3D tour available on private bookings site:
In addition to the cross-sectional 3D reconstruction, many 360° photos throughout the publicly-accessible areas can be seen.
Looking at photos of the auditorium, it appears that some more recent changes have been made. The sidewall fabric looks darker, and new decorative lighting added.
The screen frame and speakers are visible, including the “Kanga” speakers for GT venues. (The older IMAX “Proportional Point Source” speakers were replaced in 2012 when a new screen was installed.)
Non-IMAX speakers can also be seen, including the very strange arrangement of two sets of screen speakers with neither of the two centre speakers quite centrally positioned, as well as the rear array on the auditorium side/back walls.
Obviously, no IMAX sides/overheads as IMAX with Laser upgrade has not occurred, hence 12 channel IMAX audio is not supported.
Particularly attractive arrangement of linear LED strips/stretched fabric wall coverings. This demonstrates how, with a bit of thought, tasteful design possibilities can readily be achieved with these industry standard off-the-shelf components*; too often the result is either bland or suggests non-existent aesthetic sensibility.
(* Not to suggest these are not very high quality parts; they are.)
SethLewis: Odeon are/were the leaseholder for both the West End and “Covent Garden” locations, with redevelopment of both sites proposed/completed such that cinemas are spatially not the primary use, that instead being hotel accommodation/associated facilities.
The current state of the Odeon Covent Garden appears to be that the 2017 planning application was rejected, and on 10/03/21 was dismissed on appeal. I could not find any further applications on Camden Council’s planning database.
That being said, from the 2017 application, unlike the OWE, for any redevelopment of the “Covent Garden” site incorporating a cinema, another operator would need to be found. Clearly, any such redevelopment is years away from completion…
It turns out that the proposals are extensive indeed, and need to be seen in the context of building’s 2018 listing.
In particular, the freeholder is the Crown Estate, who are redeveloping the surrounding area (“St. James’s Market Phase 2”), with Chapman Taylor as their architect, and from the Design and Access Statement:
“The works undertaken by the landlord[my emphasis], which form part of this application for listed building consent, would include…”
In summary, the following: basement cinema auditoria reconfiguration, new lifts, restoration/alterations to the façade, and–
“the repair of historic interiors and the reinstatement of lost detail in the main auditorium and sub-basement bar.”
It further states that:
“Other works would be at the operator’s discretion and would be subject to a further application for listed building consent[…] The operator would also refurbish areas that do not contribute to the significance of the listed building and may not require listed building consent.”
However, “indicative” proposals for said refurbishment are given in this application.
The proposals include retail/offices behind, which at upper levels will–-I kid you not!–-“overhang” the cinema’s roof–hidden behind the existing front parapet.
The work is proposed to be “conservation-led” with the retention/restoration of remaining original or replica fabric and finishes, and sympathetic treatment to surrounding areas. This includes stripping of paint and sampling of original colours, as well referencing relevant heritage colours and finishes.
Alas, the planning application documents are very much “TL;DR.” However, for anyone interested, or for academic purposes, there is a wealth of information, including historic, within the Design and Access Statement–a very high level of attention to detail being demonstrated.
(Read: I’m too tired to properly digest and summarise them.)
Luxury seating will be installed throughout with the stadia in Screen 1 reprofiled over the original. The four basement auditoria will be “back-to-back” (like the IMAX/Superscreen over at Cineworld Leicester Square), are more symmetrically shaped than the existing centrally-subdivided original stalls, and the replacement screens look to be about the same size as the existing.
The scheme looks to be very much be in the vein of “arthouse” operators such as Curzon, Everyman or Picturehouse; and, of course, there is much space available (and proposed to be used) for presumably upmarket food and beverage offers, as in bars, lounges, etc.
Empire Cinemas do have their own similar premium brand, “Tivoli,” with sites in Bath and Cheltenham–so perhaps they will adopt the same branding here? Incidentally, the website of Tivoli states that they use laser projection, so one might have high expectations here in respect of audio/visual presentation quality.
Should these works be completed as detailed or similar to that indicated in these proposals, I imagine some contributors to this site will be absolutely delighted.
Ian: Thank you for posting links to those photos. It looks like Screen 2, happily, has a masked screen (c.f. the floating screen in Screen 1;) do you know if moveable masking is in use?
It also appears to be exceptionally bland–not even linear lighting to add a dash of colour to the sidewalls?
Lionel: Haven’t kept up to speed on the COVID rules regarding entry to the UK, so not sure if there are any real hoops for you to jump through?
I happened to pass through Leicester Square earlier this week, and whilst it was good to see custom Odeon typeface “007” signage on the OLS, the surrounding environs do look somewhat forlorn from the impact of COVID on visitation.
Hopefully things will be closer to normal soon so you are able to visit… I gather that the OLS is even closing tabs at the end of Bond screenings!
I saw the new “007” film in the IMAX auditorium at Cineworld Watford (a town ~16 miles NW of London), the first time I’ve been to the cinema since February 2020! It has a 1.9:1 ratio screen, ~72ft. wide, single IMAX laser projection, and 12 channel IMAX sound.
Whilst some of the film was shot on IMAX 70mm film cameras, and some scenes are presented in full height 1.43:1 in a suitably equipped venue (i.e. IMAX dual laser projection with the necessary screen height), these total duration of these scenes is less than 30 minutes.
A friend of mine timed them thusly:
Opening credits: ~4 min.
Section at start of movie: ~23.5 min.
Cuba sequence: ~4 min.
End credits: ~6 min.
Nevertheless, I think you’d be missing out if viewing a “scope” only presentation.
(Alas, the only IMAX venue in this country offering a 1.43:1 presentation for this film is in Manchester, almost 250 miles [by road per Google Maps directions] North of where I live; not being willing to travel that distance just for this film, the only IMAX option was 1.9:1.)
The film itself is probably not a “classic” but it certainly ticks all the boxes for an enjoyable Bond outing; epic scale, wall-to-wall action and plot turns, excellent cinematography and locations. (No ghastly “cinéma vérité”-style “shakycam!”)
There was only the odd bit of grain in the IMAX presentation, so must have gone through digital noise reduction processing. The image quality is a “best of both worlds” hybrid, with a softer/diffused filmic look, whilst the (mostly excellent and consistent) colour grading makes ample use of the options available today with saturated greens and cyans at times; overall typically heavily stylised in a glamourous way.
Sound, too, was good–albeit not quite as loud as expected. (Some of the trailers before the main feature, on the other hand, were ear-splitting!) There was some clear use of the overhead channels, most noticeably dialogue being panned to them when characters were using earpieces, which I found slightly distracting.
As is by now widely known, there is a contemporary political issue around the future of the franchise, and you may or may not find this affects your enjoyment… and I think that’s all I’ll say about that here…
Getting back to the point of this page, which is about a cinema that boasts a Dolby Cinema system in its main auditorium… The “filmic” look is also benefitted by IMAX’s projection, which (even the single laser projection system) seems to achieve a smoother image than Dolby Cinema; therefore I recommend viewing it in an IMAX with Laser equipped venue.
It’s great fun and it, surprisingly, does live up to the hype–so I’d say go see it in the best cinema you can.
Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema) screen width is, according to Odeon, 13.3m (~43.5ft.), which given the sidewalls splay in slightly towards the stage end, is in line with my previous measurements.
Measurements off the licensing plans per previous post therefore yield a screen width of ~37ft. for Screen 2.
It is perhaps worth noting that the redevelopment (over less than a decade) of all the main Leicester Square cinemas is now complete; other than Vue (aka Warner), this has been on a scale not seen since the 1960’s. It now boasts 6 “PLF spec.” auditoria with high end projection and sound. Excluding the core/shell construction cost of the replacement OWE, this must amount to an investment greater than £30m.
It also clearly delineates the cinema’s demise, c.f. plans for the whole redevelopment.
Alas, all but the first two rows are straight in Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema), and all but the first row in Screen 2.
As might be expected, Screen 1 roughly follows the conventional screen width-to-seating distance ratios, the rows being ~0.6x to ~1.75x screen width away. In fact, the seating roughly overlays over the OLS' stalls. Good for anyone not wanting to be “overwhelmed,” but certainly not IMAX-style “immersive.”
Screen 2, on the other hand, perhaps surprisingly, features a screen that as drawn is ~85% the size of Screen 1. Screen width-to-seating distance from the screen ratios are ~0.35x to ~1.25x screen width away.
This, in terms of horizontal field of vision fill, is not too far off IMAX spec., or Empire Cinemas' (patented!) schemes for IMPACT and STUDIO auditoria. Depending on projection/sound–alas not Atmos–it may therefore offer a better experience than expected.
I’m afraid to say that a “flat” ratio screen, alas, has been installed in Screen 1. The projection system should render this less of a problem than might be expected–not ideal, but not too bothersome over in the IMAX with Laser across the square.
The main foyer (inc. concessions counter) appears to be about 3,000sq.ft., i.e., a reasonable size.
It turns out that IMAX with Laser projection was not installed at Cineworld Leeds, despite the screen size. Instead, Xenon light source IMAX Digital projection is used. The same is true of Cineworld Plymouth–which even features a ~1.4:1 screen.
The cinema isn’t in “the” basement as such-–it’s on levels B3/4, mostly below a large function room on level B2. If this seems pedantic, consider that the floor level of B4 is ~20m below street level!
(On B5/6 are plant rooms and kitchen areas.)
Whilst the cinema (including plant rooms etc.) occupies about half the area of these levels, this is one of the deepest commercial buildings in the world, extending ~30m below ground level. Fortunately for patrons, the incremental cost of including the cinema presumably is ultimately borne by those staying or making use of the hotel’s facilities; in any case, this surely is one of the most, if not the most, expensively (allowing for inflation also) built cinema open to the public per m2 or m3.
Hard to believe it was 7 years ago, but I still remember the following comment:
“curmudgeon on December 16, 2014 at 8:01 am Disgraceful! More history gone. Bet the proposed basement cinemas never eventuate.”
I replied that it was a planning condition that, in effect, they would. The local authority is Westminster Council, and this is Leicester Square of all places… and so they have.
The following dated 24th March 2020 is listed on Westminster Council’s planning site:
“20/02104/ADFULL | Details of evidence the cinema has been provided with services and made ready for fit out by the relevant tenant [pursuant to planning permission conditions…]”
Of course, this does not mean that everyone would consider the eventuated cinema to be any better than no cinema!
Ambak: Interesting information! It is odd that the 1970’s conversion was clearly expensive, whilst you state that the lower auditorium was subdivided in “two weeks” by building a wall. I suppose this is a measure of just how rapidly cinema attendance patterns were changing, and an emergent unwillingness to properly invest in exhibition, but why there was not more foresight I find somewhat puzzling.
What, if any, decorative changes did this subdivision involve–or was all simply left “as is” the maximum possible extent? Were 70mm projection facilities still available? (Presumably, if so, in the rear auditorium only?)
[Corrections to previous post: 1) The images link directly to the clippings on Newspapers.com, which allows those pages to be viewed without a subscription. 2) The article is in fact an advertorial, albeit the previous comment on the decline in standards of copy still applies.]
Thank you for posting those pages, rivest266.
It turns out that the “twinning” involved extensive reconstruction works. A measure of this is that the screens were “set at either ends”–the architects are quoted as saying:
“We did it to make best possible use of the existing shell, as well as providing for maximum structural strength.”
Other facts:
2,500 tons of clay were moved.
70 tons of new steelwork, including 4x4ft. deep beams of 60ft. length supporting the upper auditorium.
Upper auditorium volume: 330,000cu.ft.
Lower auditorium volume: 150,000cu.ft.
From the “both are heated to 70°F” statement, it does not sound like full air conditioning was installed.
The designer, Felix Horton, is described being “one of the most avant-garde designers in Europe;” the article mentions some of his other work, including luxury aircraft and cruise ship interiors, as well as a palace in Kuwait.
rivest266: Thank you for posting the Evening Standard article from 1970; fascinating reading even though I never knew the cinema in that form. It is possible to get a higher resolution copy from that site (link can be found by getting the URL of the image source)–although it only allows for one free page before requesting sign up.
I have summarised the information within thusly:
Architect: Lesile C. Norton, AIAA.
Designer: Felix Holton, FSIA.
Décor: Alan Best.
Equipment, seating and carpeting: Pathé Equipment.
Project duration: ~8 months.
Upper cinema: West End
Old circle, new floor added.
Capacity: 890 in “specially designed tip-back seats.”
70mm capable.
Colour scheme: Two-tone orange in auditorium and upper lounge bar.
Carpet: 190sq.yds. of two-tone carpet with WB motif, covering upper lounge-bar also.
Clusters of 400 glass fibre drums, “pools of reflected light” diffused over auditorium.
No tabs, instead “20ft. decorative openwork mental panel which slides in half automatically to reveal the screen.”
Upper lounge bar: “the surround area is picked out in orange fabric with stainless steel trim.”
Lower cinema: The Rendezvous
Capacity: 686, “tip-back seats.”
70mm capable.
Colour scheme: Green and blue.
Carpet: 1300 sq. yds. of green-blue carpet, geometric design, covering lower foyer bar also.(Doesn’t quite make sense given the above 190sq.yds., unless this covered substantially more lobby space?!)
Seats: Woven fabric, green-blue mixture.
“Clusters of overhead lights from the predominant dark ceiling light the auditorium, and these are backed up with ceiling spots which pick out reflected strips of glass-fibre set into the green-pleated fabric walls.”
No tabs; “the screen merges into white wing walls on either side to give a total white effect from wall to wall. The wings are darkened to provide masking for the cinema screen.” (Whatever that means?)
Lower foyer bar: “Centre section of the surround walls is picked out in herculite plaster panels. Deep bands of stainless steel support the panels which, when lit, give a floating effect. The ceiling has an inset circular well with random lighting.”
Interestingly, the “behind the scenes” section of the article mentions that foundations of the former Daly’s Theatre that was on the site before the cinema were found during the works. I assume this means that some excavation took place?
It also mentions that the “original rich velvet drapes” from Daly’s Theatre were found hanging behind the screen for acoustic absorption!
(The article continues on another page, but I am unable to access this.)
As an aside, it really is rather depressing to compare the quality of writing and attention to detail, even if probably culled from the press release etc., with today’s media.
CP200: THX certification is long gone. The sound systems in Screens 5 and 7 were replaced in the 2017 refurbishment. They are still premium installations, full Atmos systems with Dolby SLS speakers. Projection is dual Sony SRX-R515’s (Xenon lamp light source since Vue have been slow with laser.)
As an aside, I’m surprised to see that ALL digital cinema projectors on Sony’s website are labelled as “Discontinued,” so I assume they have pulled out of the digital cinema market. (Not up to speed on cinema technology news at the moment.)
Just to let anyone interested know, I have now recovered from my severe ankle injury to the point that wandering out and about in the West End poses no problem. (You wouldn’t even know unless you asked me to run!)
Unfortunately, the ongoing COVID situation is still something to contend with…
The American Seating Company is now only in transport sectors, they have no product lines for theatres/cinemas. The relevant assets for those were acquired by the Irwin Seating Company.
The Irwin Seating Company had reissued some of the classic American Seating Company lines, but this no longer seems to be the case. However, they do still have products of this type under their theatre lines; obviously, expectations of cinema seating are now very different.
The old Empire 1 seats look a good deal more “plush” than old photos of similar products from American Seating Company, so presumably were fully reupholstered. They were exceptionally comfortable, and part of that was the excellent “rocker” action.
theatreofvarieties: If I may ask, what they are doing in storage? Is there no plan to reuse or sell them?
Thank you rivest266. That does bring into sharp relief just how long ago it was! The 1960’s auditorium combined modernism with traditional theatrical elements in a way that, unlike those adverts, it never felt dated (even if for practical purposes, it was.)
Edgar Wright has posted a video of the entrance corridor to the Dolby Cinema auditorium.
AFAIK this is currently the only Dolby Cinema in the UK to include the “AVP corridor” feature.
According to an article published on the 1st September 2021, which links to reports from Lambeth Council, feasibility studies for an “office-led” scheme encompassing the IMAX site continue, with a further £150,000 funding allocated.
One may still be slightly puzzled as to why laser light source projection has not been installed, for it could always be moved over to any replacement venue built as part of such a scheme, and it has been six years since the IMAX GT dual-laser projection system was installed in Leicester Square…
But it does seem to be the most likely explanation for the lack of substantial investment in this ever-popular venue; another example being the auditorium seating, which looks very tired.
Full “Dollhouse” 3D tour available on private bookings site:
3D Tour.
In addition to the cross-sectional 3D reconstruction, many 360° photos throughout the publicly-accessible areas can be seen.
Looking at photos of the auditorium, it appears that some more recent changes have been made. The sidewall fabric looks darker, and new decorative lighting added.
The screen frame and speakers are visible, including the “Kanga” speakers for GT venues. (The older IMAX “Proportional Point Source” speakers were replaced in 2012 when a new screen was installed.)
Non-IMAX speakers can also be seen, including the very strange arrangement of two sets of screen speakers with neither of the two centre speakers quite centrally positioned, as well as the rear array on the auditorium side/back walls.
Obviously, no IMAX sides/overheads as IMAX with Laser upgrade has not occurred, hence 12 channel IMAX audio is not supported.
Full “Dollhouse” 3D tour available on private bookings site:
3D Tour.
In addition to the cross-sectional 3D reconstruction, many 360° photos throughout the publicly-accessible areas can be seen.
Particularly attractive arrangement of linear LED strips/stretched fabric wall coverings. This demonstrates how, with a bit of thought, tasteful design possibilities can readily be achieved with these industry standard off-the-shelf components*; too often the result is either bland or suggests non-existent aesthetic sensibility.
(* Not to suggest these are not very high quality parts; they are.)
SethLewis: Odeon are/were the leaseholder for both the West End and “Covent Garden” locations, with redevelopment of both sites proposed/completed such that cinemas are spatially not the primary use, that instead being hotel accommodation/associated facilities.
The current state of the Odeon Covent Garden appears to be that the 2017 planning application was rejected, and on 10/03/21 was dismissed on appeal. I could not find any further applications on Camden Council’s planning database.
That being said, from the 2017 application, unlike the OWE, for any redevelopment of the “Covent Garden” site incorporating a cinema, another operator would need to be found. Clearly, any such redevelopment is years away from completion…
Thank you, Zappomatic, for the planning reference.
It turns out that the proposals are extensive indeed, and need to be seen in the context of building’s 2018 listing.
In particular, the freeholder is the Crown Estate, who are redeveloping the surrounding area (“St. James’s Market Phase 2”), with Chapman Taylor as their architect, and from the Design and Access Statement:
In summary, the following: basement cinema auditoria reconfiguration, new lifts, restoration/alterations to the façade, and–
It further states that:
“Other works would be at the operator’s discretion and would be subject to a further application for listed building consent[…] The operator would also refurbish areas that do not contribute to the significance of the listed building and may not require listed building consent.” However, “indicative” proposals for said refurbishment are given in this application.
The proposals include retail/offices behind, which at upper levels will–-I kid you not!–-“overhang” the cinema’s roof–hidden behind the existing front parapet.
The work is proposed to be “conservation-led” with the retention/restoration of remaining original or replica fabric and finishes, and sympathetic treatment to surrounding areas. This includes stripping of paint and sampling of original colours, as well referencing relevant heritage colours and finishes.
Alas, the planning application documents are very much “TL;DR.” However, for anyone interested, or for academic purposes, there is a wealth of information, including historic, within the Design and Access Statement–a very high level of attention to detail being demonstrated.
(Read: I’m too tired to properly digest and summarise them.)
Luxury seating will be installed throughout with the stadia in Screen 1 reprofiled over the original. The four basement auditoria will be “back-to-back” (like the IMAX/Superscreen over at Cineworld Leicester Square), are more symmetrically shaped than the existing centrally-subdivided original stalls, and the replacement screens look to be about the same size as the existing.
The scheme looks to be very much be in the vein of “arthouse” operators such as Curzon, Everyman or Picturehouse; and, of course, there is much space available (and proposed to be used) for presumably upmarket food and beverage offers, as in bars, lounges, etc.
Empire Cinemas do have their own similar premium brand, “Tivoli,” with sites in Bath and Cheltenham–so perhaps they will adopt the same branding here? Incidentally, the website of Tivoli states that they use laser projection, so one might have high expectations here in respect of audio/visual presentation quality.
Should these works be completed as detailed or similar to that indicated in these proposals, I imagine some contributors to this site will be absolutely delighted.
Photos of the old Empire 1 (press conference with actor Robert Vaughn) taken in 1966:
Photo 1.
Photo 2.
Shame they are not colour!
Ian: Thank you for posting links to those photos. It looks like Screen 2, happily, has a masked screen (c.f. the floating screen in Screen 1;) do you know if moveable masking is in use?
It also appears to be exceptionally bland–not even linear lighting to add a dash of colour to the sidewalls?
Lionel: Haven’t kept up to speed on the COVID rules regarding entry to the UK, so not sure if there are any real hoops for you to jump through?
I happened to pass through Leicester Square earlier this week, and whilst it was good to see custom Odeon typeface “007” signage on the OLS, the surrounding environs do look somewhat forlorn from the impact of COVID on visitation.
Hopefully things will be closer to normal soon so you are able to visit… I gather that the OLS is even closing tabs at the end of Bond screenings!
moviebuff82:
I saw the new “007” film in the IMAX auditorium at Cineworld Watford (a town ~16 miles NW of London), the first time I’ve been to the cinema since February 2020! It has a 1.9:1 ratio screen, ~72ft. wide, single IMAX laser projection, and 12 channel IMAX sound.
Whilst some of the film was shot on IMAX 70mm film cameras, and some scenes are presented in full height 1.43:1 in a suitably equipped venue (i.e. IMAX dual laser projection with the necessary screen height), these total duration of these scenes is less than 30 minutes.
A friend of mine timed them thusly:
Opening credits: ~4 min.
Section at start of movie: ~23.5 min.
Cuba sequence: ~4 min.
End credits: ~6 min.
Nevertheless, I think you’d be missing out if viewing a “scope” only presentation.
(Alas, the only IMAX venue in this country offering a 1.43:1 presentation for this film is in Manchester, almost 250 miles [by road per Google Maps directions] North of where I live; not being willing to travel that distance just for this film, the only IMAX option was 1.9:1.)
The film itself is probably not a “classic” but it certainly ticks all the boxes for an enjoyable Bond outing; epic scale, wall-to-wall action and plot turns, excellent cinematography and locations. (No ghastly “cinéma vérité”-style “shakycam!”)
There was only the odd bit of grain in the IMAX presentation, so must have gone through digital noise reduction processing. The image quality is a “best of both worlds” hybrid, with a softer/diffused filmic look, whilst the (mostly excellent and consistent) colour grading makes ample use of the options available today with saturated greens and cyans at times; overall typically heavily stylised in a glamourous way.
Sound, too, was good–albeit not quite as loud as expected. (Some of the trailers before the main feature, on the other hand, were ear-splitting!) There was some clear use of the overhead channels, most noticeably dialogue being panned to them when characters were using earpieces, which I found slightly distracting.
As is by now widely known, there is a contemporary political issue around the future of the franchise, and you may or may not find this affects your enjoyment… and I think that’s all I’ll say about that here…
Getting back to the point of this page, which is about a cinema that boasts a Dolby Cinema system in its main auditorium… The “filmic” look is also benefitted by IMAX’s projection, which (even the single laser projection system) seems to achieve a smoother image than Dolby Cinema; therefore I recommend viewing it in an IMAX with Laser equipped venue.
It’s great fun and it, surprisingly, does live up to the hype–so I’d say go see it in the best cinema you can.
Re: Comment–Fantastic!
Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema) screen width is, according to Odeon, 13.3m (~43.5ft.), which given the sidewalls splay in slightly towards the stage end, is in line with my previous measurements.
Measurements off the licensing plans per previous post therefore yield a screen width of ~37ft. for Screen 2.
It is perhaps worth noting that the redevelopment (over less than a decade) of all the main Leicester Square cinemas is now complete; other than Vue (aka Warner), this has been on a scale not seen since the 1960’s. It now boasts 6 “PLF spec.” auditoria with high end projection and sound. Excluding the core/shell construction cost of the replacement OWE, this must amount to an investment greater than £30m.
Plans (i.e. showing the revised internal layout per the fit-out from core/shell) can be found in the following licensing application:
20/03120/LIPN.
It also clearly delineates the cinema’s demise, c.f. plans for the whole redevelopment.
Alas, all but the first two rows are straight in Screen 1 (Dolby Cinema), and all but the first row in Screen 2.
As might be expected, Screen 1 roughly follows the conventional screen width-to-seating distance ratios, the rows being ~0.6x to ~1.75x screen width away. In fact, the seating roughly overlays over the OLS' stalls. Good for anyone not wanting to be “overwhelmed,” but certainly not IMAX-style “immersive.”
Screen 2, on the other hand, perhaps surprisingly, features a screen that as drawn is ~85% the size of Screen 1. Screen width-to-seating distance from the screen ratios are ~0.35x to ~1.25x screen width away.
This, in terms of horizontal field of vision fill, is not too far off IMAX spec., or Empire Cinemas' (patented!) schemes for IMPACT and STUDIO auditoria. Depending on projection/sound–alas not Atmos–it may therefore offer a better experience than expected.
I’m afraid to say that a “flat” ratio screen, alas, has been installed in Screen 1. The projection system should render this less of a problem than might be expected–not ideal, but not too bothersome over in the IMAX with Laser across the square.
The main foyer (inc. concessions counter) appears to be about 3,000sq.ft., i.e., a reasonable size.
More to follow…
It turns out that IMAX with Laser projection was not installed at Cineworld Leeds, despite the screen size. Instead, Xenon light source IMAX Digital projection is used. The same is true of Cineworld Plymouth–which even features a ~1.4:1 screen.
The cinema isn’t in “the” basement as such-–it’s on levels B3/4, mostly below a large function room on level B2. If this seems pedantic, consider that the floor level of B4 is ~20m below street level!
(On B5/6 are plant rooms and kitchen areas.)
Whilst the cinema (including plant rooms etc.) occupies about half the area of these levels, this is one of the deepest commercial buildings in the world, extending ~30m below ground level. Fortunately for patrons, the incremental cost of including the cinema presumably is ultimately borne by those staying or making use of the hotel’s facilities; in any case, this surely is one of the most, if not the most, expensively (allowing for inflation also) built cinema open to the public per m2 or m3.
Hard to believe it was 7 years ago, but I still remember the following comment:
I replied that it was a planning condition that, in effect, they would. The local authority is Westminster Council, and this is Leicester Square of all places… and so they have.
The following dated 24th March 2020 is listed on Westminster Council’s planning site:
Of course, this does not mean that everyone would consider the eventuated cinema to be any better than no cinema!
Similar shape it may well be… but lacking in elegance or proportion.
Ambak: Interesting information! It is odd that the 1970’s conversion was clearly expensive, whilst you state that the lower auditorium was subdivided in “two weeks” by building a wall. I suppose this is a measure of just how rapidly cinema attendance patterns were changing, and an emergent unwillingness to properly invest in exhibition, but why there was not more foresight I find somewhat puzzling.
What, if any, decorative changes did this subdivision involve–or was all simply left “as is” the maximum possible extent? Were 70mm projection facilities still available? (Presumably, if so, in the rear auditorium only?)
[Corrections to previous post: 1) The images link directly to the clippings on Newspapers.com, which allows those pages to be viewed without a subscription. 2) The article is in fact an advertorial, albeit the previous comment on the decline in standards of copy still applies.]
Thank you for posting those pages, rivest266.
It turns out that the “twinning” involved extensive reconstruction works. A measure of this is that the screens were “set at either ends”–the architects are quoted as saying:
“We did it to make best possible use of the existing shell, as well as providing for maximum structural strength.”
Other facts:
2,500 tons of clay were moved.
70 tons of new steelwork, including 4x4ft. deep beams of 60ft. length supporting the upper auditorium.
Upper auditorium volume: 330,000cu.ft.
Lower auditorium volume: 150,000cu.ft.
From the “both are heated to 70°F” statement, it does not sound like full air conditioning was installed.
The designer, Felix Horton, is described being “one of the most avant-garde designers in Europe;” the article mentions some of his other work, including luxury aircraft and cruise ship interiors, as well as a palace in Kuwait.
rivest266: Thank you for posting the Evening Standard article from 1970; fascinating reading even though I never knew the cinema in that form. It is possible to get a higher resolution copy from that site (link can be found by getting the URL of the image source)–although it only allows for one free page before requesting sign up.
I have summarised the information within thusly:
Architect: Lesile C. Norton, AIAA.
Designer: Felix Holton, FSIA.
Décor: Alan Best.
Equipment, seating and carpeting: Pathé Equipment.
Project duration: ~8 months.
Upper cinema: West End
Old circle, new floor added.
Capacity: 890 in “specially designed tip-back seats.”
70mm capable.
Colour scheme: Two-tone orange in auditorium and upper lounge bar.
Carpet: 190sq.yds. of two-tone carpet with WB motif, covering upper lounge-bar also.
Clusters of 400 glass fibre drums, “pools of reflected light” diffused over auditorium.
No tabs, instead “20ft. decorative openwork mental panel which slides in half automatically to reveal the screen.”
Upper lounge bar: “the surround area is picked out in orange fabric with stainless steel trim.”
Lower cinema: The Rendezvous
Capacity: 686, “tip-back seats.”
70mm capable.
Colour scheme: Green and blue.
Carpet: 1300 sq. yds. of green-blue carpet, geometric design, covering lower foyer bar also.(Doesn’t quite make sense given the above 190sq.yds., unless this covered substantially more lobby space?!)
Seats: Woven fabric, green-blue mixture.
“Clusters of overhead lights from the predominant dark ceiling light the auditorium, and these are backed up with ceiling spots which pick out reflected strips of glass-fibre set into the green-pleated fabric walls.”
No tabs; “the screen merges into white wing walls on either side to give a total white effect from wall to wall. The wings are darkened to provide masking for the cinema screen.” (Whatever that means?)
Lower foyer bar: “Centre section of the surround walls is picked out in herculite plaster panels. Deep bands of stainless steel support the panels which, when lit, give a floating effect. The ceiling has an inset circular well with random lighting.”
Interestingly, the “behind the scenes” section of the article mentions that foundations of the former Daly’s Theatre that was on the site before the cinema were found during the works. I assume this means that some excavation took place?
It also mentions that the “original rich velvet drapes” from Daly’s Theatre were found hanging behind the screen for acoustic absorption!
(The article continues on another page, but I am unable to access this.)
As an aside, it really is rather depressing to compare the quality of writing and attention to detail, even if probably culled from the press release etc., with today’s media.
CP200: THX certification is long gone. The sound systems in Screens 5 and 7 were replaced in the 2017 refurbishment. They are still premium installations, full Atmos systems with Dolby SLS speakers. Projection is dual Sony SRX-R515’s (Xenon lamp light source since Vue have been slow with laser.)
As an aside, I’m surprised to see that ALL digital cinema projectors on Sony’s website are labelled as “Discontinued,” so I assume they have pulled out of the digital cinema market. (Not up to speed on cinema technology news at the moment.)
Just to let anyone interested know, I have now recovered from my severe ankle injury to the point that wandering out and about in the West End poses no problem. (You wouldn’t even know unless you asked me to run!)
Unfortunately, the ongoing COVID situation is still something to contend with…
The American Seating Company is now only in transport sectors, they have no product lines for theatres/cinemas. The relevant assets for those were acquired by the Irwin Seating Company.
The Irwin Seating Company had reissued some of the classic American Seating Company lines, but this no longer seems to be the case. However, they do still have products of this type under their theatre lines; obviously, expectations of cinema seating are now very different.
The old Empire 1 seats look a good deal more “plush” than old photos of similar products from American Seating Company, so presumably were fully reupholstered. They were exceptionally comfortable, and part of that was the excellent “rocker” action.
theatreofvarieties: If I may ask, what they are doing in storage? Is there no plan to reuse or sell them?
Thank you rivest266. That does bring into sharp relief just how long ago it was! The 1960’s auditorium combined modernism with traditional theatrical elements in a way that, unlike those adverts, it never felt dated (even if for practical purposes, it was.)