At that time it had, IIRC, the same type of pleated fabric wall coverings, and definitely the same seats, as were then fitted to the Warner Village West End. JBL 8330 rear array.
However, the use of some of the same parts doesn’t equate to the same whole! Presentation was extremely poor.
It has now been refurbished, although how extensively and to what standard I do not know.
According to Vue’s website, Vue Westfield London and Vue Westfield Stratford City are the 1st and 3rd highest grossing cinemas in the UK. I wonder what’s the 2nd—is there a list somewhere?
They are both a few miles from the edge of Central London and can easily be accessed by tube from there. Vue Westfield London is probably about as close to the West End as a 20 screen “megaplex” will ever be built!
They are both listed as flagship sites by Vue but IMO Vue Westfield London is very much a run of the mill multiplex.
I went here a couple of times in the late 90’s. Absolutely dreadful multiplex in a very unappealing secondary location. I gather Digbeth, nearby, is now “trendy.”
Thanks, Zappomatic, for those photos of the access to Screen 9.
What a dreadfully scrappy arrangement with the “wooden box” at the back of Screen 9.
The stairs/lobby areas look pretty good, but the “starfield” is bodged—not remotely comparable to the 1989 fibre-optic starfields in the foyer/Empire 1. There’s some information on them in the Lighting + Sound International article I previously linked to (PDF p19-21):
“Par Opti Projects used no less than 14,000 fibre optic lenses producing 26,000 light points in the ceiling, created by various size fibres. The new Eldon bezels were specifically developed for the four sizes of star lenses, together with twinkle wheels…”
Wonder when the foyer/associated areas work will commence? I assume at some point they will have to completely close during the works, and looking at their website, Cineworld have performances scheduled through the end of this month.
Sooner the better as I already said my “goodbyes” to the existent foyer—no desire to go through that process again! :–( Thankfully, on my last visit to Screen 1 I had no idea about the impeding conversion—theatreofvarieties' strip-out photos were fascinating, but time (and nice replacement auditoria) heals. It would have been far too emotional to bear.
Oh dear, trying to decipher patents is enough to make one crazy!
At least this one is quite specific and straightforward and most of the key information is in the short abstract at the start. One thing missing is the front row distance:
“a seat in the centre of the front row would be located is spaced apart perpendicularly from the screen a distance not less than 0.3 times the width of the auditorium adjacent the front wall”
This is exactly what Fig. 3 shows.
I am interested in why you think a close front row and steep raking is not suitable in particular for a small auditorium?
BTW, a strange story loosely related to this: A couple of years ago, I had booked seats in Empire Leicester Square Screen 7 to attend a midday screening for myself and a friend. On entering the auditorium, I stopped at the front pondering where to sit, saying to my friend that the front row seats I’d booked seem to be too close to the screen.
Sitting in a middle row was an Irish gentlemen, formally dressed IIRC, who said, “No no no… don’t sit there… sit at the back. There will only be a few in…”
It didn’t occur to me at the time, but I can’t help but wonder if the gentlemen wasn’t Thomas Anderson himself!
Lunch at Wong Kei, eating therapy for cinema obsessions (!), sounds good to me. ;–)
Photos of plasterwork remnants can be seen in documents submitted in relation to the following planning applications:
http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=0206506ADLBC — see “PROPOSALS FOR THE SALVAGE & REUSE OF EXISTING DOORS / PLASTERWORK” – PDF page numbers 18-20. Note that this part of the document is excerpted from an earlier 1998 survey. Also within this document are details of a later survey (PDF p4), and on PDF p21-22 are plans from the 1998 survey showing locations where plasterwork and other auditorium decorative remnants were found.
madorganplayer: In response to your question about whether the roof was “taken off,” it certainly seems to be the case.
This can be seen in Google Earth (desktop application) by turning on “Historical Imagery” and setting the date to 2003.
For convenience, and since Google allow limited use of these images on third-party sites providing attribution is included, I have exported the relevant image from Google Earth and uploaded to the Photos section.
The roof plan shows new glazed roof areas, and most of the remaining part of the roof is a “flat roof to plant enclosure.”
Looking at the section plans, the plant rooms and central section of glazed roofing extend above the original building. Beneath them, there are offices (fourth floor) which also extend above the original building.
Given the extensiveness of the reconstruction, requiring the facades/dome to be “proped up,” I’m afraid that the chances of organ parts remaining up there are, I’d suggest, zero.
You are absolutely right, I felt guilty whilst doing it knowing that I had “more important” matters to attend to.
I couldn’t help myself, once I started thinking about it I felt compelled to figure it all out as far as I could! :–( On the face of it, it has almost no practical value whatsoever other than satisfying my own curiosity—and it is, I hope, of interest to anyone who bothers to read my ramblings—although they might equally well wish that I would shut up!
The best cinemas for me are a more “magical” environment than anywhere else. Very little can touch them in terms of the special feeling I get from them.
For better or worse, the engineering side of my brain wants to know “how and why it works,” so I always end up “pulling things apart” to find out.
Whether my “cinema obsession” actually makes any sense… hmm. I enjoy it, but I do drive myself nuts at times. Few people “get it” so, maybe I should find a “normal hobby” like following football! :-O However, I consider the intense interest in watching a ball being kicked around a field for 90 minutes, hoping that it will eventually make its way into the “right” net, and the tribe-like devotion to football teams, to be somewhat “insane”! (My apologies to football fans…)
As for these 60s/70s mini-cinemas like the Odeon Wardour St./Swiss Centre—I find the auditoriums very strange. Yes, there were lots of constraints but why should they result in odd shaped auditoria with such small screens? I think we can do better today with “boothless” digital projection. A small auditorium can be a comfortable and intimate environment; a good experience if the design, decor, seating layout, screen size/position and sound system are right.
BTW, (if anyone is “crazy” enough to want to read it!) you may be interested in a patent application (I’m not clear on whether the patent has been granted) by Thomas Anderson (Empire Cinemas etc.) relating to the design/geometry of small auditoria.
Now, where do I find the group hypnotherapy session to stop the “cinema obsession”…?
I think I’ve now figured out a possible way this scheme could be implemented, based on available plans, publically stated project goals, presumed retention of the organ and stage, the structural constraints of keeping the existing circle structure, and the assumption that the proscenium cannot be significantly raised in height:
-Removal of front splay walls at least up to approx. location of the left/right front stalls fire hoses. According to the licencing plans, this would mainly affect stairs at stalls level on the right side that may require relocation, or possibly could simply be eliminated. Removal of splay walls to a position slightly beyond the front stalls side fire exit doors would be advantageous, to gain more screen width and aesthetic integration with the existing walls, but modification of other access and service areas etc. would then be required.
-Replacement splay walls in new location to accomodate new wider screen and sightlines therefore required.
-Replacement screen between 60-65ft. wide, where 65ft. by my estimates is the limit.
-Removal of approx. last 5 rows of existing stalls seating to accomodate sightlines to top of new screen; move stalls level rear wall forward (possibly with new toilets behind.)
-Acoustic absorption with suitable covering fitted to walls and ceilings at screen end, noting that Eomac’s catalogue includes “acoustic wood” and various design options for fabric covering-based systems.
This would still leave a compromised auditorium by current standards, but would essentially keep the original form, including retention of stage and organ, and should leave sufficient space for tabs also.
By my estimates, assuming a 65ft. wide screen, such a layout would put seats in the centre part of the front 4 rows in the Royal Circle more or less within IMAX standards (where the rearmost seats should be no further than ~1 screen width from the screen) for seating distance/position in relation to screen width, albeit located a little too high. The other 2 rows of the Royal Circle would still be OK.
Having a look at the layout of a new build iSense auditorium, the rearmost seats are 1.4x screen width away from the screen. By my estimation the scheme outlined above would put all but the last 8 rows of the circle within this distance, and in this respect it could be said that a majority of seats would meet current expectations of “immersiveness“ as found in auditoria marketed as “premium large format” cinemas, albeit not comparable to a textbook IMAX or the Cineworld/Empire LSQ IMAX (nor the IMPACT/Superscreen at the Empire, for that matter)—although some may consider this to be preferable!
So, as long as you are in the “right” seats, assuming laser projection and Atmos, it seems to me there is a good chance the pending refurbishment/alterations will make for an up-to-date “immersive” cinema experience with all the trappings of a super cinema to boot.
A 2012 application specifically to confirm that this would be in keeping with Class D2 use and thus not require planning permission, resulted in a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development confirming this would not constitute a material change of use being issued by Westminster Council.
As this scheme has not been taken forward this would appear to be of largely academic (!) interest; however, the application does include existing plans. The remains of old decor on the “right hand side wall” in the photos posted by Ian I would assume to be in the “PLANT/SERVICE AREA” on the existing plans.
Amazing that alterations to these buildings result in them being chopped and changed so much, almost like “Trigger’s broom”!
Demolished. Bowling alley which occupied units in the building to the right of the cinema’s former location converted and extended to form a new Asda superstore. Part of this extension, surface level car parking and ‘click and collect’ pick-up point now occupy the former site of the cinema.
Thanks Zappomatic, nice summary—I’d just found the plans for myself but I’d missed some of the detail you’ve picked up on.
The facade is a dreadful state and I had no idea that so much had been lost of the original.
(Original facade shown on p14 of the Design & Access Statement.)
The rendering of the ‘restored’ facade looks like a massive improvement!
I haven’t been to any of the auditoria in a very long time, but from memory, they will have their work cut out to do a good selective ‘restoration’ and will also need to improve control over the acoustics.
I imagine that plans for a ‘boutique’ cinema built on top of the nearby ‘The Glades’ regional shopping mall (also known as ‘intu Bromley’ for a few years) will now not be taken forward. Meanwhile, the £90m Bromley South Central development is under construction, to include a 9 screen Vue multiplex, with completion delayed and now slated for Spring 2018.
This cinema originally opened with two THX certified auditoria, which, at that time, were very few in relative number in the UK compared to most other developed markets—and by the late 1990s not to be expected for a newly commissioned site.
Alas, at that time IIRC KCS speakers were installed—and those screens didn’t sound particularly different to the main screens in any other run-of-the-mill multiplex, i.e. medicore and not comparable to the excellent THX certified installations at the Empire Leicester Square or Warner West End in the 1990s.
(Of course, this is not a comment on the current presentation quality, with which I am not familar.)
I agree that they ought to be one of the indispensable “finishing touches” to a good cinema.
Alas, it seems curtains/tabs are seen as a dated feature with no upside and plenty of scope for reliability and maintenance issues, whilst they are now uncommon so patrons may be bemused by them? :–(
OTOH, the stated basis of the OLS refurb is to keep it as a traditional single screen “super cinema” with existing features preserved and/or sympathetic treatment otherwise, so not including curtains/tabs would be to miss the point.
Looking at the the above referenced planning application…
-In the plans, the first few rows of the rear circle are shown. Aisles are reduced from 3 to 2 with no centre aisle, and the number of seats per row slightly decreased. The rows do not appear to be re-stepped, but I assume wider replacement seats will be installed.
-In addition to renders being included in the “Design & Access Statement,” there is a separate “Renders as Proposed” document, which contains slightly higher resolution copies of the renders. It can be seen that there is a concessions (“SNACKS”) bar opposite the main entrance doors; moreover, to the left of this are doors with a “SCREEN ONE” sign on the wall above. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that the refurbished auditorium will still include stalls.
Revisiting the licensing plans for the OLS, and the classic “cross section” drawing, I have to wonder how this will work. The current rear stalls, presumably, will be unusable with the larger screen. However, if the screen is moved ahead of the existing proscenium, to get increased width within the existing auditorium footprint—and I would assume minimum 60ft. width for the new screen?—then this would probably make the front stalls also unusable.
Furthermore, ideally, to bring the cinema in line with today’s practices and expectations, the screen would also be positioned so that its vertical centre is positioned closer in line with, say, at least the middle rows of the circle—albeit this would not help the stalls either. I would also expect a flagship Dolby Cinema installation, if that is what this will be, would ideally have the projectors positioned to be aligned vertically with the screen centre.
All things considered, I can only imagine that very considerable alterations will be needed to the front of the auditorium, and possibly adjacent areas, involving reconfiguration of the ceiling, side walls, services and stairwells.
Maybe the first few rows of the circle could be removed to gain more space for reconfigured/restepped stalls? I am certain that FanaticalAboutOdeon can enlighten…
“Odeon are proposing to carry out a regeneration project which will preserve and enhance the character of the existing Art Deco Odeon, providing a much-needed upgrade to reflect the status it holds. It will accommodate the needs of the Cinema, be state-of-the-art in terms of technology to offer the best film experience. Its overall design will be brought together again to read as a whole rather than fragments of a past masterpiece. The history, heritage and the story of the building as well as the future of cinema enjoyment have all been major drivers in the development of the scheme. It will be the ultimate beacon of the ODEON brand as the best the brand can be, reinforcing the role of Odeon in its industry This is not a restoration project but where significant elements remain these will be preserved and the essence will be respected. It will still remain a ‘working cinema’, not just an icon or beacon.
“[…]
“This building whilst having special architectural, cultural and historic interest is not currently listed.
“[…]
“The cinema will offer a more open and inviting frontage with new glazing, canopy and glazed feature box, signage and advertising strategy.
“The glazed box would be an extension of the 1st floor Foyer Bar and wrap approximately 5m to the South of the existing opening. The feature element will be used as a seating area and help to present a more open and inviting space.
“[…]
“The glazed box would be constructed as a structural glass solution made from structural glass units and supported with glass beams and fins.
“[…]
“Gold coloured metal, linking outside to inside, would feature to the canopy soffit and edges, as well as featuring as a spandrel panel to mask close existing column locations. It is also proposed to have a white lit band to the edge of the canopy featuring a written historical reference – ‘Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation’. The Text will be provided by LED panels, and will be capable of change – e.g. for Premiere performances.
“[…]
“We are also proposing that the current arrangement of advertising and signage would be refined. The digital billboard sizes would remain the same but the paper billboard will be removed. […] With just one digital billboard each side of the glazed element, the building will present a more legible and balanced façade.
“[…]
“The details of the signage will be the subject of a separate Advertising Consent application.
“[…]
“At the foyer level the separation between the main auditorium and the studio screens will be connected for the first time. Internally a Lift and Escalator will be introduced to the main foyer space easing movement around the building and allowing wheelchair access to the Circle level which was previously not possible.
“[…]
“As an existing 1930s building the number of provisions such as WC numbers or Accessible WC numbers do not meet the current requirements. However with the capacity being reduced and the sanitary provisions being updated and increased, the building should better meet current standards of provision.”
Note the reference to capacity reduction and the connection between the “OLS” and “Studio” foyer areas.
EllisWilliams Architects are listed as the architect in the “Design & Access Statement.”
A new planning application is now up, 17/07604/FULL – “Installation of new cinema canopy, refurbishment of the ground floor entrances, and replacement of first floor canopy balcony with glass extension to first floor lobby bar”, dated as validated 31 August 2017.
It is pending approval; therefore, presumably the refurbishment will not commence until the application is permitted.
Alas, Westminster Council’s IDOX site has just gone down (again!), but here’s what I’ve gleaned so far:
-The design for the updated facade can be seen under “FULL ELEVATIONS-PROPOSED” and “RENDERS AS PROPOSED.”
-There is large “DOLBY” sign on the right side of a new glazed balcony area. This suggets that a full Dolby Cinema installation is planned, with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
-EllisWilliams Architects are responsible for drawings submitted with this application.
-3x large LED displays retained. All other external advertising to be tidied up and consolidated with new digital displays.
-Blue neon strips on the facade to be replaced with LED.
-The Odeon Studios sign is removed with “Screens 2-6” shown on the new canopy above the entrance to the “studio” screens.
–“Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation” (!) is shown on the canopy above the entrance to what I assume is now Screen 1.
-The “Design & Access Statement” makes considerable reference to the cinema’s heritage. It mentions that the building is not listed several times, but almost suggests that it ought to be, albeit noting that much of the original features have been lost through previous refurbishments. There appears to be considerable apprehension around this; certainly the importance of the building is fully recognised.
-No details on the auditorium works as they are not the subject of this application.
The proposed facade, in my opinion, looks very good indeed.
I note the CTA’s Casework Report (June 2017) comments on the pending refurbishment, saying that it will be kept as a single screen, and the organ retained, with a “large format screen of some genus” planned.
I don’t find “kept as a single screen” terribly reassuring if the form of that screen is unknown, albeit keeping the organ and the constraints of the building imply that certain options that one could imagine are off the table.
OTOH, one might hope that it will feature a Dolby Cinema installation with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
I guess if the premiere for “Murder on the Orient Express” is at the OLS, then the refurb won’t happen until next year?
Cjbx11: According to Maeve Contractors, the conversion cost £5m. I saw £4.6m quoted elsewhere.
I’m not convinced by the conversion in terms of gaining the extra screen, but I do think that Empire 1 couldn’t meet today’s expectations—the stalls were too flatly raked, and the circle was too far from the screen—and the “slap echo” made dialogue unintelligible—especially since movie soundtracks, these days, are mixed for acoustically damped small to medium sized rooms.
Please don’t get me wrong, I loved Empire 1, but I can see that it wasn’t perfect.
Added to the above they obtained the IMAX brand on the facade and at present they have the only IMAX with Laser installation in London with the screen size to match. One only has to look at the BFI to see how popular full scale IMAX is.
Empire Cinemas' beneficial owner, Thomas Anderson, was reported to have had problems with debt structuring over in Ireland. Cineworld admit, in their annual report, to paying a very large premium (over their own fair market valuation) to acquire those key sites from Empire Cinemas.
Regarding standards of presentation, I cannot remember the lighting and tabs at my local Odeon, the main screen of which was still OK despite subdivision. But I can say that it wasn’t until the late 1990s that Dolby Digital was installed, and even then the sound was quite poor. JBL rear speakers were installed but who knows what was behind the screen.
I have been to multiplexes on multiple occasions (35mm) where there was a failure to switch lens for the main feature (until I left the auditorium to complain!) and even more times with otherwise sloppy projection such as an out-of-focus picture.
The local Cannons and Coronets, which may well have had tabs, were absolutely dire in all respects.
OTOH, I went to a new multiplex back then and there were no tabs; before the feature, a badly aligned slide projector was used to show still adverts for local businesses. This included the local kebab shop or similar. Absolutely terrible.
I went here in the late 90’s on one occasion.
At that time it had, IIRC, the same type of pleated fabric wall coverings, and definitely the same seats, as were then fitted to the Warner Village West End. JBL 8330 rear array.
However, the use of some of the same parts doesn’t equate to the same whole! Presentation was extremely poor.
It has now been refurbished, although how extensively and to what standard I do not know.
According to Vue’s website, Vue Westfield London and Vue Westfield Stratford City are the 1st and 3rd highest grossing cinemas in the UK. I wonder what’s the 2nd—is there a list somewhere?
They are both a few miles from the edge of Central London and can easily be accessed by tube from there. Vue Westfield London is probably about as close to the West End as a 20 screen “megaplex” will ever be built!
They are both listed as flagship sites by Vue but IMO Vue Westfield London is very much a run of the mill multiplex.
I went here a couple of times in the late 90’s. Absolutely dreadful multiplex in a very unappealing secondary location. I gather Digbeth, nearby, is now “trendy.”
Rear array speakers were JBL 8330.
Thanks, Zappomatic, for those photos of the access to Screen 9.
What a dreadfully scrappy arrangement with the “wooden box” at the back of Screen 9.
The stairs/lobby areas look pretty good, but the “starfield” is bodged—not remotely comparable to the 1989 fibre-optic starfields in the foyer/Empire 1. There’s some information on them in the Lighting + Sound International article I previously linked to (PDF p19-21):
“Par Opti Projects used no less than 14,000 fibre optic lenses producing 26,000 light points in the ceiling, created by various size fibres. The new Eldon bezels were specifically developed for the four sizes of star lenses, together with twinkle wheels…”
BTW, the “studio” screens use Eomac stretched fabric wall systems—“gold frames by others” according to the PDF linked to from that page.
Wonder when the foyer/associated areas work will commence? I assume at some point they will have to completely close during the works, and looking at their website, Cineworld have performances scheduled through the end of this month.
Sooner the better as I already said my “goodbyes” to the existent foyer—no desire to go through that process again! :–( Thankfully, on my last visit to Screen 1 I had no idea about the impeding conversion—theatreofvarieties' strip-out photos were fascinating, but time (and nice replacement auditoria) heals. It would have been far too emotional to bear.
Oh dear, trying to decipher patents is enough to make one crazy!
At least this one is quite specific and straightforward and most of the key information is in the short abstract at the start. One thing missing is the front row distance:
“a seat in the centre of the front row would be located is spaced apart perpendicularly from the screen a distance not less than 0.3 times the width of the auditorium adjacent the front wall”
This is exactly what Fig. 3 shows.
I am interested in why you think a close front row and steep raking is not suitable in particular for a small auditorium?
BTW, a strange story loosely related to this: A couple of years ago, I had booked seats in Empire Leicester Square Screen 7 to attend a midday screening for myself and a friend. On entering the auditorium, I stopped at the front pondering where to sit, saying to my friend that the front row seats I’d booked seem to be too close to the screen.
Sitting in a middle row was an Irish gentlemen, formally dressed IIRC, who said, “No no no… don’t sit there… sit at the back. There will only be a few in…”
It didn’t occur to me at the time, but I can’t help but wonder if the gentlemen wasn’t Thomas Anderson himself!
Lunch at Wong Kei, eating therapy for cinema obsessions (!), sounds good to me. ;–)
Photos of plasterwork remnants can be seen in documents submitted in relation to the following planning applications:
http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=0206506ADLBC — see “PROPOSALS FOR THE SALVAGE & REUSE OF EXISTING DOORS / PLASTERWORK” – PDF page numbers 18-20. Note that this part of the document is excerpted from an earlier 1998 survey. Also within this document are details of a later survey (PDF p4), and on PDF p21-22 are plans from the 1998 survey showing locations where plasterwork and other auditorium decorative remnants were found.
http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=I70H4KRP59000 – see “PHOTOS” – which are of a couple of removed sections of plasterwork.
http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=IGFO5IRPR1000 – see “PLASTERWORK SCHEDULE” – details of the four sections of plasterwork removed and proposed restoration work (white paint only!) – and “PHOTO” – showing the proposed wall display of these sections.
madorganplayer: In response to your question about whether the roof was “taken off,” it certainly seems to be the case.
This can be seen in Google Earth (desktop application) by turning on “Historical Imagery” and setting the date to 2003.
For convenience, and since Google allow limited use of these images on third-party sites providing attribution is included, I have exported the relevant image from Google Earth and uploaded to the Photos section.
Documents associated with the planning application for the 2000s reconstruction are available. (N.B. Some modifications were made to these proposals in subsequent applications.)
The roof plan shows new glazed roof areas, and most of the remaining part of the roof is a “flat roof to plant enclosure.”
Looking at the section plans, the plant rooms and central section of glazed roofing extend above the original building. Beneath them, there are offices (fourth floor) which also extend above the original building.
Given the extensiveness of the reconstruction, requiring the facades/dome to be “proped up,” I’m afraid that the chances of organ parts remaining up there are, I’d suggest, zero.
Hello Lionel,
You are absolutely right, I felt guilty whilst doing it knowing that I had “more important” matters to attend to.
I couldn’t help myself, once I started thinking about it I felt compelled to figure it all out as far as I could! :–( On the face of it, it has almost no practical value whatsoever other than satisfying my own curiosity—and it is, I hope, of interest to anyone who bothers to read my ramblings—although they might equally well wish that I would shut up!
The best cinemas for me are a more “magical” environment than anywhere else. Very little can touch them in terms of the special feeling I get from them.
For better or worse, the engineering side of my brain wants to know “how and why it works,” so I always end up “pulling things apart” to find out.
Whether my “cinema obsession” actually makes any sense… hmm. I enjoy it, but I do drive myself nuts at times. Few people “get it” so, maybe I should find a “normal hobby” like following football! :-O However, I consider the intense interest in watching a ball being kicked around a field for 90 minutes, hoping that it will eventually make its way into the “right” net, and the tribe-like devotion to football teams, to be somewhat “insane”! (My apologies to football fans…)
As for these 60s/70s mini-cinemas like the Odeon Wardour St./Swiss Centre—I find the auditoriums very strange. Yes, there were lots of constraints but why should they result in odd shaped auditoria with such small screens? I think we can do better today with “boothless” digital projection. A small auditorium can be a comfortable and intimate environment; a good experience if the design, decor, seating layout, screen size/position and sound system are right.
BTW, (if anyone is “crazy” enough to want to read it!) you may be interested in a patent application (I’m not clear on whether the patent has been granted) by Thomas Anderson (Empire Cinemas etc.) relating to the design/geometry of small auditoria.
Now, where do I find the group hypnotherapy session to stop the “cinema obsession”…?
I think I’ve now figured out a possible way this scheme could be implemented, based on available plans, publically stated project goals, presumed retention of the organ and stage, the structural constraints of keeping the existing circle structure, and the assumption that the proscenium cannot be significantly raised in height:
-Removal of front splay walls at least up to approx. location of the left/right front stalls fire hoses. According to the licencing plans, this would mainly affect stairs at stalls level on the right side that may require relocation, or possibly could simply be eliminated. Removal of splay walls to a position slightly beyond the front stalls side fire exit doors would be advantageous, to gain more screen width and aesthetic integration with the existing walls, but modification of other access and service areas etc. would then be required.
-Replacement splay walls in new location to accomodate new wider screen and sightlines therefore required.
-Replacement screen between 60-65ft. wide, where 65ft. by my estimates is the limit.
-Removal of approx. last 5 rows of existing stalls seating to accomodate sightlines to top of new screen; move stalls level rear wall forward (possibly with new toilets behind.)
-Acoustic absorption with suitable covering fitted to walls and ceilings at screen end, noting that Eomac’s catalogue includes “acoustic wood” and various design options for fabric covering-based systems.
This would still leave a compromised auditorium by current standards, but would essentially keep the original form, including retention of stage and organ, and should leave sufficient space for tabs also.
By my estimates, assuming a 65ft. wide screen, such a layout would put seats in the centre part of the front 4 rows in the Royal Circle more or less within IMAX standards (where the rearmost seats should be no further than ~1 screen width from the screen) for seating distance/position in relation to screen width, albeit located a little too high. The other 2 rows of the Royal Circle would still be OK.
Having a look at the layout of a new build iSense auditorium, the rearmost seats are 1.4x screen width away from the screen. By my estimation the scheme outlined above would put all but the last 8 rows of the circle within this distance, and in this respect it could be said that a majority of seats would meet current expectations of “immersiveness“ as found in auditoria marketed as “premium large format” cinemas, albeit not comparable to a textbook IMAX or the Cineworld/Empire LSQ IMAX (nor the IMPACT/Superscreen at the Empire, for that matter)—although some may consider this to be preferable!
So, as long as you are in the “right” seats, assuming laser projection and Atmos, it seems to me there is a good chance the pending refurbishment/alterations will make for an up-to-date “immersive” cinema experience with all the trappings of a super cinema to boot.
A 2012 application specifically to confirm that this would be in keeping with Class D2 use and thus not require planning permission, resulted in a Certificate of Lawful Use or Development confirming this would not constitute a material change of use being issued by Westminster Council.
As this scheme has not been taken forward this would appear to be of largely academic (!) interest; however, the application does include existing plans. The remains of old decor on the “right hand side wall” in the photos posted by Ian I would assume to be in the “PLANT/SERVICE AREA” on the existing plans.
Amazing that alterations to these buildings result in them being chopped and changed so much, almost like “Trigger’s broom”!
Demolished. Bowling alley which occupied units in the building to the right of the cinema’s former location converted and extended to form a new Asda superstore. Part of this extension, surface level car parking and ‘click and collect’ pick-up point now occupy the former site of the cinema.
Lionel: Afraid I don’t. However, you can view the plans for the cinema within this licencing application.
A short blurb on the refurbishment to create the Picturehouse, as well as a number of photos, are on the website of Phelan Construction:
http://www.phelans.co.uk/portfolio/projects/picturehouse-central-piccadilly
The project duration was 20 weeks, including strip-out, minor structure alterations (to walls and floors, and new steel work) and fit-out.
Thanks Zappomatic, nice summary—I’d just found the plans for myself but I’d missed some of the detail you’ve picked up on.
The facade is a dreadful state and I had no idea that so much had been lost of the original.
(Original facade shown on p14 of the Design & Access Statement.)
The rendering of the ‘restored’ facade looks like a massive improvement!
I haven’t been to any of the auditoria in a very long time, but from memory, they will have their work cut out to do a good selective ‘restoration’ and will also need to improve control over the acoustics.
I imagine that plans for a ‘boutique’ cinema built on top of the nearby ‘The Glades’ regional shopping mall (also known as ‘intu Bromley’ for a few years) will now not be taken forward. Meanwhile, the £90m Bromley South Central development is under construction, to include a 9 screen Vue multiplex, with completion delayed and now slated for Spring 2018.
This cinema originally opened with two THX certified auditoria, which, at that time, were very few in relative number in the UK compared to most other developed markets—and by the late 1990s not to be expected for a newly commissioned site.
Alas, at that time IIRC KCS speakers were installed—and those screens didn’t sound particularly different to the main screens in any other run-of-the-mill multiplex, i.e. medicore and not comparable to the excellent THX certified installations at the Empire Leicester Square or Warner West End in the 1990s.
(Of course, this is not a comment on the current presentation quality, with which I am not familar.)
For whatever reason, the “Omnimaxx” brand is now known as “OmniplexMAXX.”
A quick WIPO search brings up entries for “Omnimax” being registered as a trademark by IMAX Corp. in at least the US and Canada.
The OmniplexMAXX screen in Antrim is said to be the largest in Ireland at 23m wide and 9m high.
Press release from January 2016 states that all Omniplex Maxx screens to be equipped with Dolby Atmos.
I agree that they ought to be one of the indispensable “finishing touches” to a good cinema.
Alas, it seems curtains/tabs are seen as a dated feature with no upside and plenty of scope for reliability and maintenance issues, whilst they are now uncommon so patrons may be bemused by them? :–(
OTOH, the stated basis of the OLS refurb is to keep it as a traditional single screen “super cinema” with existing features preserved and/or sympathetic treatment otherwise, so not including curtains/tabs would be to miss the point.
HowardBHaas: Hear, hear!
Revisiting past posts, I guess this post by FanaticalAboutOdeon suggests the circle cannot be shortened at all. Hmm…
Looking at the the above referenced planning application…
-In the plans, the first few rows of the rear circle are shown. Aisles are reduced from 3 to 2 with no centre aisle, and the number of seats per row slightly decreased. The rows do not appear to be re-stepped, but I assume wider replacement seats will be installed.
-In addition to renders being included in the “Design & Access Statement,” there is a separate “Renders as Proposed” document, which contains slightly higher resolution copies of the renders. It can be seen that there is a concessions (“SNACKS”) bar opposite the main entrance doors; moreover, to the left of this are doors with a “SCREEN ONE” sign on the wall above. It seems reasonable to assume, therefore, that the refurbished auditorium will still include stalls.
Revisiting the licensing plans for the OLS, and the classic “cross section” drawing, I have to wonder how this will work. The current rear stalls, presumably, will be unusable with the larger screen. However, if the screen is moved ahead of the existing proscenium, to get increased width within the existing auditorium footprint—and I would assume minimum 60ft. width for the new screen?—then this would probably make the front stalls also unusable.
Furthermore, ideally, to bring the cinema in line with today’s practices and expectations, the screen would also be positioned so that its vertical centre is positioned closer in line with, say, at least the middle rows of the circle—albeit this would not help the stalls either. I would also expect a flagship Dolby Cinema installation, if that is what this will be, would ideally have the projectors positioned to be aligned vertically with the screen centre.
All things considered, I can only imagine that very considerable alterations will be needed to the front of the auditorium, and possibly adjacent areas, involving reconfiguration of the ceiling, side walls, services and stairwells.
Maybe the first few rows of the circle could be removed to gain more space for reconfigured/restepped stalls? I am certain that FanaticalAboutOdeon can enlighten…
Excerpts from the “Design & Access Statement”:
“Odeon are proposing to carry out a regeneration project which will preserve and enhance the character of the existing Art Deco Odeon, providing a much-needed upgrade to reflect the status it holds. It will accommodate the needs of the Cinema, be state-of-the-art in terms of technology to offer the best film experience. Its overall design will be brought together again to read as a whole rather than fragments of a past masterpiece. The history, heritage and the story of the building as well as the future of cinema enjoyment have all been major drivers in the development of the scheme. It will be the ultimate beacon of the ODEON brand as the best the brand can be, reinforcing the role of Odeon in its industry This is not a restoration project but where significant elements remain these will be preserved and the essence will be respected. It will still remain a ‘working cinema’, not just an icon or beacon.
“[…]
“This building whilst having special architectural, cultural and historic interest is not currently listed.
“[…]
“The cinema will offer a more open and inviting frontage with new glazing, canopy and glazed feature box, signage and advertising strategy.
“The glazed box would be an extension of the 1st floor Foyer Bar and wrap approximately 5m to the South of the existing opening. The feature element will be used as a seating area and help to present a more open and inviting space.
“[…]
“The glazed box would be constructed as a structural glass solution made from structural glass units and supported with glass beams and fins.
“[…]
“Gold coloured metal, linking outside to inside, would feature to the canopy soffit and edges, as well as featuring as a spandrel panel to mask close existing column locations. It is also proposed to have a white lit band to the edge of the canopy featuring a written historical reference – ‘Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation’. The Text will be provided by LED panels, and will be capable of change – e.g. for Premiere performances.
“[…]
“We are also proposing that the current arrangement of advertising and signage would be refined. The digital billboard sizes would remain the same but the paper billboard will be removed. […] With just one digital billboard each side of the glazed element, the building will present a more legible and balanced façade.
“[…]
“The details of the signage will be the subject of a separate Advertising Consent application.
“[…]
“At the foyer level the separation between the main auditorium and the studio screens will be connected for the first time. Internally a Lift and Escalator will be introduced to the main foyer space easing movement around the building and allowing wheelchair access to the Circle level which was previously not possible.
“[…]
“As an existing 1930s building the number of provisions such as WC numbers or Accessible WC numbers do not meet the current requirements. However with the capacity being reduced and the sanitary provisions being updated and increased, the building should better meet current standards of provision.”
Note the reference to capacity reduction and the connection between the “OLS” and “Studio” foyer areas.
EllisWilliams Architects are listed as the architect in the “Design & Access Statement.”
A new planning application is now up, 17/07604/FULL – “Installation of new cinema canopy, refurbishment of the ground floor entrances, and replacement of first floor canopy balcony with glass extension to first floor lobby bar”, dated as validated 31 August 2017.
It is pending approval; therefore, presumably the refurbishment will not commence until the application is permitted.
Alas, Westminster Council’s IDOX site has just gone down (again!), but here’s what I’ve gleaned so far:
-The design for the updated facade can be seen under “FULL ELEVATIONS-PROPOSED” and “RENDERS AS PROPOSED.”
-There is large “DOLBY” sign on the right side of a new glazed balcony area. This suggets that a full Dolby Cinema installation is planned, with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
-EllisWilliams Architects are responsible for drawings submitted with this application.
-3x large LED displays retained. All other external advertising to be tidied up and consolidated with new digital displays.
-Blue neon strips on the facade to be replaced with LED.
-The Odeon Studios sign is removed with “Screens 2-6” shown on the new canopy above the entrance to the “studio” screens.
–“Oscar Deutsch Entertains Our Nation” (!) is shown on the canopy above the entrance to what I assume is now Screen 1.
-The “Design & Access Statement” makes considerable reference to the cinema’s heritage. It mentions that the building is not listed several times, but almost suggests that it ought to be, albeit noting that much of the original features have been lost through previous refurbishments. There appears to be considerable apprehension around this; certainly the importance of the building is fully recognised.
-No details on the auditorium works as they are not the subject of this application.
The proposed facade, in my opinion, looks very good indeed.
I note the CTA’s Casework Report (June 2017) comments on the pending refurbishment, saying that it will be kept as a single screen, and the organ retained, with a “large format screen of some genus” planned.
I don’t find “kept as a single screen” terribly reassuring if the form of that screen is unknown, albeit keeping the organ and the constraints of the building imply that certain options that one could imagine are off the table.
OTOH, one might hope that it will feature a Dolby Cinema installation with Dolby Vision (HDR laser projection) and Dolby Atmos.
I guess if the premiere for “Murder on the Orient Express” is at the OLS, then the refurb won’t happen until next year?
Looks like they will be also be using a temporary cinema in Embankment Gardens again.
Cjbx11: According to Maeve Contractors, the conversion cost £5m. I saw £4.6m quoted elsewhere.
I’m not convinced by the conversion in terms of gaining the extra screen, but I do think that Empire 1 couldn’t meet today’s expectations—the stalls were too flatly raked, and the circle was too far from the screen—and the “slap echo” made dialogue unintelligible—especially since movie soundtracks, these days, are mixed for acoustically damped small to medium sized rooms.
Please don’t get me wrong, I loved Empire 1, but I can see that it wasn’t perfect.
Added to the above they obtained the IMAX brand on the facade and at present they have the only IMAX with Laser installation in London with the screen size to match. One only has to look at the BFI to see how popular full scale IMAX is.
Empire Cinemas' beneficial owner, Thomas Anderson, was reported to have had problems with debt structuring over in Ireland. Cineworld admit, in their annual report, to paying a very large premium (over their own fair market valuation) to acquire those key sites from Empire Cinemas.
Regarding standards of presentation, I cannot remember the lighting and tabs at my local Odeon, the main screen of which was still OK despite subdivision. But I can say that it wasn’t until the late 1990s that Dolby Digital was installed, and even then the sound was quite poor. JBL rear speakers were installed but who knows what was behind the screen.
I have been to multiplexes on multiple occasions (35mm) where there was a failure to switch lens for the main feature (until I left the auditorium to complain!) and even more times with otherwise sloppy projection such as an out-of-focus picture.
The local Cannons and Coronets, which may well have had tabs, were absolutely dire in all respects.
OTOH, I went to a new multiplex back then and there were no tabs; before the feature, a badly aligned slide projector was used to show still adverts for local businesses. This included the local kebab shop or similar. Absolutely terrible.