Robert: Thanks for your fascinating recollections of how things were back in the day! By those standards, showmanship and presentation had already declined before I was born.
Empire 1 was my favourite cinema, too. But I always imagined that it couldn’t possibly remain in that form forever. :–(
Lionel: Interesting that the GM said that to you back then.
In the 1990s, new build multiplex development in London had trailed behind the rest of the country. In parts of London, the only “local” option was a 1930s cinema which typically had become a run down Cannon or Coronet, probably with Altec speakers behind the screen, and, in the largest auditorium, a really bad Dolby Stereo installation, with the smaller auditoria still mono. The environment was very poor with awful subdivisions and lack of upkeep.
If you wanted to see a quality presentation with 5.1 digital audio and particularly in a THX certified screen then the West End was the only game in town.
I remember Empire 1 being very busy at peak times; I knew people at that time with no particular special interest in cinema who would visit the West End for some “blockbuster” movies.
By 2000 or so a number of new multiplexes had opened in London, so this situation had changed. The standard of presentation at these tended to be sub-par, but they were new, clean and had digital sound. More have opened today with further sites in the pipeline.
Around that time the Empire building (5-6 Leicester Sq.) was acquired by London & Regional Properties (from First Leisure, operators of the nightclub that was then below the main part of the cinema.) Currently, AFAIK the building is on a 25 year lease (ending 2030) to the company which owns the casino.
I had expected the building to be demolished by now, and I dare say without the successful casino, it would have been.
I don’t see small auditoria built in “spare” space as negative—do not visit them if you don’t like them? I have not been to the Odeon Mezzanine/Studios in a long time.
I share your concerns over the loss of West End cinema “culture.” Empire Cinemas, I think, very much ran it as the Empire Leicester Sq. and not another multiplex and we shall see if this is sustained under Cineworld.
One of the benefits of an IMAX installation is the quality control including continuous montoring by IMAX, and automatic daily recalibration of picture/sound. Auditoria used for premieres should also benefit from more servicing of projection/sound than the average cinema.
All IMAX screenings are introduced by a member of staff; the Empire IMAX still has colour changing concealed lighting; no tabs but the screen is never simply left blank.
A new laser show would be a great addition. :–(
I sudder to think of watching an 8K screening whilst eating a plastic tasting steak from the awful tourist trap that is an Angus Steak House!
Thankfully, this is not the direction that cinemas are going in, however. Operators are spending a lot of money refurbishing or on new sites with nice foyer areas and “premium large format” screens featuring Dolby Atmos, sometimes laser projection, and more spacious seating. Also, the average new IMAX screen—and they are increasing in number—may be disappointing for someone familar with the “classic” ones, but IMAX Digital is a high quality system—vastly better than the days of the typical multiplex out-of-focus 35mm presentation with medicore audio!
I agree with your comments on the current medicore output of Hollywood. The picture quality, sound and special effects in some of today’s releases is incredible—but the incomprehensible plot and threadbare storytelling makes watching “blockbuster” or “tentpole” films with wall to wall action like going to a theme park. I like theme parks, actually, but it’s not how movies ought to be.
P.S. For me Leicester Square is a nice place to be on a sunny afternoon if it’s not too busy.
I paid a visit to the Vue West End yesterday to see the re-released 3D/4K transfer/restoration/conversion of “Terminator 2.”
The new foyer and associated auditorium access areas are very attractive, being bright, welcoming and fresh, yet warmly lit, in an appropriate way for a cinema. I could nit-pick, but in a nutshell they have done a fabulous job.
Brass balustrades in the escalator stairwell landings, along with marble tiles, are, I believe, retained from the original 1993 fit-out. All windows to Leicester Court were blacked out, and I had assumed that the automatic door exit from the escalators were out of use, but looking at a photo I had taken, I had most likely been confused.
Unfortunately, the screening was not such a positive experience. Only one screening was listed as scheduled, in Screen 5, and I had booked a seat in the centre of a row. Alas, after obtaining my tickets from the vending machine, on presenting my tickets, I was informed that the screening was now in Screen 6, which I gather was due to Screen 5 being used for an event. I expressed my dissatisfaction to their disinterested ears.
Once in the auditorium, I discovered that my reallocated seat was off-centre, and the centre seats in that row were later occupied by other patrons. “Non-sync” music was played before the feature, and I may be mistaken, but it sounded something like a bizarre “muzak” version of generic movie soundtrack material. Tabs were left open with only a blank screen shown.
At the scheduled programme time, a member of staff entered the auditorium and curtly announced from the rear that we would have to wait 10 minutes for the film. This seems bizarre for a digital presentation, and I can only imagine that the DCP was frantically ingested at the last minute or similar!
The film started with a “pop”, no preceding material being played, and ended similarly abruptly, with the house lights remaining dimmed even after the end credits, and patrons had to find their way out of the auditorium using the “torch” function of their mobile phones; one of them quipped, “this cinema is terminated!”
Picture quality was very good, but on the dark side with 3D glasses on, and the black level (with glasses off) a little high. Geometry was also good, but with a bit of a curve towards the screen edges at the bottom.
Sound quality was good, although I assume playback was slightly less than reference level, and the LFE seemed restrained. Still, maximum levels were easily handled, with clear and clean high frequencies at all times, albeit coloured by a little peakiness.
The better auditoria in the 1993 multiplex were built to achieve excellent acoustics, with the advantage of not being four parallel walls as today’s auditoria tend towards, and this was apparent today with a highly controlled reverberation time and overall flat room contribution, and very good front stereo imaging.
However, it must be said that Screen 6 has too small a screen size, with seating too far away, certainly by today’s standards, and pales in comparison to the new “large format” digital screens in a certain cinema only a couple of hundred feet or so away—or for that matter the Odeon Leicester Square from the front stalls. It would be adequate for a smaller scale film, but is not for a monumental affair like T2.
The auditorium was very comfortable with good seats and excellent air conditioning, albeit all black in colour.
As for the film, to my mind, it goes without saying that T2 has a vastly more coherent and structured plot, better characterisation and more depth than today’s average “summer blockbuster”. The new transfer is outstanding with no visible grain, and almost perfect colour grading to the originally intended tints. It looks almost new, albeit not quite as detailed as current digitally acquired material. The 3D conversion is generally on the conservative side.
On leaving the Vue West End, I complained to a member of staff, who was very friendly and understanding, clearly enthusiastic about cinema in general, and they apologised profusely saying that Vue were “deeply humilated” by what had happened with the T2 screening.
Based on today’s visit, having spent £6.6m to modernise the Vue West End to create a very attractive and comfortable premium flagship location, with pricing to match, Vue really need to improve the overall customer experience and presentation to a consistent standard.
I will definitely return in the belief that next time will be better…
I have taken a number of photos, uploads to follow—alas only limited shots of the auditorium as it was too dark after the film finished!
LW’s own amplifiers are used in all auditoria (MUK and EK V2 series.)
As each of the LW 6117 units contains two 21" drivers, in the iSense auditorium the LFE channel is reproduced using eight 21" drivers, equivalent in surface area to 16 18" drivers.
At least at the Odeon Orpington iSense screen, it looks like the days of the “local” cinema using conked out old Altecs, or otherwise underspecified systems, are well and truly over.
“5.1. Why do presence ratings increase with screen size?
“[…]
“Thus, a high-level account of these results might posit that larger displays are generally more impressive and therefore more engaging. Of course, it should come as no surprise that object size is an important visual measure. After all, it is not retinal images but the properties of distal stimuli that we are rightly interested in, and our perceptions of these are derived from the influences of various perceptual constancies, including size constancy.
“Evidence from fMRI (Murray, Boyaci, & Kersten, 2006) has shown that the spread of activation across the retinotopic V1 increases with an increase in perceived size, even when retinal size is constant. Exactly why this occurs is still not clear […] but it does show that the perception of physical object size, traditionally associated with high-level processes, can assert its influence at the very earliest stages of cortical visual processing, presumably through feedback.”
So, screen size is a factor, albeit in that particular study the field of view was kept constant, with the screen size altered by using two different screens, one more than twice the size of the other.
alpinedownhiller: Sure, screen size is a factor, hence I began my post by comparing an 80ft.+ wide screen with a 5" diagonal mobile phone. Obviously holding the phone right in front of your eyes isn’t the same as a large screen even if the “FOV” is the same.
Confused by your comment: “Yeah but since you can chose where to sit, screen size does make a difference”?
With regard to the discussion on IMAX screen sizes, the important factor (given, say, 80ft.+ wide screens and not a 5" mobile phone) is the geometry of the auditorium.
Essentially, the distance from the screen to the last row should not exceed one screen width, and the first row not more than 0.35x screen width.
Also, the front row should be somewhat above the bottom of the screen, and the last row positioned about half way up.
Of course, the projection system must also be adequate to cope with the closer position to the screen compared to a traditional auditorium, and stadium seating is a given.
These requirements can also be expressed in terms of horizontal and vertical viewing angles.
IOW, whether a screen is 85ft. or 95ft. wide will make little difference, especially since the viewing angles vary depending on which row you choose to sit in!
(I am not sure what location this is, as the text overlay on the image ‘slideshow’ says that it’s at the ‘Resort World at the NEC Birmingham,’ but the filename says ‘Milton Keynes.’)
The interior design of this and other sites seems to be constructed from the ‘parts bin’ of Cineworld’s current ‘house style.’ Note that the linked image is on the website of Lyons + Sleeman + Hoare Architects, and it turns out that Cineworld have their own in-house architects also.
Cineworld’s ‘next generation’ foyer/corridors are looking good. If only their auditorium designs were more interesting than, say, a black box with an illuminated red star logo on each side wall!
Zappomatic: Odd indeed, maybe they are getting in there via the ductwork? I hope they offered refunds, or at least a goodwill gesture, to customers attending ridiculous ‘trapped fly’ screenings!
IIRC operators have had to come up with their own ‘ad hoc’ solutions for projection cabinets in ‘boothless’ auditoria, but off the shelf products are now becoming available.
The seats in the IMAX and IMPACT/Superscreen are from Seating Concepts. I have to wonder if the seating business has entered a race to the bottom using commodity parts sourced from China. Products from different manufacturers look very similar but don’t appear to be of real commerical ‘heavy duty’ spec.
Thanks (as well) Lionel for those photos, I have fond memories of those days!
Indeed there is nothing like the 80s! The fibre-optic ‘starfields’ were a wonderful addition, though not all the changes to the foyer were in good taste…
Zappomatic: They will sort out the seats; I didn’t explicitly ask about the timeframe or press for more details, but I got the impression that they plan on a full refurb of all auditoria. Not making ‘band-aid’ changes to seating upholstery may suggest that it will all be changing.
The Cineworld interim report shows that they have phased overhauls of all sites acquired from Empire, so at this point it could be next year, I’d guess?
The seats in the IMAX auditorium aren’t as comfortable as they were when new; the padding seems to have sagged a bit. I’m not sure their quality is better than my own ‘premium’ (but not ‘uber-expensive’) office chair—super comfortable when new but merely comfortable enough after a while!
Flies in the projection enclosures?! Silhouettes on the screen?
I have uploaded a few photos of the foyer taken today.
In particular, this one shows the dire state of the ceiling, with the further stains, and peeling/missing covering, possibly revealing the original 1962 finish (paint?):
Whilst that photo has not been post-processed in Photoshop, the others have; as I note in the description of that photo, the ceiling really does look that faded and stained. My other photos are, to a lesser or greater extent, not honest about the ceiling’s condition.
I expected leaving the Empire today to be a sad experience, but the foyer is in such messy, tatty and rapidly deteriorating state, not just the ceiling but also the disjointed collection of permanent and temporary fixtures and changes made over the years, that the shock of it being replaced has worn off. It is very jarring walking from the crumbling foyer into the still-new looking IMAX auditorium.
It needs redoing, so fingers crossed for a replacement that exceeds expectations!
I visited the “Cineworld Cinema – at the Empire Theatre” today to see “Dunkirk” in the IMAX auditorium.
I had a conversation with a member of staff who has worked there from UCI, through Empire Cinemas, and now Cineworld operation. They informed me that:
-The 4DX conversion is progressing. Strip-out of Screen 2 has already been completed. They are not sure, but they think that the 4DX conversion will result in the loss of one or more rows of seats to fit in the equipment; it will have fewer seats.
-They confirmed that the foyer “domes” will be lost, and said that whilst they understood the foyer has been around for a long time, it is dated and looking “patchy.” They expressed a positive view on the proposed design and were pleased about the forthcoming refurbishment.
-Asked if changes would be made to other areas, i.e. the rest of the auditoria and in particular the seating, they said that this would not be happening yet as the priority is the 4DX conversion and the foyer refurbishment.
-In response to my concerns over the prospect of it becoming “'a Cineworld multiplex…' it is, after all, the Empire Leicester Square,” they said that “that is the one thing [Cineworld] most definitely do NOT want… they want to keep it… glitzy.”
The IMAX auditorium is looking well cared for, excellent air conditioning, projection was perfect and the sound very good—visceral subbass at times. I have thought that the sound system doesn’t quite have the headroom to cope with the large auditorium and that was evident today; e.g. it sounded like the low frequency content was pushing the drivers to maximum excursion at times.
The IMAX trailer is a variant of this one, but altered to demonstrate the overhead/side speakers with a 3D visualisation of speakers placed around an auditorium, when the voiceover says “and immersive sound, that will surround you from here… here… and here.”
As for “Dunkirk,” it seemed to me to skip over Acts 1 and 2 and launched straight into Act 3 resulting an incomprehensible mess. Lovely photography and, as mentioned, impressive sound.
The 1.4:1 IMAX segments did not seem to quite reach the top of the screen but I assume were <1.9:1 as the screen is 1.7:1 and the laser projectors are capable of 1.4:1.
The odd scratch mark and other tale-tell signs could be seen uncorrected, so I assume Nolan didn’t allow IMAX to put the material through a heavy-handed DMR process. I shall leave an analogue vs. digital discussion at that, but it should be obvious which side of the fence I firmly sit on!
That’s actually the front left fire exit from the IMAX auditorium—which incidentally is in the same location as the wall between the IMAX and the IMPACT/Superscreen auditoria.
BTW, if you go to the “old” Street View images (by clicking on the clock icon in the top left hand corner) and change the date to May 2014, you can see it’s been left open as the IMAX was being finished.
Having a quick look at the licensing application plans, it seems access to Screen 6 involves going down the stairs of one fire exit, and, when near the external doors, going through another door to the second fire exit, and then up the stairs to the auditorium! Ridiculous…
I’d guess, then, that the lack of replacement finishes and the use of non-permanent signage, i.e. bits of paper (!), one way or the other has something to do with building regulations or (avoiding) building control approval, albeit there are plenty of Class 0 fire retardant materials to choose from…
I haven’t been to Screen 2 since the mid-90s—and that was only because, until I bought the ticket, I’d not realised the film I wanted to see had moved over from Screen 1! An awful auditorium.
It is curious that, if the floor can be lowered, that it hasn’t been done to date? It will be interesting to see just how much they are able to lower it by.
I, too, think that the stairs up to screens 7/8/9 are nicely decorated. I have not been to screen 6 and I’m surprised that the staircase is as you describe? I suspect the “urine” whiff actually emanates from the toilets!
It’s understandable that Cineworld want to rebrand and to my mind the stair/lobby areas for public auditorium access from the main foyer are a blank slate for them. I do not believe that because something was there first it automatically acquires some sort of mystical primacy, but I think it’s worth noting that the “domes” in the 1962 foyer seem to me to be a nod to the original 1927 interior.
I am concerned that without due care they will end up with the Empire looking like a run-of-the-mill multiplex with no attention paid to its “DNA.” They are, after all, going to be removing marble from the right vestibule wall… replacement finishes had better be up to standard!
Building Control entry (dated as received on 17th August 2017) for the Foyer and 4DX works is up on Westminster Council’s website.
To quote:
“Refurbishment of the public areas of the lobbies and cinema #2 located in the basement of Cineworld at Leicester Sq (previously Empire) for the conversion into a 4DX cinema.
“The refurbishment of the lobbies will include: – Demolition of existing floors, ceiling and wall finishes at ground floor lobby and public access to upper levels.
“The works will include: Breaking of the lower level concrete slab of the room and rebuild at a lower level to increase the space required for the system and new seating arrangement. Installation of suspended trusses between the columns which will support the equipment for the 4D effects (wind fans, water spray tanks, snow machine, fog machine) – Removal of all projector and installation of new one at the back of the room, in the former projection booth. – New floor, wall and ceiling finishes – New finishes at the access staircase and lobby. – All fire escapes remain unchanged”
So there you have it—how to convert Screen 2 to 4DX!
I can never work out why the section with the sloped ceiling (presumably due to the stadium seating structure above) is “curtained off” in these old (pre late 1980s refurb) photos…
LSQ is listed as “Refurbishment starting” (p17 – PDF page number) although according to an article in The Telegraph , “[LSQ] will get a makeover at the end of the year.”
I’ve just spent the last hour being very angry and grumbling to myself about Cineworld not “getting” the Empire LS (as a flagship venue with decades of heritage) and simply wanting to engage in a rebranding exercise for the sake of it.
OTOH, actually it’s a pretty bold piece of reimaging. I’m assuming expensive finishes and I guess the ceiling, in a way, is a nod to the existing one. Lots of concealed lighting and coving too.
Would be nice to see what they have in mind for the main section though. They had better put in some decent seating!
I assume they won’t be moving concessions to the stop of the stairs as queues would block the route to the IMPACT and 7/8/9 screens, and they still have the “curved” section with a poster (or maybe LED display?)
Talking of which, it looks like there are small LED displays above each auditorium entrance.
Reading through the presentation, Cineworld discuss their multiple “premium screens” approach so the addition of 4DX in Screen 2 and not the IMPACT screen makes sense.
A previous presentation (p29 – PDF page number) says “4DX and Super Screen expected to be installed in Leicester Square” so I wonder if any changes will be made to the IMPACT screen? To keep it at the currently available state of the art they need to install laser projection, which has very good black levels thus obviating the need for masking.
Update to previous post: The surround speakers appear to be manufactured by SLS Audio, a company acquired by Dolby Labs. a couple of years ago.
All of their products feature ribbon high frequency transducers.
Zappomatic: £10 for popcorn and a drink is better than trying to hide a can of Coke in your trousers and having it “explode” just as you walk past the usher to enter the auditorium—as once happened to me back when it was the Warner West End! ;–)
The large facade-mounted display is a very rare instance of outdoor advertising within the City of Westminster, in a location with extremely high footfall.
“The only commercial advertising screen in London’s Leicester Square, this impressive high definition digital screen is one of the largest in Central London at 63m2."
Elegant or not, I imagine it’s lucrative and very much here to stay!
I rather like the foyer with its “industrial” treatment (although I’m not sure about the finishes—the floor could be vinyl tiles not much better than B&Q or Wickes?!)
Seeing “Square Pie” and the other concessions in context, it doesn’t look so bad.
The configuration is a bit too reminiscent of a mall food court, but hey, a picking up a tasty slice of pizza before the feature sounds good to me!
Hopefully, I may finally have some time this week to check it out… :–( I can’t identify the speaker brand from the photos, so it will be interesting to check out the Dolby Atmos installs…
Robert: Thanks for your fascinating recollections of how things were back in the day! By those standards, showmanship and presentation had already declined before I was born.
Empire 1 was my favourite cinema, too. But I always imagined that it couldn’t possibly remain in that form forever. :–(
Lionel: Interesting that the GM said that to you back then.
In the 1990s, new build multiplex development in London had trailed behind the rest of the country. In parts of London, the only “local” option was a 1930s cinema which typically had become a run down Cannon or Coronet, probably with Altec speakers behind the screen, and, in the largest auditorium, a really bad Dolby Stereo installation, with the smaller auditoria still mono. The environment was very poor with awful subdivisions and lack of upkeep.
If you wanted to see a quality presentation with 5.1 digital audio and particularly in a THX certified screen then the West End was the only game in town.
I remember Empire 1 being very busy at peak times; I knew people at that time with no particular special interest in cinema who would visit the West End for some “blockbuster” movies.
By 2000 or so a number of new multiplexes had opened in London, so this situation had changed. The standard of presentation at these tended to be sub-par, but they were new, clean and had digital sound. More have opened today with further sites in the pipeline.
Around that time the Empire building (5-6 Leicester Sq.) was acquired by London & Regional Properties (from First Leisure, operators of the nightclub that was then below the main part of the cinema.) Currently, AFAIK the building is on a 25 year lease (ending 2030) to the company which owns the casino.
I had expected the building to be demolished by now, and I dare say without the successful casino, it would have been.
I don’t see small auditoria built in “spare” space as negative—do not visit them if you don’t like them? I have not been to the Odeon Mezzanine/Studios in a long time.
I share your concerns over the loss of West End cinema “culture.” Empire Cinemas, I think, very much ran it as the Empire Leicester Sq. and not another multiplex and we shall see if this is sustained under Cineworld.
One of the benefits of an IMAX installation is the quality control including continuous montoring by IMAX, and automatic daily recalibration of picture/sound. Auditoria used for premieres should also benefit from more servicing of projection/sound than the average cinema.
All IMAX screenings are introduced by a member of staff; the Empire IMAX still has colour changing concealed lighting; no tabs but the screen is never simply left blank.
A new laser show would be a great addition. :–(
I sudder to think of watching an 8K screening whilst eating a plastic tasting steak from the awful tourist trap that is an Angus Steak House!
Thankfully, this is not the direction that cinemas are going in, however. Operators are spending a lot of money refurbishing or on new sites with nice foyer areas and “premium large format” screens featuring Dolby Atmos, sometimes laser projection, and more spacious seating. Also, the average new IMAX screen—and they are increasing in number—may be disappointing for someone familar with the “classic” ones, but IMAX Digital is a high quality system—vastly better than the days of the typical multiplex out-of-focus 35mm presentation with medicore audio!
These developments are covered in the “Next Gen Multiplex” feature in the June 2017 issue of Cinema Technology Magazine.
I agree with your comments on the current medicore output of Hollywood. The picture quality, sound and special effects in some of today’s releases is incredible—but the incomprehensible plot and threadbare storytelling makes watching “blockbuster” or “tentpole” films with wall to wall action like going to a theme park. I like theme parks, actually, but it’s not how movies ought to be.
P.S. For me Leicester Square is a nice place to be on a sunny afternoon if it’s not too busy.
A number of photos of the facade, foyer and lobby areas of the refurbished Vue West End now uploaded.
I paid a visit to the Vue West End yesterday to see the re-released 3D/4K transfer/restoration/conversion of “Terminator 2.”
The new foyer and associated auditorium access areas are very attractive, being bright, welcoming and fresh, yet warmly lit, in an appropriate way for a cinema. I could nit-pick, but in a nutshell they have done a fabulous job.
Brass balustrades in the escalator stairwell landings, along with marble tiles, are, I believe, retained from the original 1993 fit-out. All windows to Leicester Court were blacked out, and I had assumed that the automatic door exit from the escalators were out of use, but looking at a photo I had taken, I had most likely been confused.
Unfortunately, the screening was not such a positive experience. Only one screening was listed as scheduled, in Screen 5, and I had booked a seat in the centre of a row. Alas, after obtaining my tickets from the vending machine, on presenting my tickets, I was informed that the screening was now in Screen 6, which I gather was due to Screen 5 being used for an event. I expressed my dissatisfaction to their disinterested ears.
Once in the auditorium, I discovered that my reallocated seat was off-centre, and the centre seats in that row were later occupied by other patrons. “Non-sync” music was played before the feature, and I may be mistaken, but it sounded something like a bizarre “muzak” version of generic movie soundtrack material. Tabs were left open with only a blank screen shown.
At the scheduled programme time, a member of staff entered the auditorium and curtly announced from the rear that we would have to wait 10 minutes for the film. This seems bizarre for a digital presentation, and I can only imagine that the DCP was frantically ingested at the last minute or similar!
The film started with a “pop”, no preceding material being played, and ended similarly abruptly, with the house lights remaining dimmed even after the end credits, and patrons had to find their way out of the auditorium using the “torch” function of their mobile phones; one of them quipped, “this cinema is terminated!”
Picture quality was very good, but on the dark side with 3D glasses on, and the black level (with glasses off) a little high. Geometry was also good, but with a bit of a curve towards the screen edges at the bottom.
Sound quality was good, although I assume playback was slightly less than reference level, and the LFE seemed restrained. Still, maximum levels were easily handled, with clear and clean high frequencies at all times, albeit coloured by a little peakiness.
The better auditoria in the 1993 multiplex were built to achieve excellent acoustics, with the advantage of not being four parallel walls as today’s auditoria tend towards, and this was apparent today with a highly controlled reverberation time and overall flat room contribution, and very good front stereo imaging.
However, it must be said that Screen 6 has too small a screen size, with seating too far away, certainly by today’s standards, and pales in comparison to the new “large format” digital screens in a certain cinema only a couple of hundred feet or so away—or for that matter the Odeon Leicester Square from the front stalls. It would be adequate for a smaller scale film, but is not for a monumental affair like T2.
The auditorium was very comfortable with good seats and excellent air conditioning, albeit all black in colour.
As for the film, to my mind, it goes without saying that T2 has a vastly more coherent and structured plot, better characterisation and more depth than today’s average “summer blockbuster”. The new transfer is outstanding with no visible grain, and almost perfect colour grading to the originally intended tints. It looks almost new, albeit not quite as detailed as current digitally acquired material. The 3D conversion is generally on the conservative side.
On leaving the Vue West End, I complained to a member of staff, who was very friendly and understanding, clearly enthusiastic about cinema in general, and they apologised profusely saying that Vue were “deeply humilated” by what had happened with the T2 screening.
Based on today’s visit, having spent £6.6m to modernise the Vue West End to create a very attractive and comfortable premium flagship location, with pricing to match, Vue really need to improve the overall customer experience and presentation to a consistent standard.
I will definitely return in the belief that next time will be better…
I have taken a number of photos, uploads to follow—alas only limited shots of the auditorium as it was too dark after the film finished!
Details on the audio system are on LW Speakers' site.
For the iSense (Atmos) screen:
Screen speakers: 5x LW 5109-BI (4-way) 4x LW 6117 21" subwoofers
Surround speakers: 6x LW 7517 V2 subwoofers 27x LW 7017HD surrounds 19x LW 7609 ceiling speakers (coaxial)
LW’s own amplifiers are used in all auditoria (MUK and EK V2 series.)
As each of the LW 6117 units contains two 21" drivers, in the iSense auditorium the LFE channel is reproduced using eight 21" drivers, equivalent in surface area to 16 18" drivers.
At least at the Odeon Orpington iSense screen, it looks like the days of the “local” cinema using conked out old Altecs, or otherwise underspecified systems, are well and truly over.
In the interests of truth seeking, from “Perception while watching movies: Effects of physical screen size and scene type”:
“5.1. Why do presence ratings increase with screen size?
“[…]
“Thus, a high-level account of these results might posit that larger displays are generally more impressive and therefore more engaging. Of course, it should come as no surprise that object size is an important visual measure. After all, it is not retinal images but the properties of distal stimuli that we are rightly interested in, and our perceptions of these are derived from the influences of various perceptual constancies, including size constancy.
“Evidence from fMRI (Murray, Boyaci, & Kersten, 2006) has shown that the spread of activation across the retinotopic V1 increases with an increase in perceived size, even when retinal size is constant. Exactly why this occurs is still not clear […] but it does show that the perception of physical object size, traditionally associated with high-level processes, can assert its influence at the very earliest stages of cortical visual processing, presumably through feedback.”
So, screen size is a factor, albeit in that particular study the field of view was kept constant, with the screen size altered by using two different screens, one more than twice the size of the other.
alpinedownhiller: Sure, screen size is a factor, hence I began my post by comparing an 80ft.+ wide screen with a 5" diagonal mobile phone. Obviously holding the phone right in front of your eyes isn’t the same as a large screen even if the “FOV” is the same.
Confused by your comment: “Yeah but since you can chose where to sit, screen size does make a difference”?
With regard to the discussion on IMAX screen sizes, the important factor (given, say, 80ft.+ wide screens and not a 5" mobile phone) is the geometry of the auditorium.
IMAX and OMNIMAX Theatre Design goes into some detail on their requirements.
Essentially, the distance from the screen to the last row should not exceed one screen width, and the first row not more than 0.35x screen width.
Also, the front row should be somewhat above the bottom of the screen, and the last row positioned about half way up.
Of course, the projection system must also be adequate to cope with the closer position to the screen compared to a traditional auditorium, and stadium seating is a given.
These requirements can also be expressed in terms of horizontal and vertical viewing angles.
IOW, whether a screen is 85ft. or 95ft. wide will make little difference, especially since the viewing angles vary depending on which row you choose to sit in!
Given the Cineworld rendering, this photo ought to give an idea of what the walls of the new foyer might look like:
Cineworld corridor photo
(I am not sure what location this is, as the text overlay on the image ‘slideshow’ says that it’s at the ‘Resort World at the NEC Birmingham,’ but the filename says ‘Milton Keynes.’)
The interior design of this and other sites seems to be constructed from the ‘parts bin’ of Cineworld’s current ‘house style.’ Note that the linked image is on the website of Lyons + Sleeman + Hoare Architects, and it turns out that Cineworld have their own in-house architects also.
Cineworld’s ‘next generation’ foyer/corridors are looking good. If only their auditorium designs were more interesting than, say, a black box with an illuminated red star logo on each side wall!
Zappomatic: Odd indeed, maybe they are getting in there via the ductwork? I hope they offered refunds, or at least a goodwill gesture, to customers attending ridiculous ‘trapped fly’ screenings!
IIRC operators have had to come up with their own ‘ad hoc’ solutions for projection cabinets in ‘boothless’ auditoria, but off the shelf products are now becoming available.
The seats in the IMAX and IMPACT/Superscreen are from Seating Concepts. I have to wonder if the seating business has entered a race to the bottom using commodity parts sourced from China. Products from different manufacturers look very similar but don’t appear to be of real commerical ‘heavy duty’ spec.
The refurbishment is the subject of an article in the September 2017 edition of Cinema Technology Magazine, on p82, currently available at:
http://emag.cinematechnologymagazine.com/#page/82
Unfortunately, the article is not as extensive as one might have expected.
A few details from the article:
-The building work involved up to 90 workers in a single day.
-EOMAC were responsible for some of the fit-out including stretched fabric over acoustic absorption wall coverings.
-All projection and sound systems were installed by Sound Associates.
-Screens 5/7: 2xSony R515 projectors (stacked configuration)/Dolby CP850 Atmos processors/Dolby multi-channel amplifiers/Dolby SLS speakers.
-Other screens: Sony R320 projectors/Dolby CP750 processors.
-Screens 5/6/7/8: Harkness Clarus XC170 screens.
Thanks (as well) Lionel for those photos, I have fond memories of those days!
Indeed there is nothing like the 80s! The fibre-optic ‘starfields’ were a wonderful addition, though not all the changes to the foyer were in good taste…
Zappomatic: They will sort out the seats; I didn’t explicitly ask about the timeframe or press for more details, but I got the impression that they plan on a full refurb of all auditoria. Not making ‘band-aid’ changes to seating upholstery may suggest that it will all be changing.
The Cineworld interim report shows that they have phased overhauls of all sites acquired from Empire, so at this point it could be next year, I’d guess?
The seats in the IMAX auditorium aren’t as comfortable as they were when new; the padding seems to have sagged a bit. I’m not sure their quality is better than my own ‘premium’ (but not ‘uber-expensive’) office chair—super comfortable when new but merely comfortable enough after a while!
Flies in the projection enclosures?! Silhouettes on the screen?
I have uploaded a few photos of the foyer taken today.
In particular, this one shows the dire state of the ceiling, with the further stains, and peeling/missing covering, possibly revealing the original 1962 finish (paint?):
http://cinematreasures.org/theaters/912/photos/216889
Whilst that photo has not been post-processed in Photoshop, the others have; as I note in the description of that photo, the ceiling really does look that faded and stained. My other photos are, to a lesser or greater extent, not honest about the ceiling’s condition.
I expected leaving the Empire today to be a sad experience, but the foyer is in such messy, tatty and rapidly deteriorating state, not just the ceiling but also the disjointed collection of permanent and temporary fixtures and changes made over the years, that the shock of it being replaced has worn off. It is very jarring walking from the crumbling foyer into the still-new looking IMAX auditorium.
It needs redoing, so fingers crossed for a replacement that exceeds expectations!
I visited the “Cineworld Cinema – at the Empire Theatre” today to see “Dunkirk” in the IMAX auditorium.
I had a conversation with a member of staff who has worked there from UCI, through Empire Cinemas, and now Cineworld operation. They informed me that:
-The 4DX conversion is progressing. Strip-out of Screen 2 has already been completed. They are not sure, but they think that the 4DX conversion will result in the loss of one or more rows of seats to fit in the equipment; it will have fewer seats.
-They confirmed that the foyer “domes” will be lost, and said that whilst they understood the foyer has been around for a long time, it is dated and looking “patchy.” They expressed a positive view on the proposed design and were pleased about the forthcoming refurbishment.
-Asked if changes would be made to other areas, i.e. the rest of the auditoria and in particular the seating, they said that this would not be happening yet as the priority is the 4DX conversion and the foyer refurbishment.
-In response to my concerns over the prospect of it becoming “'a Cineworld multiplex…' it is, after all, the Empire Leicester Square,” they said that “that is the one thing [Cineworld] most definitely do NOT want… they want to keep it… glitzy.”
The IMAX auditorium is looking well cared for, excellent air conditioning, projection was perfect and the sound very good—visceral subbass at times. I have thought that the sound system doesn’t quite have the headroom to cope with the large auditorium and that was evident today; e.g. it sounded like the low frequency content was pushing the drivers to maximum excursion at times.
The IMAX trailer is a variant of this one, but altered to demonstrate the overhead/side speakers with a 3D visualisation of speakers placed around an auditorium, when the voiceover says “and immersive sound, that will surround you from here… here… and here.”
As for “Dunkirk,” it seemed to me to skip over Acts 1 and 2 and launched straight into Act 3 resulting an incomprehensible mess. Lovely photography and, as mentioned, impressive sound.
The 1.4:1 IMAX segments did not seem to quite reach the top of the screen but I assume were <1.9:1 as the screen is 1.7:1 and the laser projectors are capable of 1.4:1.
The odd scratch mark and other tale-tell signs could be seen uncorrected, so I assume Nolan didn’t allow IMAX to put the material through a heavy-handed DMR process. I shall leave an analogue vs. digital discussion at that, but it should be obvious which side of the fence I firmly sit on!
Report on foyer condition and photos to follow.
P.S. Large Diet Coke was £3.99. :–(
Video of building under construction
Ceremony speech prior to placement of a time capsule
At 4 min 20 sec: “…which will include… an underground cinema complex, adding to the cinematic legacy that the area is so famous for.”
Nice!
That’s actually the front left fire exit from the IMAX auditorium—which incidentally is in the same location as the wall between the IMAX and the IMPACT/Superscreen auditoria.
BTW, if you go to the “old” Street View images (by clicking on the clock icon in the top left hand corner) and change the date to May 2014, you can see it’s been left open as the IMAX was being finished.
The exit you’re looking for is this: http://goo.gl/mYBPSD
Having a quick look at the licensing application plans, it seems access to Screen 6 involves going down the stairs of one fire exit, and, when near the external doors, going through another door to the second fire exit, and then up the stairs to the auditorium! Ridiculous…
I’d guess, then, that the lack of replacement finishes and the use of non-permanent signage, i.e. bits of paper (!), one way or the other has something to do with building regulations or (avoiding) building control approval, albeit there are plenty of Class 0 fire retardant materials to choose from…
Perhaps Cineworld can smarten it up with intumescent flame retardant paint and a few bottles of smell “munching” enzymes!
Al Alvarez: Does that work?!
I haven’t been to Screen 2 since the mid-90s—and that was only because, until I bought the ticket, I’d not realised the film I wanted to see had moved over from Screen 1! An awful auditorium.
It is curious that, if the floor can be lowered, that it hasn’t been done to date? It will be interesting to see just how much they are able to lower it by.
I, too, think that the stairs up to screens 7/8/9 are nicely decorated. I have not been to screen 6 and I’m surprised that the staircase is as you describe? I suspect the “urine” whiff actually emanates from the toilets!
It’s understandable that Cineworld want to rebrand and to my mind the stair/lobby areas for public auditorium access from the main foyer are a blank slate for them. I do not believe that because something was there first it automatically acquires some sort of mystical primacy, but I think it’s worth noting that the “domes” in the 1962 foyer seem to me to be a nod to the original 1927 interior.
I am concerned that without due care they will end up with the Empire looking like a run-of-the-mill multiplex with no attention paid to its “DNA.” They are, after all, going to be removing marble from the right vestibule wall… replacement finishes had better be up to standard!
Chapman Taylor were the architects for the refurbishment including the 4DX auditorium.
Building Control entry (dated as received on 17th August 2017) for the Foyer and 4DX works is up on Westminster Council’s website.
To quote:
“Refurbishment of the public areas of the lobbies and cinema #2 located in the basement of Cineworld at Leicester Sq (previously Empire) for the conversion into a 4DX cinema.
“The refurbishment of the lobbies will include: – Demolition of existing floors, ceiling and wall finishes at ground floor lobby and public access to upper levels.
“The works will include: Breaking of the lower level concrete slab of the room and rebuild at a lower level to increase the space required for the system and new seating arrangement. Installation of suspended trusses between the columns which will support the equipment for the 4D effects (wind fans, water spray tanks, snow machine, fog machine) – Removal of all projector and installation of new one at the back of the room, in the former projection booth. – New floor, wall and ceiling finishes – New finishes at the access staircase and lobby. – All fire escapes remain unchanged”
So there you have it—how to convert Screen 2 to 4DX!
Agent name is listed as Chapman Taylor, a large architectural practice, who it turns out were responsible for the 4DX auditorium at Cineworld Wandsworth, as well as the rest of the Cineworld Wandsworth refurb.
Video of demolition.
Re: 1986 foyer photos — little changed since the 1962 reconstruction, I think, right down to the (very nice) carpet?
I guess the “Empire — The First 100 Years” (to the right of the stairs in https://www.flickr.com/photos/oldcinemaphotos/2105035479/in/album-72157603441125079/ is related to the same titled book (by David High.)
I can never work out why the section with the sloped ceiling (presumably due to the stadium seating structure above) is “curtained off” in these old (pre late 1980s refurb) photos…
Zappomatic: Thanks for the info on the foyer rendering. Here’s the link: http://www.cineworldplc.com/~/media/Files/C/Cineworld-PLC/reports-and-presentations/2017-results-presentation-final-for-website.pdf (http://www.cineworldplc.com/~/media/Files/C/Cineworld-PLC/reports-and-presentations/2017-results-presentation-final-for-website.pdf)
LSQ is listed as “Refurbishment starting” (p17 – PDF page number) although according to an article in The Telegraph , “[LSQ] will get a makeover at the end of the year.”
I’ve just spent the last hour being very angry and grumbling to myself about Cineworld not “getting” the Empire LS (as a flagship venue with decades of heritage) and simply wanting to engage in a rebranding exercise for the sake of it.
OTOH, actually it’s a pretty bold piece of reimaging. I’m assuming expensive finishes and I guess the ceiling, in a way, is a nod to the existing one. Lots of concealed lighting and coving too.
Would be nice to see what they have in mind for the main section though. They had better put in some decent seating!
I assume they won’t be moving concessions to the stop of the stairs as queues would block the route to the IMPACT and 7/8/9 screens, and they still have the “curved” section with a poster (or maybe LED display?)
Talking of which, it looks like there are small LED displays above each auditorium entrance.
Reading through the presentation, Cineworld discuss their multiple “premium screens” approach so the addition of 4DX in Screen 2 and not the IMPACT screen makes sense.
A previous presentation (p29 – PDF page number) says “4DX and Super Screen expected to be installed in Leicester Square” so I wonder if any changes will be made to the IMPACT screen? To keep it at the currently available state of the art they need to install laser projection, which has very good black levels thus obviating the need for masking.
Update to previous post: The surround speakers appear to be manufactured by SLS Audio, a company acquired by Dolby Labs. a couple of years ago.
All of their products feature ribbon high frequency transducers.
Zappomatic: £10 for popcorn and a drink is better than trying to hide a can of Coke in your trousers and having it “explode” just as you walk past the usher to enter the auditorium—as once happened to me back when it was the Warner West End! ;–)
According to a news article in the June 2017 issue of Cinema Technology Magazine, VUE will upgrade the cinema based on the VUE West End refurbishment as a “template,” and the IMAX auditorium will be upgraded to laser projection in early 2018.
The large facade-mounted display is a very rare instance of outdoor advertising within the City of Westminster, in a location with extremely high footfall.
From http://www.oceanoutdoor.com/products/digital/the-screen-on-leicester-square/:
“The only commercial advertising screen in London’s Leicester Square, this impressive high definition digital screen is one of the largest in Central London at 63m2."
Elegant or not, I imagine it’s lucrative and very much here to stay!
I rather like the foyer with its “industrial” treatment (although I’m not sure about the finishes—the floor could be vinyl tiles not much better than B&Q or Wickes?!)
Seeing “Square Pie” and the other concessions in context, it doesn’t look so bad.
The configuration is a bit too reminiscent of a mall food court, but hey, a picking up a tasty slice of pizza before the feature sounds good to me!
Hopefully, I may finally have some time this week to check it out… :–( I can’t identify the speaker brand from the photos, so it will be interesting to check out the Dolby Atmos installs…
Zappomatic: The plans for the cinema are on Westminster Council’s site, e.g. http://idoxpa.westminster.gov.uk/online-applications/licencingDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=KDGKTIRP10100
There is also a building control entry, dated 2010, for “Replacement of two structural beams due to corrosion and delamination.”
One therefore might wonder about the building’s overall condition.
Clearly plenty of scope for refurbishment and reconfiguration although I’m also cynical about its future.